03-24-09 BZA Agenda
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
7pm
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
I. Approval of Minutes - December 23, 2008
II. The Petitions are:
1532 Aquila Ave. N. (09-03-01)
Tim Harris, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 19 Driveway Setback
Requirements
. 1 ft. off the required 3 ft. to a distance of 2 ft. at its closest point to
the side yard (south) property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new driveway.
III. Other Business
IV. Adjournment
This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call
763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats
may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc.
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
December 23,2008 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
and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - October 28, 2008
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by Segelbaum and motion car
the October 28,2008 minutes as submitted.
II. The Petitions are:
1816 York Avenue North (08-12-17)
Tom & IIse Clark, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Sec
Requiremen
ed 35 . to a distance of 32 ft. at its closest
yard (southeast) property line.
Purpose:
e construction of an addition with a sunroom above.
tsare proposing to convert their existing one stall
oom above. He noted that the proposed new addition
oward the front yard property line than portions of the
e added that the applicants are also proposing to construct
ge in the rear yard that will meet all of the zoning code
ted that staff is in support of this request due the lack of a second
Sell refe the survey of the property and noted that the variance request should be
amended to read 4.41' off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.59 ft. at its closest point
to the front yard property line rather than the 32 ft. written on the agenda. Hogeboom
and the rest of the Board Members agreed.
Segelbaum referred to the survey of the property and questioned the distance from the
corner of the proposed new addition to the side yard property line and if there will be
enough room for a new driveway. Kisch noted that there is approximately 16 feet of
width to accommodate a new driveway. Hogeboom stated that he has been working
with the applicants to make sure they understand the requirements for the proposed
new driveway and two-stall garage.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
Page 2
Kisch expressed concern about the proposed new garage requiring variances in the
future. Hogeboom reiterated that he is confident that the applicants understand all the
requirements they will have to meet when they build the proposed new two-stall garage.
Kisch noted that since the proposed new garage is detached it is allowed to be located
5 feet away from the rear and side yard property lines. Hogeboom agreed and added
that if the garage were attached to the house it would have to follow the same
requirements as the principal structure.
addition and
ping the property to
Tom Clark, Applicant, stated that they currently have a one-stall tu
their plan is to extend the footprint of that garage closer to the fr
(even with the front of the existing house) and convert it to livi
that they have had severe water issues in their existing gar
will fix those issues.
Sell asked about the grading of the lot to accommodat
garage. Clark explained that they will be grading
help the water flow out to the street.
Sell asked the applicants how long they
use. Clark said 10 years.
McCarty asked if the existing drivew
said yes.
Sell opened the public heari
closed the public hearing
Segelbaum asked t
from the garage to
of walkway bet
under the new
explained t .
larger .
attache
they are planning to build any type of connection
e future. Clark said they would like to build some sort
garage and they are thinking about building footings
y ever want to attach it to the house in the future. Sell
and garage are connected then there would need to be a
e Clark, Applicant, stated that she understands that an
t be possible with the shape of their lot.
e applicants when they are planning on building the garage. Mr.
ould like to start construction by next fall. Segelbaum questioned if the
Board s dd a condition of approval stating that the proposed new garage would
have to be built within a year and half because it may be a period of time before they
decide to build the new garage. Mrs. Clark explained that they are doing the house -
addition first so they don't exceed the 1,000 square foot allowance for accessory
structure space.
Kisch said he thinks the hardship in this case is the water issue. He said he doesn't
think the Board should mandate when the applicants should have to build their garage
because the code states that a homeowner only has to show that they have the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
Page 3
necessary space to build a two"stall garage, and the applicants in this case have done
that. Segelbaum said he thinks his suggestion of adding a condition of approval as he
stated earlier would then be unnecessary. Sell suggested that a condition of approval
be added that says no variances shall be applied for in the future regarding the
proposed garage. Kisch said he thinks that would limit any potential new owner of this
property .
Kisch asked the applicant how big their existing garage is. Mr. Clark sai
approximately 12 feet wide by 25 feet deep.
Kisch referred to the survey of the property and asked if the pro
going to be built. Mrs. Clark said no because that would put t
feet of accessory structure space.
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by McCarty and motion
applicants request to read 4.41 ft. offthe required 35
closest point to the front yard (southeast) prope
o amend the
.30.59 ft. at its
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by Nelson and mo
variance request for 4.41 ft. off the requir
point to the front yard (southeast) prop
addition with a sunroom above.
animously to approve the
e of 30.59 ft. at its closest
e construction of an
1524 Valders Avenue N
Todd & Susan Farl
Request:
11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(b)Side Yard
uirements
required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 9.5 ft. at its closest
o e side yard (south) property line.
w for the construction of a garage addition.
at the applicants are proposing to convert their single stall garage
e. He added that the Board has typically considered a single stall
ardship; therefore staff is recommending approval of this variance
Sell referred to the plans submitted with the application and asked about the proposed
addition on the northeast corner of the house. Todd Farley, Applicant, explained that
the addition on the northeast corner of the house is a bedroom addition.
Kisch asked about the size of the proposed new garage. Farley said the garage will be
approximately 22 feet wide x 32 feet deep. Susan Farley, Applicant, said she thinks the
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
Page 4
new garage will be approximately 22 feet wide x 36 feet deep. Kisch referred to the
plans and asked about a one-foot discrepancy he noticed. Mrs. Farley clarified the
discrepancy and reiterated that the proposed new garage will be 22 feet in width x 36
feet in depth.
Segelbaum referred to the existing driveway space located to the right side of the
existing garage. Mr. Farley explained that the existing driveway will be wide enough to
accommodate the proposed new garage.
rried unanimously to
2.5 ft. to a distance of 9.5 ft. at
line 0 allow for the construction of a
Sell asked ifthe two existing trees in the front yard will remain. Mr. F
Sell opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wi
closed the public hearing.
Kisch noted that the application states the variance re
12.5 foot side yard setback but the agenda states tha
off the required 12.5 foot setback. Nelson noted
Hogeboom stated that staff used the dimension
survey.
MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Seg
approve the variance request for 3
its closest point to the side yard
garage addition.
6900 Harold Ave
Paul S. Olin A
Request:
Section 11.21, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard
irements
ft. off the required 16.5 ft. to a distance of 14.42 ft. at its
est point to the side yard (south) property line.
To allow for the construction of an addition on the rear of the home.
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.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
Page 5
Hogeboom stated that the applicant is proposing to build an addition on the rear of his
home. He said the applicant has stated that the home was originally built with the
intention. of building this addition in the future. In the meantime, the City's ordinances
have changed and the applicant's plans and drawings have already been done. He
stated that this proposal won't affect any neighboring properties and that staff is
recommending approval of these variance requests.
Kisch referred to the photos of the property and asked if the existing arti
chimney could be considered for the articulation requirement. Hogeb
the articulation requirements state that the wall has to articulate for a
and the chimney is 6 feet in width.
ion of the
ed that
feet
Kisch asked if the chimney is considered when figuring the
requirements. Sell stated that chimneys typically aren't consl
setbacks. McCarty asked if a chimney would be consi red i
Hogeboom explained that chimneys are only conside
in this case the chimney does not have a founda'
Nelson asked the applicant if this proposal has
Applicant, said yes and that the recent h .
plans. He added that his proposed ne
basement and explained that he ha
and the proposed addition will m
functional.
his intent. Paul Olin,
ded up his construction
other egress window in the
. that also needs to be replaced
ooms and bathrooms more
Sell opened the public he
closed the public hearin
d hearing no one wishing to comment, Sell
McCarty said he is
isn't really a tr
the articulation
ok with th 'd
surrou
time with this request because even though there
the articulation of the chimney should count toward
s eets the intent of the code. He added that he is also
ce request because there is no impact to any of the
here is no impact to any of the surrounding properties. She added
h ew rules regarding wall articulation are great but in this case the
tion meets the intent of the zoning code. Kisch agreed.
Segelbaum stated that the applicant's noted hardship is that the zoning code changed
in the midst of his plans and questioned if there are other hardships the Board should
consider in making its decision. Olin reiterated that he started his plans before the
zoning code was amended and that the proposed addition will allow for anotheregress
window in the basement. He added that the house does not lend itself to be added onto
in any other direction.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 23, 2008
Page 6
Kisch asked if the proposed addition could be set in an addition two feet so it would
meet the side yard setback requirements. Olin said that the architecture on the inside of
the house would not be pleasing if he jogged the proposed addition in an additional two
feet.
Kisch stated that the amount of square footage the applicants is proposing isn't going to
create something that goes against the intent of the zoning code.
McCarty said he is not sure he sees a hardship in this case other tha
but he also realizes that the proposed addition will not go any clos .
property line than the existing house already does.
Segelbaum stated that the Board has to consider the impac
properties along with the reasonableness of the request, bal
He said there is not much of a hardship in this case, b it is
there is no impact to surrounding properties. McCa
a change in the zoning code constitutes a hards .
should unless the zoning code changes during t
Segelbaum said that if this proposal had
would feel differently. The Board mem
rrounding properties he
MOVED by Kisch, seconded by
variance request for 2.08 ft. off t
closest point to the side yar
addition on the rear of th
o I n carried 4 to 1 to approve the
ft. to a distance of 14.42 ft. at its
erty Ii e to allow for the construction of an
voted no.
MOVED by Segelb
the variance reques
39.33 ft. in len i
by Kisch and motion carried unanimously to approve
all of the addition along the so~th property line to be
g
when he plans on starting construction. Olin said he wants
n as possible.
bers discussed rescheduling their December 2009 meeting date.
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm.
Chuck Segelbaum, Vice Chair
Joe Hogeboom, Staff Liaison
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
March 20, 2009
To:
From:
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
Joe Hogeboom, City PI,anner
1532 Aquila Avenue North
Tim Harris, Applicant
Subject:
Background
Tim Harris is the owner of the property located at 1532 Aquila Avenue North. There is currently
no garage on Mr. Harris' property. In order to access a proposed garage in the rear of the
home, the existing driveway (which is two feet from the property line) must be extended. Mr.
Harris is requesting a variance to City Code in order to construct a driveway extension.
The location of the current driveway, combined with the current lack of a garage, constitutes a
hardship in this situation. The garage proposed by the applicant meets all codes set forth by
the City. In addition, the applicant intends to move the proposed driveway to a legally
conforming three foot distance from the property line as soon as it would be feasible to do so.
No prior variances have been obtained for this property.
Variance
The proposal requires a variance from the following section of City Code:
. Section 11.21, Subd. 19 Driveway Setback Requirements.
City Code requires a distance of three feet between a driveway and a property line on all
driveways constructed after 2005. The applicant is requesting one foot off of the required three
feet to a distance of two feet between the proposed driveway and the south side yard property
line.
Recommended Action
Staff has reviewed this request, and believes this is a suitable proposal. Staff requests the
Board of Zoning Appeals to approve a waiver to Section 11.21, Subd. 19 of City Code,
allowing the applicant to construct an extension of his existing driveway within two feet of the
south side yard property line.
8135 8325
8310
1624
1620
1623
1619
1615
1536 1537
1532 1533
15D 1529 1529
1524 1525
1$21
1520 1$21
151li 1517 1517
1512 1515 1515
1508 1!!0!'1 1509 1504
1504 15i05 15i05
1500
8640 llliOO 1501
(i)
,
f
\
\lO~-1)
~\
~\
.J,
-i
...,~
.- ,
(1"\
"~i.
\
\
.
~1
\ i
~
Pow-Bel Con.st. Co..
01" 9 t)~Y{H
If)3....hl
F. C. ..JACKSON
LAND SURVEYOR
~JI'-
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF ST"TE OF MINNE80T"
L1C&NSED e.... OROINAJ>lCE OF CITY OF' MINNEAPOLIS
3616 EAST 55TH STREET
PA. 4.4661
,
i
t
\
\
\ / ),S.,c, .
#/.5.31. \
\ // / \
N/.{, _
\ I G \
\ ! ~ 1/, I \
~ :..~: ~ -. 3~'~-:-:;-';'4~'--:;--1 S-Q:o---..-.--..------~..==-.=-.: ~
.\\ ..,.-- _ '18.-1' _ <.U J.~ -4lI'- \
. .......-.-- """
\ l'I') CI .)51 ,n .~ 1 '....i;n ..------ j
Ir ~ "liJ III -.. [J.. t,a.....i
\.' "\ 't" I,.J 'll. ,\ \>.1 ....\
\ ~ ~~); ~ ~ ~ 'JO. .....~,
\"-9 " ~ I.j" 4, \I., 'oj ,~\
, I'l;(.~, \l.j-.J "',," \.
.... l~~'" <l ~
~a~~ .
""""""'--_/,j 1.. .0 Go . '. 7. 7. .9 '\ \
_______ ~ ~ l------,.ll V'; \
. .' ----. - ~- - \
1/;.+ ,.... _. 't 2 ~ \
---iso~\---'-------~~ - -=-1,
/a:J.r r- ~_ \
~ - ~
,I
!,..
-----. -=
'DI?p,! rJA ,j.e;
&urbtpor'S \ttrtificaft
I
Ii
I
Sc.ALE: ) ":= 36'
0-= :z:.p ON
~.; .(;,<I::,.'7'/r./;-, E,-~
~a '" PE."~ o~;. ~c- ELI
to/.4
e'i\ 5liY'f)
__ 3S
loi.Q
;.5.r:.
~1~ZS
'.
i
\
r HEflESY CERTIFY THAT\ THE ASOVE IS A nhJErA.~; ~RREC::T P\;.AT Of"A SURVEY Of"
L.. 3-> -J
\
Lot 19 Block 2, G1enwOod View.
Hennepin County,Minn.
IS'" 75 :J.-
~9 W ,l4l ~ (6./1 J
\.1~~
17th NO~7. 196il.
10.$ SURVEYED BY ME TH1S--- ______DAY OF_____'- -A.D._.~ -~. /I (
---: #/ I
SIGNEO--- __!:.~ ~~- ~~
F. C. JACKSON. M1NNESO
/-~/
1 ~;.)-';'j.
rowp.t;e.l V VII.,:!'.'. ...........
F. c. JACKSON
LAND SURVEYOR
.../yl"
REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA
LICENSED BY OROINANCE OF CITY OF MINNEAPOUlii
3t'116 EAST 5!5TH STREET
PA, 4.4661
&urbepot" 5 ~frtifitatt
I
i
'I
I
I
II
./0,.1)
r----
.s c.t4Lc: j It:: 36'
,:> -= :: p ') ,.,
E.</c,."":rI'. [L'
1\\\
,..
(
\
~\
-I,
.-'1
~i
'" \
~.
~:::t \
"
3~:2,,,
Ga ~. ;.-' t: ;)e.-:') 0_: ~_ ..:~ (;. jt:...' ~ :'
,____:.J .-
--~
DRAi!,)Ll '.~
r '., ~
8' D~ .d'"v A;'
~
._ ............ .......,.... r\... ...., ~..-...... .r'\.... .
/S",).O') ",
~_ \T1
/z. ~.
_~_ I
. .._' -., -..)i)
.-" \
\
fo/.4
--
,
i
t
.. 3~
IO'i, ~
10J. ..f..
r'
[, "
. ::,.
,. J. 5. . ,
" ("7 a
~' .f/':;'~~
\
\
fr()fos~J
II
\
\ ,
\
\
,
~\
\ \
~
\
~3.')'
\ C_
Lot 19 Block 2, Glenwood VieW.
Hennepin County,:.anr;.
A /'
IS-S:;J- u-9'-' .i'>t ;fu ( C,dJ
17th 'Novo 1964
'Hi SURVE...eD .... IoIE THIS.--' .. .' ._DAY Ol'--"--'''- ..___^.D.-.-.-.---~. "f
--.-.--- ~.!
<"/ j
SIGNEO--" --- (.~. .. ,\
_ ..,.vc:('\N MII>lNt60
!
''';::;(~'' ~::..'I=)-..::--:=::-
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
/ S 3 z At VI ~f 9r 4v~,n,;< #c>rIL
2. Applicant: "-1 /~
Name
;-)~ Yr-r ~S
/532. 4~ v,'/c,
Address
~V'-L /l/CP~I-f.. 61( Mu 55'127
City/State/Zip
7" 3 915'olzl)
Business Phone
Home Phone
fol2 liZ 3 /tfL/7
Cell Phone
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.
11 dcJ,.lr'cnt41 /1 L F of Dr/~ fl~ ~ov+L Prl>~-t, h,~~ +0
J4U{~ t~~~ /h I3i!iJ~ yq;,cl. AJJ .4JJf..J.~ { /1 S9~~ ~f
, -60
+0 ~XI:'#7 k"d/., "n Sov tL SJJ.... o~' b-\-ovu. Fb,,- <=t ~ k,( ,CJ r 3 (.p ~p
25 ~F IN,(~,.[ ~l'S I'sfc j.jj.f (l "'V"" +k s 'O~L wd-L .5~"r5> ~~,...l, /t-",~JS kK
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.
f-.e.6eJ1117 ,vi!) /;".r.:,,.t J (~"'~ ,4- jUv$r I~ '#/,,~..4! g~~<-<< cf!.-
S/"p<-,~ A1J< 't~reL. J-h-! -fdJ AdJ ~f7~ I 5t~ ~A1,.A.. fo
Sto"p t})V1 ~",,+L S/J-<-. 0 P }Aou~ {DrS'tor/y,) QV1d -10 Atws~ beL-JL-
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.
~~-< C
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:
" .
/ //h ~r'-d'
Print Name of owner
'(1 ~ !J-
'8
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:
V 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.
~
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.
t/.
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.
. .
Comment
Signature
Print Name (lilt55 U-y 5r7<.f)/I)
/
Comment
Signature
Comment
Signature
It: --Lf\!( C
~e~ mak/-4~(O
Print Name
Comment
Signature WifJfrv1f11rz ~-'
Print Name 06. r I+! VI e .s ell- eifn 4. A h
Comment
Signature 9~J /"JL-
Print Name ':) D ti/1/ A ~ v, Vl J !/o ~
Comment
Signature
~~
/
Address I () 33 II-t;u i/ct J1 ve-
Address 191 ?~ p ~"{) ~ '-L ('on '"
Address ~7 ~~ cV
,
Address
Address L D'I A-tr All (IA AveAJ
Address I Sdl t:t< JJ.,u ;L AIJ~,"vtJ.
Address is ~ 3 Z <?It I #L~vA A t/,A
If -
..
1
tt. I
(
. r e'l ',1
..
,
~ \ n \ \ \ \\\
,-
.......r-
".1