12-23-08 BZA Agenda
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
7 pm
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
I. Approval of Minutes - October 28, 2008
II. The Petitions are:
1816 York Avenue North (08-12-17)
Tom & IIse Clark, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Front Yard Setback
Requirements
. 3 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 32 ft. at its closest point
to the front yard (southeast) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of an addition with a sunroom above.
1524 Valders Avenue North (08-12-18)
Todd & Susan Farley, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 3 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 9.5 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
6900 Harold Avenue (08-12-19)
Paul S. Olin, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 2.08 ft. off the required 16.5 ft. to a distance of 14.42 ft. at its
closest point to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of an addition on the rear of the home.
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(d) Wall Articulation
Requirements
. The wall of the addition along the south property line will be 39.33
ft. in length without articulating
Purpose: To allow for the construction of an addition on the rear of the home.
III. Other Business
IV. Adjournment
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
October 28,2008 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 Pia
Representative McCarty. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeb 0
Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - September 25, 2008
MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Kisch and motion
the September 25 minutes as submitted.
II. The Petitions are:
Continued Item...
1800 Mendelssohn Avenu
Marlin Henrikson A Ii
Request:
n 11.21, Subd. 19 Driveway Setback
required 3 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to
(south) property line.
for the construction of a new driveway.
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(c) Side Yard Setback
equirements
. 3 ft. off the required 12 ft. to a distance of 9 ft. at its closest point
to the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new deck.
Hogeboom reminded the Board that this proposal was tabled at last month's meeting in
order to allow the applicant time to provide proof of the location of the previously existing
driveway. Hogeboom stated that staff has reviewed the photos submitted by the applicant
and has determined that the edge of the driveway shown in the photos is landscape rock
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
Page 2
and not the edge of the previously existing driveway. Therefore, if the applicant wants to
expand the driveway all the way to the property line he still requires a variance.
Hogeboom added that the variance request listed above regarding the proposed deck was
removed from last month's agenda but is back on this agenda per the applicant's request.
McCarty asked Hogeboom to discuss the recent Planning Commission discussion
regarding setbacks for patios and other paved surfaces. Hogeboom explained that Golden
Valley currently has no setback requirements for patios. He stated that h hed
surrounding city's requirements and most of the cities he spoke with re
setback for patios. He said at this point staff and the Planning Com Sl
considering requiring a 3-foot setback for patios because it would consl
driveway setback requirements.
Segelbaum asked if a new driveway could be reconstructed in
previously existing driveway. Hogeboom stated that any of
driveway that was paved can be replaced in the exa
Segelbaum asked if the City has received an upd f the property. Hogeboom
explained that the City would not require a s low the applicant to replace
the previously existing driveway in the sa , he has suggested to the
applicant that it would be in his best intert~S to ey because there has been
some discrepancy regarding the exaq~..loca~iOfiilofthep~evious driveway.
Marlin Henrikson, Applicant, said:~e misl,lilderstood the Board's request regarding
obtaining a new survey. He s tltl~::~bard several pictures in order to demonstrate
where the previous drivew ca. He stated that the area in question used to be
blacktop but it had disint muc at he put rock there to help with drainage
issues. He stated th t he s to place a curb along the edge of the driveway to help
with the run-off from
Kisch said it is
relation to e s
tell where
nd the distance of the driveway shown in the pictures in
agreed that the pictures show landscape rock but it is hard to
t:riveway is located.
t the survey shows that the existing driveway is located two feet
o rty line and reiterated that if he wants to replace the previously
he can, but without a variance the 3 ft. x 11 ft. new driveway area in
located 3 feet away from the property line.
Henrikson stated that the top portion of the previously existing driveway was located
approximately 6 inches away from the property line and then it tapered away from the
property line approximately 2 feet. Hogeboom reiterated that the survey is the only proof
the City has right now regarding the location of the previously existing driveway and it
shows that it was 2 feet away from the property line.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
Page 3
Kisch referred to the proposed new deck addition and asked the applicant if the
dimensions of the deck are 12 ft. x 5 ft. Henrikson said yes. He referred to a picture of the
previous deck location and stated that he would like to have a one level deck as opposed
to the previous two smaller levels. He stated that the previous deck was 4 feet in width and
he would like to build the new deck 5 feet in width in order to make it easier to move things
in and out of the house.
Kisch stated that an 8 ft. x 5 ft. deck might also work. Henrikson stated th
approximately 6 feet of deck space on one side of the door and 3 feet
the other side of the door. McCarty stated that he wasn't sure if the
3 feet of deck space behind the screen door especially since at I
was willing to consider building a 25 square foot landing area in
said it was his misunderstanding that the applicant would be
foot landing area. Henrikson said a 5 ft. x 5 ft. landing area wo
space on either side of the door.
could be built within
eck and would have to
. He added that when he
uare foot landing would
Kisch asked if 25 square feet would be considere
the setback area but if anything larger would be c
meet the setback requirements. Hogeboom ~~.i
originally looked at the applicant's propos sf
work.
Kisch asked the applicant if he wo
Henrikson said he would rather
door.
Jo com romise on the size of the deck.
e O~!~be deck to the right side (east) of the
Sell asked the applicant
Henrikson said yes.
tairs leading from the deck to the back yard.
iPosing to move his shed. He stated that the shed
or's shed, but that he is proposing to move his shed to a
mer.
driveway issue and said he would like to see an outline with
aved area written on the survey. Kisch agreed and stated that if the
e applicant will still be able to build a new driveway in the same
eviously existing driveway.
Henrikson ed if he could pave the areas of the driveway/patio area that are not in
question. Sell said yes and reiterated that he can pave a new driveway in the same
footprint as the previously existing driveway.
Sell opened the public hearing.
Ginger Dunlap, 1720 Mendelssohn Avenue North, said she doesn't care if the applicant
replaces the previously existing driveway in the exact same place. She just wants the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
Page 4
driveway of the 8 ft. x 11 ft. area in question to be located 3 feet away from the property
line because it is right outside her dining room. She stated that there is no hardship in this
case and the applicant has not proven where the previously existing driveway was located.
Dunlap asked if the applicant installs gravel in the 3 feet setback area if he will be able to
park on it. Hogeboom explained that the applicant is allowed to drive over any gravel area,
but he will not be allowed to park on it.
McCarty asked if the pavement has changed since they heard last
Hogeboom said nothing has changed with this property since last
unanimously to approve a
'ts closest point to the side
deck. McCarty suggested
5 ft. wide deck. The Board
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Sell closed the pub'
Kisch said he would support the variance request regarding t
considered to be a landing rather than a deck it could still be 5
agreed and said she was concerned about the width of ro
length.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by Segelbaum and
variance for 3 ft. off the required 12 ft. to a
yard (south) property line to allow for the
the Board make it clear that they are ap
ag reed.
Segelbaum referred to the variane~.. regarding driveway and stated that he doesn't see
the necessary hardship in thi erh;lesaid he ped to see a new survey that clearly
showed where the previo located.
meeting there was discussion about calling a portion of
at patio portion is still being proposed. Hogeboom said
ut the applicant will not be allowed to park on it.
MOVED b
varianc
side ya
. pded by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to deny the
. the required 3 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to the
line to allow for the construction of a new driveway.
Request:
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback
Requirements
. 1.6 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.4 ft. at its closest
point to the front yard (west) property line.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
Page 5
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage.
Hogeboom stated that the applicant currently has a 1-stall garage. He explained that it is
the applicant's intent to tear down the existing garage and build a new 2-stall garage in its
place. He referred to a survey of the property and noted that the existing garage was built
1.6 feet into the front yard setback area. He stated that moving the garage to a conforming
location further back on the lot would cover up an existing window and there is also a
significant slope in the rear yard which would make it difficult to build the aFlny
further back on the lot. He stated that staff believes this is a reasonabl uest and is in
support of this proposal.
Donna Nelson, Applicant, showed the Board pictures of her exi
how moving the garage further back on the lot would block an
Board Member Nelson asked if the proposed new gara
the front as the existing garage. Donna Nelson saidY.Ei.~.
Segelbaum asked if the stoop area on the back ot:fhe exisfi~g is being removed.
Donna Nelson said yes. She explained that t ~!ll be an 8~ft. x 12 ft. porch area in its
place and in the future she would like to b dltoom I .. dry area above the porch.
Sell opened the public hearing. Seei
closed the public hearing.
ne wishing to comment, Sell
Segelbaum said he thinks th'
applicant is conforming to
in area also seem to enc
ble re est and he appreciated the fact that the
tback requirements. He added that other homes
nt yard setback area.
Kisch said that give e existing garage encroaches 1.6 feet into the front
yard setback ar a an .............hE4i ..... osed new garage will too, he is inclined to support this
mairtltFlips the integrity of the building.
by Nelson and motion carried unanimously to approve the
'. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.4 ft. at its closest point
st) property line to allow for the construction of a garage.
nwood Avenue (08-10-16)
Kelly Schetnan, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback
Requirements
. 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point
to the side yard (west) property line.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28, 2008
Page 6
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
Hogeboom explained that the applicant is proposing to remove an existing carport and
replace it with a second garage stall. He stated that staff supports this request.
Kelly Schetnan, Applicant, stated that the recent hail storm has speeded up the process of
her needing to upgrade the existing carport/garage. She added that the c es not
have a door so it is not feasible to store anything in it so she would like ond
garage stall.
pared to
t wider than
avor of the
Segelbaum asked how much bigger the proposed new garage s
the carport. Schetnan said the new garage stall will be appro
the carport. She added that the neighbor most impacted by thi
project.
Sell asked if the existing carport is located 5 feet
said no, but they would like to build the new gara
Kisch asked the applicant if she intends t
rage. Schetnan said yes.
Sell questioned the size of the propo
be 10 feet in width instead of the
proposed new garage has to do
tflll. He suggested the new garage
t. Kisch stated that the width of the
pd the size of the garage door.
Sell asked the applicant w~~Jshei '
two garage stalls. Schetnan:,.~ai .
osing to remove the interior wall between the
expensive to remove the wall.
McCarty explained t
this case, he is' su
agreed and ad
impact the eig
. Boar is not supposed to consider economic hardships but in
posal in order to get a second garage stall. Nelson
rage will aesthetically improve this house and it won't
erties. Segelbaum agreed.
ring. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
~i;<<~
Movai. by
the req
side yard
Ibaum, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve
o ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the
st) property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
October 28,2008
Page 7
III. Other Business
Discussion on variance standards - City Attorney Allen Barnard
Barnard discussed legislation changes regarding the reasonable use of property. He
stated that since the new legislation the Board of Zoning Appeals has a lot of discretion
and can consider the reasonable use, unique circumstances and impact on surroundings
when hearing variance proposals. He added that if Golden Valley's laws
restrictive than state statutes then Golden Valley's laws have to be ign
c . ard stated that it is
'gure out what is reasonable
McCarty asked at what point the Board can say no and at what p
considered excessive. Barnard discussed the tests to determin
unique conditions and the impact to surrounding properties.
three things: reasonable use, unique circumstances and impac
considered together.
McCarty asked Barnard if he thinks the Board is b~Ihg t
not the Board's job to deny variance requests it's tpeir job t
and best.
Kisch stated that he also looks at the int
Barnard suggested that the minutes
granted.
questioned setting precedent.
asons for variances being
Segelbaum questioned if the
variance or if the approval'
indicate what is being ap
roving specific plan when they approve a
t approval. Barnard suggested that the minutes
IV.
08-12-17
1816 York Avenue North
Tom & IIse Clark, Applicants
liey
n
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
From:
December 15, 2008
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
1816 York Avenue North
Use and Tom.Clark, Applicants
To:
Subject:
IIse and Tom Clark own of the property located at 1816 York Avenue. They are requesting a
variance from City Code for the construction of an addition to the front of their home. The
proposed addition would extend into the southeast front yard setback area. No prior variances
were obtained for this property.
The proposed addition would be built onto the current attached one-stall garage. The proposed
project would convert the existing garage into living and storage space and provide a sunroom
on the upper level. The proposed addition would extend no further into the front yard setback
than do portions of the existing structure. In addition to this project, the applicants are planning
to construct a detached double-stall garage in the rear of the property at a later time.
The proposed addition requires a variance from the following section of City Code:
. Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements
A35 foot front yard setback is required for properties located in the Single Family R1
Residential Zoning District. The applicants are requesting 3 feet off of the required 35 feet to a
distance of 32 feet from the closest point of the proposed addition to the front (southeast) yard
property line.
The Planning Department feels this addition is compatible with the character of the
surrounding neighborhood, and supports this request as proposed by the applicant.
Ul12
1801
1800 1725
1721
1719
1715
1719
1717
1711
1707
G
3m!
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
I~/~ 1t1~K .1VE" " 1Jt7~ 71-/
r
2. Applicant: 77;11 oi. It-~ cur~ K
Name
Itl~\40RK AVe AJo~Jf/
Address T
Business Phone
76'5 S-22~o'l()
Home Phone
C;~Ll>nJ Vfru&jl
City/State/4iQ. 2..
HN "S""tr!.fZ
6/.7 270~
Cell Phone )"
ct/; I ,-cd @ 11/Iac ? Ibm
Email Address
3.
Detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this petition. The site
plans and drawings submitted with this petition will be the basis of any variance that may be
approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is issued.
4.
A brief statement of the hardship which provides legal grounds for the granting of this variance
(see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs,
or other evidence, if appropriate.
\
;\leea' c;a/L ~
To the be t of my knowledge the stataRi'ents f<fGnd in this application are true and correct. I also
understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
is not taken within one year, the variance expire
5.
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
A brief statement of the hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this variance (see
Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or
other evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this
project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of any
variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is
issued.
Variance application fee, as follows: $125 - single family residential; $225 - other
Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners
Note to the variance applicant:
As part of the variance application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all
surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly
across the street. If on a corner, this means across both streets.
To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them
about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them
sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your
project and gives them opportunity to comment.
If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at
home, you may simply write something to the effect "made two attempts, owner not home" and then
write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the
time and place of the BZA meeting.
Note to surrounding property owners:
This is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding the project.
Print Name (\\~v4 C-JlLb~o;J
,
Comment ~ ~
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
rf +'t
WfJ t~
f
Mr:ug(A. c-JO~J
Comment ffi ..
Signature ~",-t' . ;. _,J
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
! [)I ma'J!L ILtLMUavd
-
~IYIA.I cd ~
.
~ ?
~ I rlH f/'Pf 1-<] ~ .
fM"l ~fA(.JG
,
4. 'H' \ {to .v-OO.. ......."
, .
"
Address /f5z,! VtuA..-...~,
Address
I ? J,'~/ f1y t/ IC tV
/
Addressjf(Jq y~ {bur N
;Jff~iA 0( UI/tA hA,Md
I f'
-] ~.-., ." , [,I'} J
Address. ~ 00 l-J icteLL.:,'. !a.tb44 f!.r.
/
Address '100 j & I t,.{ d;\/\ Lk(/[i..(/
Address
Address
.......,
~
~
'........
"..
~
'S
'l..ij
-J
4J
~.......
"<
~
~
e~
V~~
~"'"
~.~
~
! I
I 1
I ~~.
i
! ,
\
I
'0
~--l
k-,~_, II'fO:Y.:J.
(f~-v.....
/!i.
~.. '?~ /)
I~
..,.,... '.
{{,,;> ~ Q...
fl""tllll~
"'-
...~.,
....,
J-rtwfll.
j -
V-
-
-"--..--
1
~ , ,.,
, J,J.., ..
v'll 1 .. . ,~'t
. t ~...- ""
.. '-{
'l. "
~, '1' ,
I ,
I '-
I .'
~
Jl ", .
l I
'" . "
, l'
. , , 'fl
. J ; "
'\i~ r. ~,
~ "
.r'
r:
~"~.i" ,,'I ,.
J",
!
...
,
~
...
I
.!
\
· , Jl
.\ ~ ",. ~
'""',\ ...,
h'~ \~,
.{
4'\),:,
.~
~ (
_ ...L
,
~
. ;
I ~
,
""
l'
..
{i
I
'I
1
i'
u
t~,
~
r
;. ~.
..~
II
..
j"
-',
.'
'.
It. "
t l
1
.'
'I
'~ t I .'
,~1<~" ('
.:I '
g~
..
n
'i
~
~
,~
'to 11
.,
I'
"
"
I
~
, " It"'., \
.
I,
08-12-18
1524 Valders Avenue North
Todd & Susan Farley, Applicants
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
December 15, 2008
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
1524 Valders Avenue North
Todd and Susan Farley, Applicants
To:
From:
Subject:
Todd and Susan Farley are the owners of the property located at 1524 Valders Avenue North.
Mr. and Ms. Farley are planning to renovate and remodel several areas of their home.
Renovation plans include converting the existing one-stall garage into a two-stall garage, for
which a variance is needed. No prior variances were obtained for this property.
The proposed garage addition would facilitate the homeowners' ability to store two mid-size
cars indoors. Existing setback boundaries do not accommodate a two-stall garage.
The proposed addition requires a variance from the following section of City Code:
. Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3)(b) Side Yard Setback Requirements
A 12.5 foot side yard setback is required for this property. The applicants are requesting 3 feet
off of the required 12.5 feet to a distance of 9.5 feet from the closest point of the proposed
addition to the south side yard property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition.
The lack of a two-stall garage has typically constituted a hardship in the City of Golden Valley.
The applicants' plans indicate that the most suitable location for a two-stall garage would
extend into the property's side yard setback area. Therefore, the Planning Department
supports the applicants' proposal and recommends approval of the variance as requested.
1141
1140
1621
1121
1720
Ifill
8163
1101
8160
8140
8100
1950
19O1l
1536
8001
1536
1545
1535
1524
1m
1512
1523
15Z5
1512
1519
1!llMi
1513
15llO
1501
19O1l
1400
1439
1342
1425 0
1620
1621
1620
1610 1611
1610
1600 1501
1566
1566 1565
1ll5Il
OLYMPlAST
1845
z
~
I
1536
11524 Valders Ave. N.I50
t
1520
1S08
1840
~WlNSDALE ST N
1440
1434
1430 1431
!It
1551
1805
1516
1159
1541
1540
1533
1m
15Z5
1511
z:
!
~
:E
i
1S08
15119
1800
11411
1441
1440
1159
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
1524 Valders Ave N
2. Applicant: Todd and Susan Farley
Name
1524 Valders Ave N.. Golden Valley. MN 55427
Address
612-325-9143
Business Phone
763.542.1008
Home Phone
City/State/Zip
612-423-316~
Cell Phone
_sue.farley@comcast.net
Email Address
3. Detailed description of building(s), addition(s), ahd alteration(s) involved in this petition. The site
plans and drawings submitted with this petition will be the basis of any variance that may be
approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is issued.
Remodelinq to include addition of master bedroom and. subiect to approval of this request.
replacement of existing one car QaraQe with. a .two car QaraQe.
4. A brief statement of the hardship which provides legal grounds for the granting of this variance
(see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs,
or other evidence, if appropriate.
The older we Qet. the more troublesome it is to clear ice and snow from a car.JExoandinQ the
garage within the 12 ft. setback will not accommodate two midsized cars. RedUcina the
setback by 4 feet will alleviate this problem.
5. To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true arid correct. I also
understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
is not taken w~hin one year, the variancek ~
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it willl"lot be accepted:
Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
A brief statement of the hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this variance (see
Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or
other evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this
project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of any
variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is
issued.
Variance application fee, as follows: $125 - single family residential; $225 - other
Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners
Note to the variance apf)licant:
As part of the variange application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all
surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly
across the street. If on a corner, this means across both streets.
To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them
about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them
sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your
project and gives them opportunity to comment.
If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at
home, you may simply write something to the effect llrnade two attempts, owner not home" and then
write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the
time and place of the BZA meeting.
Note to surrounding property owners:
This is an application by y~ur neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time arid place of the variance meeting.
" .
.
.
By signing this form, y~~ are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If yOu wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding the project.
Print Name. . .... @.i c lIJ 0 el /1.0 Pf (./ J!Y1 ~'1
Comment
Signature
~
J
'"""" ,,'
-------
<-
,
Address I SZ$ Va lJ~..5 ~ }J
Print Name
,.v\ '+ I I
I 4. T5 k q ..'(.., 11/1.-{
R:(..~
Comment
Print Name
~tP "1Zkr~"
~J ~ rJ~
Address { 'i., / W' ; '1. 1. -<....;f /.:.t( AvoA. A/
Signature
Comment
Print Name
Address IcJ31 Ct,J;k1nafttc Av~
'-'
Signature
Comment
Signature rD.t--. ~ j
Print Name ~c1 n~ ~. S1~ h ~-e..d~{
Address /!;Il Val/err Ar. ,lj.
Comment
Signature rfk.u,A.., ~~ Address /~'1I!;J..lkrs Are. jV~
Print Name rna.d~ ;;Z.,a ~ ~.. ~ rW> t ~
Comment
Signature
Address /530 Va I J.erS f1ve M.
Print Name YV\~:;2. ..'o~fs. tJWY1-ev- YL6C ~.
Comment
Signature
Address
16 ~ ~ U)j ntle-+-k.a- AtJ..e...,
i . -j ~ I ~-
~~ ~ ~tTI
~ - .x
,,() ;;;(p
~ ffi ;-i
- - (p
(p -f
m ~
tJ
(p m
-f -f
m II> ~ m
2 r
m I ~ ~ m
-f I :<
I
m
r
m
:< ''''''I~
{jl
is
1li
'"
~
I
~
~
z
!
~
::l
z
t'l
""
E
Z
tJ
()
E
(p
o
1:
m
tJ
c
r
m
Nesset Architecture, Inc.
COPYRIGHTS: I REGISTRATION:
,
6321 ELM TREE AVE.
Exce~ior,N\innesota
55331-1719
THESE DOCUMfNTS ARE
INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE
AND AS SUCH REMAIN THE
PROPERTY OF NE55ET
ARCHITECTURE, INC. USE
OR PUBLICATION REQUIRES
WRITTEN APPROVAl OF
NESSET ARCHITECTURE, INC.
DATE:
REG. NO. 12337
I HEREBY CERlfY THAT THIS PlAN,
SPEC/FICA TION OR REPORT WAS
PREPARED BY ~ OR UNDER MY
DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I
AM A DUL Y REGISTERED ARCHITECT
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE
OF MINNESOTA
tel: 952.474.1008
fax: 952.474.0228
e-mail: mark@nessetarchitecture.com
web site: nessetarthitecture.com
MARK l. NESSET, AlA
PROJECT:
Remodeling for:
FARLEY
1524 Valders AV N
Golden Valley, MN 55427
-
D
DA TEl PHASE:~HEET
6/24/08
8/27/08
913/08
9111/08
9/30/08
10/10/08
- ---...--
{
45.2
1--
!
!
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
L
NAIl.. ON ..-"'-
WOOl) 1WBER .
:,
~"
w
UJ
::>
2
q'
~l
...,Q _n
!l:XJS1ING
_ DECK
C) ~!EXISTING
'~ ~ (!i lili PAVING
5.7_ I- 10 'STONE
iCll!. - UJ r i PATIO
~i - 'II: U1
iO~ "I;
..: ...
... .....,
22.2 .
. .
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES:
Lot 13, Block 1, GOLDEN OAKS 2ND ADDITION
This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, and
the location of an existing house, deck and paving stones thereon.
It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments.
.: Iron marker found
0: Iron marker set
Beartngs shown are based upon an assumed datum
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
08-256
T
I h8I!ebY cerliIY lI18l1hill8UMIY - prepered by me or under my dir8ct super.
GRON BERG & ASSOCI A TES INC. vIlIlon. and that 11m a duly regiIItIIInId CMI Engineer and Land SIrIeyor under
· - Tthe IBwa of lII8 EMal8 of Mmeeofa.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS. lAND SURVEYORS. I
SI1E PLANNERS I
445 N. WILLOW DRIVE
LONG LAKE. MH. 55366
952-473-4141
f SCALE
I 1w=3O'
!-
I DATE
!
I 8-21..()8
~ JOB NO.
1 08-256
Mark S. Gronberg MInnesota Ucense Number 12755
I
!
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
08-256
~
SETBACK
IO'
U;
-.
'~
.-
N
w4il:8
en
:>
o
::t: .1~,Q
C) EXISTING
~ ~ DECK
I- ll)~. EXISTING
C/) ..... <'Ii PAVING
X * : STOllE
W : PATIO
'.A
. .. . .
. . .
. . .
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES:
Lot 13, Block 1, GOLDEN OAKS 2ND ADDITION
This survey shows the boundaries of the above described property, and
the location of an existing house, deck and paving stones thereon.
It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments.
.: Iron marker found
0: Iron marker set
Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum
-
~ GRONBERG & ASSOCIA lES, INC.
,. . ~ CONSULTING ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS,
I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my diI8Gt super-
vision, and that I am a duly Jegistered Civil Engineer and Land SUlveyor under
the laws oftlle Stale of Minnesota.
SCALE
1"=30'
DATE
8-21-08
SITE PLANNERS
445 N. V\IILLOW DRIVE
LONG LAKE, MN. 55366
952-473-4141
JOB NO.
08-256
Mark S. Gronberg Minnesota License Number 12755
~
. .
I
.,
Ii
I
,
.,?/t "
tft: .
~, , ,
t
'(
t.
I'
",.i
J!.
JI"
,'..... ..1
ly'., r- '..,,.. t". .
tf.~ or l'
';'-I~:";'" I;.
,....:,1- If
1\ ~.... "
r
.." It( ,r.',
;\ ~'., . ~ J-~
~ ...~~, -...I
""~~<1 . ~. ..... J
l'~ ..' .' ~
1 \-
1>..... .~.~ '_" ."
J' /. '~~f.
. ,}/,,;'\, ,..,..,
, . ..1.."',. ','; .. ".1
1 \"'.
. ~ ~..' (:..-
,1,;i ..~
'.
~. '~.; '"
'''~ f:1"...
~~~t r """, ir
.~ L \.,.....
.; ~ .., -;J
. .,t~j _
.j ,,'~~~ ...... oCl.
I ". {
"~~~ ~'\..
I, .~.
;(,..-
OkV,' ~ r
l'.~ .....
". '"
~~:'; 1 , _,
1ft. "', .
-......' ,~
;,.. '.~. '\ .
1 J.~ \
,.,\.
.~,\~
( "t
(
J f'
, l
,
~ ,
:t
.
.'
,
. "
,. \. ~
, '.
!\ ~.~*'
'<<., \, ",
. .. .,'r'
.
. ,
,",~i~ ...
~\
~
.-:
"
)~.
1.
< 'i
"-1
t.-f
,
~,'
l :
,
If
~
:
.,'.. )
I
..
.... .
~
"
"'-
~
,~
r-
~
.
1
.,
~,
.
.
..
.
08-12-19
6900 Harold Avenue
Paul S. Olin, Applicant
lIey
o
Planning
763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax)
From:
December 15,2008
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
Joe Hogeboom, City Planner
6900 Harold Avenue North
Paul S. Olin, Applicant
Date:
To:
Subject:
Paul S. Olin is the owner of the property located at 6900 Harold Avenue North. Dr. Olin is
requesting a variance to City Code to allow construction of an addition to his home. The
proposed addition will allow more living space in the home. The applicant has stated the
existence of pre-existing architectural plans as a hardship. No prior variances have been
obtained for this property.
Dr. Olin is also the owner of the lot directly to the south of the abovementioned property. In
addition, Glenwood Avenue is directly to the rear of both properties. This limits the impact of
the proposed addition to adjoining properties.
The proposed addition requires a variance from the following sections of City Code:
. Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3){a) Side Yard Setback Requirements
A 16.5 foot side yard setback is required for this property. The applicant is requesting 2.08 feet
off of the required 16.5 feet to a distance of 14.42 feet from the closest point of the proposed
addition to the south side yard property line.
. Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(d) Building Articulation Requirements
City Code requires walls longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated by at least 2 feet. The
applicant is requesting that this requirement be waived.
Dr. Olin originally constructed his home with the intention of constructing an addition at a later
time. Dr. Olin began drafting architectural plans for this proposed addition prior to the
implementation of the Infill Zoning Ordinance. The plans conform to the previous provisions of
City Code.
The Infill Zoning Ordinance was created, in part, to address the affects of new home
construction and home additions to surrounding properties. Staff determines that this proposed
addition will not impact adjoining properties, and therefore recommends approval of both
variances as requested by the applicant.
7201
6930
1tI4II
1020
;;:
;IJ
iili
;lII
o
1lI
:z
O . 6820
V'
L-
C
SOl
. ()lSON I"I!:MOfIlAl.. W#N
litG\i'll\tA'l 55
72011
7182
1031
I'llGWlJA'lSS
.. ~ MEl"\OfUALlWft
1045
7156 7146
683il
6941
6905
'-it
I1l
~
i
:z
300
320
6925
310
6935
205ft
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
b q 00 \-f o..V-<J l ~ Ave
2. Applicant:
?G..u.\
Name
<;
o \ "~ V\
Address
City/State/Zip
Business Phone
Home Phone
Cell Phone
all Y) X <t5<;1' l @ u. VY\ V\. e. d Vl
Email Address
3. Detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this petition. The site
plans and drawings submitted with this petition will be the basis of any variance that may be
approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is issued.
4. . A brief statement of the hardship which provides legal grounds for the granting of this variance
(see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs,
or other evidence, if appropriate.
.:z: oevn ~ to + (l,c-x. r ro rvt ~ a.V\J S~.--+e d t'k
~pt c,l'~8n fJlO-I4)"
I~{I '1e&-'" ,
r do 1101
ho.-v......
a.V'l'1
clore- /1e.rf A {;,o>r J
5. To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also
understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
is not taken within one year, the variance expires.
.y;;;;l~
/SIgnature of Applicant
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
/ Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
V A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
~ brief statement of the hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this variance (see
Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or
~ther evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this
project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of any
variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is
issued.
Variance application fee, as follows: $125 - single family residential; $225 - other
Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners
Note to the variance applicant:
As part of the variance application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all
surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly
across the street. If on a corner, this means across both streets.
To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them
about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them
sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your
project and gives them opportunity to comment.
If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at
home, you may simply write something to the effect "made two attempts, owner not home" and then
write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the
time and place of the aZA meeting.
Note to surrounding property owners:
This is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding the project.
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
;/1,1/1 } ,/ /
,1 . ~'l //i~- '\ #-'.'.\;~... J <"" #i~
i/~"'7
'"
Address 7//') s- t /, ..""...J /,/C . t:,'~i,I/.1/..
"".,'v, r-c~).?' /
~. #--l~
,~Ii~
_j,dwell if. K/et/~
Address 6~bo /tJz-I/PtL~
Print Name 'DA-rJ $(lOvJDIJ
Comment
j;2~ J ~
Signature t. D~
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Address I DOl Ot...S<Si,J ~~RII1-L ~t
Address
Address
Address
Address
I
I 'u
r- -
-'"
,,;;';'
. jl<7" f..... /- . .
~./ "
'0~/r,/
-' '(
,~
, ,
)
t
.,
;~
~'l
".'J,,'
...It~
'n
,. .1\.
, :~i:~'\
\
.
'jJ 7
, ~
- I'
11J
"9r7""
;l .' t,
~
)
i
I,
I.:' '
.
II' ,
,)',
..j:
L
."'ril
(.'; ,.
'~1 \.
~~ 'I I
j
I,
; J
-,
., '""
I
(
~
..' r.- \~.
I, I t'
, .
.
,
1t 'l Jt~
.
I,
J"
~ ~I..
I. i: ~,;~
,f
~
.: ' f ,~
l
f'
,I,
(
'i'
~'l.il
"
t'
I
'. '1'-
."
c' ,
,,-
I I '~
'1' ~
" \1
I ;1 ~ '
"/'
"I '
'. 'I
.\"l -{:~
.(1
'11 ~
\~ ,} ~I ~J\
f ~~ I
,I' ~!f,J
,.I
.
'~,
'..
.'
.~;
ti'~
\.
t
j~~ ~:' ~
LOT SURVEYS.COMPANY, INC.
LAND SURVEYORS
INVOICE NO. 33107
F. B. NO. 548-50
SCALE I" 20'
0- DENOTES I RON
ID1ES BY- FRANCIS
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA
'1601 - '13rd Avenue North 560-3093
, .
~ ;-~.. . ..,:..~. I ..t....- .
.
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428
"AS BUILT"
\
&nritrynrll" OIrrfifualt
t*.~s, --
,~- ------
"
t.,
ltq
..q-
,-
~
f
\
~~
~
I
~
,
\\1\
~.~
"
~
~
^
I
I
tt\
(('\
f(\
..Jl
I
I
./
Top of Block
\
\
\
,0 \
~t.o
Lowest Most P.1oot ~ .
8B7.~
~
<J
I
I
{,g7.S
Garage Floor
g,S.S
~
T_
~l
f{$~~
~
~
/
_lie
'tfoO
HAI2DLD
AVENUE
15
!
. tl77t..1 rr I 024M1/JC,E
'E-~er?eNr ~
n \
.J)
-~.89~.t.
~~
- -----5"
t)
'''/'7
I
'--
\
- \1~.4e
Lot 1, Block 1 t VANMAN ADDITICN
'-
I
\
\
',"
The only easements shown are from plats of record or infoonation provided by
client. :. -
We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the
boundaries of the abOve described land and the location of all buildings and vis-
ible encroachments, if any, from or on said land.
SurVeyed by us this 12th day of November 19 92
tfev/"sed 1-/8-'3.
.....-
a~~
aymond A. Prasch, Minn. Reg. No. 6743