07-22-08 BZA Minutes
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
July 22, 2008
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
July 22, 2008 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Sell
called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Members Kisch, Nelson, Segelbaum, Sell, and Planning Commission
Representative McCarty. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and
Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - June 24, 2008
MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Segelbaum and motion carried unanimously to approve
the June 24, 2008 minutes as submitted.
II. The Petitions are:
701 Parkview Terrace (08-07-10)
Kathryn Sedo, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 7.7 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.3 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (north) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
Hogeboom explained that the applicant is requesting a variance from side yard setback
requirements in order to expand her garage to construct a handicapped accessible ramp
inside the garage. He stated that this property has received two variances in the past in
order to bring the existing home into conformance.
Segelbaum referred to a survey of the property and asked if there have been additions
added to the house that are not noted on the survey. Hogeboom stated that there was a
screen porch on the south side of the house that the applicants built above, but it did not
change the footprint of the house.
McCarty referred to the survey and noted that it says "proposed addition" on the north side
of the house. Kathryn Sedo, Applicant, stated that when she had the survey done she was
considering constructing the "proposed addition" on the north side of the house, but she
didn't end up building the addition.
Sell asked the applicant how long she has lived at this property. Sedo said she's lived
there since 1984 and the house was built in 1939. She stated that the footprint of the
house has not changed since it was built, however they did add a second story on the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
July 22, 2008
Page 2
house. She stated that she has talked to all of her neighbors, particularly the neighbor
most affected by this proposal, and they are ok with her plans. She stated that her
daughter has balance and gait issues that make it difficult for her to navigate the steps in
the garage leading into the house. She discussed her proposal to knock down the existing
garage, replace the garage floor and replace the existing driveway.
McCarty asked if the proposed access ramp will be in its own enclosed space. Sedo said
she is hoping to build the ramp in a heated enclosed space.
Segelbaum asked if the existing access door into the house will be utilized. Sedo said yes.
Segelbaum asked if there are any other access doors. Sedo explained that there is a patio
door off of the deck behind the garage but there are steps leading to the deck so using
that entrance is not an option.
McCarty asked about the depth of the garage. Sell noted that the depth of the garage is
20.5 feet. Sedo added that the garage is not very deep and that two cars barely fit in it.
Segelbaum asked the applicant about alternative locations she considered for the ramp.
Sedo explained that she considered building the proposed ramp in the back of the garage
but it won't work with the location of the existing deck, the topography of the lot and layout
of the house. Sell guessed that the house was originally built 30 feet away from the front
yard property line because the topography of the lot would not allow it to be built any
further back on the lot. Sedo added that the only other way to construct a ramp would be
to bring the garage further forward which would also require a variance and would look
worse.
Kisch asked what room of the house is right inside the garage door. Sedo said the garage
enters into a narrow kitchen and she can't move the kitchen because of a stairway.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
closed the public hearing.
Nelson stated that the Board in the past has said that front yards are sacred in Golden
Valley. She asked if side yards are as sacred. Segelbaum said he thinks side yards would
be considered less sacred. Sell said he would prefer there to be an impact to a side yard
versus a front yard.
Segelbaum referred to the steepness of the back yard and questioned if the lot drops off
immediately behind the garage. Sedo said the lot does drop off right away behind the
garage.
Kisch noted that the variance request is almost 50% of the side yard setback area. He
stated that if the main reason for the proposed garage expansion is to construct a ramp
there seems to be a way to build a ramp in a smaller space. He suggested a 4-foot wide
area for the ramp instead of the proposed 6-foot area. Sedo said her daughter has issues
with spatial perception so the width is really a safety concern. McCarty noted that
handrails could be installed for safety. Sedo stated that her builder has said that 6 feet
would be best for what she wants to accomplish. She explained that she would like a little
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
July 22, 2008
Page 3
bit of space for coat hooks and a place for boots and that it would be easier for her
daughter and her family if they have enough room for their needs.
Sell said he thinks the Board is "nitpicking" over the size of the proposed ramp. He stated
that the applicant has a child with physical and mental issues that need to be
accommodated.
Nelson said she thinks the proposal meets all of the criteria the Board is supposed to
consider.
Segelbaum said his concern is that this proposal takes 50% of the side yard setback area.
He said there is obviously a hardship in this case but it is the responsibility of Board to
look at alternatives.
McCarty said he is not trying to deny the applicant's daughter easier access into the
house. However, he is trying to see if there are other ways to do it with a lesser variance.
Sell noted that there is a minimal size garage to work with.
Segelbaum said he also considers the housing stock and what will attract the next buyer.
He said this proposal seems similar to a mudroom. Sedo said that a mudroom is kind of
what she had in mind. She said the way she is proposing to build the ramp will be better
for the house. She said she is not sure she will spend $50,000 to construct what is being
proposed without building the wall that will enclose the ramp.
Nelson reiterated that the three criteria the Board considers when reviewing variance
requests are reasonable use, the character of neighborhood and the uniqueness of the lot.
She said she thinks it is a good exercise to consider other options for this proposal but the
nature of the lot in this case doesn't allow the applicant to build the proposed garage/ramp
addition anywhere else.
McCarty noted that the dimensions of the proposed garage addition are different on the
survey and the sketch. Sedo clarified that the dimensions on the survey are correct.
Hogeboom stated that accessible ramps often look out of place and he thinks this
proposal is good way to incorporate an accessible ramp and universal design.
Segelbaum stated that the circumstances in this case are unique. He said there will be
some impact to the neighboring property but this is certainly a reasonable use.
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Nelson and motion carried unanimously to approve
the variance request for 7.7 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.3 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a garage
addition.
III. Other Business
No other business was discussed.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
July 22, 2008
Page 4
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:45 pm.
)1t.L~
Mike Sell, Chair
~~
Joe HOg:t:om, Staff Liaison