Loading...
09-26-06 BZA Agenda e e e Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Tuesday, September 26, 2006 7pm 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers I. Approval of Minutes - August 22,2006 II. The Petitions are: 815 Zane Avenue North (06-09-16) Tennant Company. Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 8 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 2 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (west) property line. Purpose: To allow for the curb along the west property line to be moved into the 10-feet of required landscaped area. 3125 Quail Avenue North (06-09-17) Mary and Robert Shaffer. Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 1 O(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements . 6 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line along Quail Ave. N. Purpose: To allow for a garage addition. 6731 Golden Valley Road (06-09-18) Golden Vallev Historical Society. Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . 23 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 27 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (west) property line. Purpose: To allow for a building addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements e . 7.2 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 42.8 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. ' Purpose: To allow for a building addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . 2 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a distance of 23 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Yard Requirements . 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. e Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Front Yard Requirements . 10ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 25 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing building into conformance. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . 19 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (west) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing building into conformance. e 2 5750 Duluth Street (06-09-19) Local Government Information Systems (LOG IS), Applicant e Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements . 28.4 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 6.6 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (south) property line along Duluth Street Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Rear Yard Setback Requirements . 20 ft. off the required 30 ft. to a distance of 10ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (north) property line Purpose: To allow for a building addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Rear Yard Setback Requirements e . 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (north) property line Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Side Yard Setback Requirements . 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the. rear yard (north) property line Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. e 3 . e e 2500 Mendelssohn Avenue North (06-09-20) Lena Enterprises LLC, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.70, Subd. 3 Minimum Number of Required Off-Street Parking Spaces . 10 spaces off the required 33 spaces for a total of 23 parking spaces for the liquor store, grocery store and Class II restaurant space Purpose: To allow for a reduction in the number of required parking spaces 5735 Westbrook Road (06-09-21) Kyle Hamilton, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Accessory Structure Location Requirements . The proposed shed will not be located completely to the rear of the principal structure Purpose: To allow for a shed addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (J) Accessory Structure Design . The proposed shed will have a gambrel"barn style" roof not consistent with the flat roof style of the existing home. Purpose: To allow for a shed addition. III. Other Business IV. Adjournment 4 . Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 22, 2006 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, August 22,2006 in the Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Landis called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members Landis, Morrissey, Nederveld, and Hughes and Planning Commission Representative McCarty. Also present were Planning Intern Kristin Gonzalez and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Sell was absent MOVED by Nederveld, seconded by McCarty and motion c approve the July 25,2006 minutes as submitted. I. Approval of Minutes - July 25, 2006 . II. The Petitions are: Request: (3)(a) Side Yard Setback . re . . to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest ard (north) property line. Purpose: ruction of a new tuck under garage with living d explained that the applicants are asking for a side agelliving space addition to within 5 feet of the north the Board members that this proposal was tabled at their eeting the applicants were asking for the above noted ond variance request to allow them to have more than the allowed accessory structure space. They've since redesigned their plans r asking for the variance to allow them more than the allowed 1,000 ccessory structure space. . Kristene Heyer, Keith Waters and Associates, architect for the project, stated that when they tabled their variance requests in June it was to discuss the Board's recommendations and to allow for a full Board to be present. She referred to a survey of the property and discussed the various options that the Board had suggested in June. She stated that they looked at building the proposed addition in toward the rear of the home, but that would not work because the steepness of the slope would not allow for the egress windows that are required in a bedroom. She stated that they looked at the option of building the addition in the south east corner of the property but that would still require a variance and a driveway in that location would be even steeper than the current driveway. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 22,2006 Page 2 . She said that none of the other options seem to be feasible so they had to go back to the originally proposed location, but they did make the living space and mechanical room/storage room space as small as possible. McCarty asked if the proposed accessory structure space is below 1,000 square feet. Heyer said the proposed accessory structure space is right at 1,000 square feet. Heyer referred to a drawing of the driveway and reminded the Board that at the last meeting one Board Member stated that it looked like five cars could be driveway. She showed how that would not work because cars parked' need to be able to turn around because with the steepness of the i back out. McCarty noted that if the proposed garage addition we s not a garage, cars would be able to turn around and get out 0 driv having to back out. Hughes referr other loc . s kitchen Board meeting, but the perty even after the allowed. Heyer stated that another option mentioned at the Ju stall covered parking space rather than a full two car would still need the same variance to do that as . Heyer stated that the hardships aren't chan site is inordinately steep and difficult. Sh proposed addition falls below the allo Landis said he thought the applic options that were discussed at f going through all the various Heyer showed a renderin and stated that it would neighbors have no obi having several cars the proposed addition looking from the street o . e and hard to even see. She said the e proposed addition and that it would be better than driveway. nd asked Heyer if they are proposing additions in two e one being discussed. Heyer said they are proposing a ddition in the front, neither of which require variances. ublic hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, blic hearing. Hughes that he was not at the previous meeting in June, however he finds this property very interesting and likes unusual homes built on unusual lots. He said the applicants consider this addition very essential and if the proposed garage addition was detached it would be allowed to be within five feet of the side yard property line. . Nederveld asked about the City's requirements 14 years ago when this home was built. Grimes explained that this proposed addition would have also required a variance 14 years ago. He stated that when the City reviews subdivision requests the applicant only has to show that a home meets the setback requirements for the new lots. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 22,2006 Page 3 He said that staff typically tells the applicants at the time they are requesting a subdivision that creates lots at or near the minimum lot size that future requests for variances would not be welcomed. However, the City cannot prevent a future variance request. He pointed out that 7,000 square feet of this lot is in the front setback area so it is a rather unusual lot and adding on to this house is difficult. He stated that whether or not the applicants need this addition is up to the Board to decide, but the applicants could not build a detached garage on this property nor could they build to the rear of the home. Nederveld stated that the Board has a very narrow set of criteria whe hardships. He said what they need to decide is if not having cars p r is a hardship. Cyndi Barrington, applicant, stated that the City h k park on the street so it limits the parking on their property. Hughes stated that a lot of houses in Golden Valley were bu and that is what there original plans showed so to hol orne their house seems unfair. McCarty states that it is diff go from a one stall garage to a two stall garage. been clearly established for someone wanting t stall garage. garages inal plans of eon who wants to hat a hardship has I garage to a two Landis stated that the hardship in this parking available on the driveway, b agree that it is a very unusual lot side yard setback. He said that at the 1,000 square foot allo been about the amount of .. nalliving space. He said they all r n Ighbor is far away from the north pplicant for changing their plans to be ure space. Morrissey stated that ha of the property acco ding could look at what t the "only reaso Ie a to the category of what is a "reasonable use" partment of Administration. She said that the Board proposing as a "reasonable use" of the property, not proposed addition on the property. is understanding that it is possible for the applicants to have operty and stay within the requirements of the City's t if there were 10 more feet to north the addition wouldn't be an stated that the whole point of having setback requirements is to and the City Council has agreed that a single stall garage is a hardship. Morrissey asked hypothetically if the garage space was taken out of the proposal, if it was just living space for their mother-in-law if the Board would feel different about the request. Nederveld said no. To him it doesn't matter who would be living there, it doesn't mean that they don't have to follow the same rules that everyone else does. McCarty added that this is still a usable home and lot and not having this proposed addition doesn't make it unusable. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August22,2006 Page 4 Barrington stated that the BZA has granted several variances for larger garages. She referred to a house on Paisley Lane that has five visible garage stalls and two more inside that area for a total of seven garage stalls. Keith Waters, Keith Waters and Associates, architect for the project, stated that the regular zoning standards don't apply to this particular situation. He said the hardships are not economic in nature and they were not created by the applicant. The land itself is the hardship and they are not overbuilding this lot because if the property had a different configuration they wouldn't have to go through the variance pr at all. He said there is no place else to build on this lot and there is a clear hard eland. Gonzalez stated that people have to look at those issues when t Landis stated that people don't usually know the setback requ. house. Nederveld said that is part of the due diligence proc Hughes said that the culture is not the same as it was everyone had a single stall garage now homes have thing and that it is not fair to say that just becau never change. ack then Id it's a cultural ed in 1950 it can son why detached imes said part of it is ically smaller and less imposing pe lines. Morrissey said she wants to ents and asked if it is a visual thing, a e to b easy to administer. He said he thinks t Golden Valley has large front yard and side e . onally that is what Golden Valley has wanted dded that Golden Valley is not completely stagnant. een reduced because people do want to build larger f the problem is how homes are placed on the lots in o sly this property in question is a very valuable home r not being able to add on to a house is an undue hardship. Morrissey asked Grimes to speak to the i accessory structures have less of a se tradition and the thought has been t than the home so they could be understand the intent of having fire thing, etc. Grimes said t it is an issue of aesthetic yard setback requireme and it's a choice citi s m The setback requir homes and gar es the first place. and the q i ggling with the hardship in this case. He said it seems to him onsidered lot themselves to be a hardship. Grimes stated that nd that is why the City requires the applicant to state what they feel ith their lot. Nederveld said he thinks this is maybe a decision the City Council should make. Morrissey said she would have more difficulties with this variance request if it wasn't for this lot. Heyer added that they could build a detached garage in this same location but they couldn't have living space above it. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals August 22,2006 Page 5 . MOVED by Morrissey, seconded by Hughes and motion carried 3 to 2 to approve the variance request for 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line. McCarty and Landis voted against the approval of the variance requested. III. Other Business Grimes stated that this was Gonzalez's last Board of Zoning Appeals meeting as her internship with the City is ending. The Board thanked her for her work. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 pm. . . ~ . 06-09-16 815 Zane Avenue North . Tennant Company, Applicant . . . . Planning 763-593-8095 /763-593-8109 (fax) Date: September 19, 2006 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: 815 Zane Avenue North (06-09-16) Tennal'!~" Company, Applicant Tennant Company owns the property at 815 Zane Avenue North. They are requesting one variance from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) of the Zoning Code in order to allow for the curb along the west property line to be moved 8 feet west of its current location which puts it into the 10-feet of required landscaped area. Because of the location of the current curb the applicant's longest trucks can't maneuver in the existing space and when a truck is parked in the south dock there is no room to drive between it and the existing curb. The project requires a variance from the following section of City Code: . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Industrial Zoning District chapter of the City Code requires that there be a 20 foot rear yard setback area, half of which must be landscaped. The variance request is for 8 feet off of the required 10 feet of landscaped area to allow the curb to be located to within 2 feet of the rear yard (west) property line. A review of the City file indicates that the building was built in 1978 and that no other variances have been granted for this property. 1111 -.zs -"- i Z z i 28 101 i ; I ; I AOO I.ltm 621 J:i I ~ i i OJ 51184 S738 5130 SUO saoa ~.. HIGtMAY 55 HIGHWAy 55w w.. .US 6US . . . . August 17, 2006 Mark Grimes Director of Planning and Development City of Golden Valley Dear Mr. Grimes, This is a request for a variance concerning a piece of "parking setback line" at 815 Zane Avenue North. When the building was built in 1978, the maximum legal lengths for a tractor and trailer were 10' and 45' respectively. I suspect that the building was placed on the property so that this size tractor and trailer could maneuver around the angled truck docks on the west side of the building; Tennant Company is currently shipping finished machines from our 701 North Lilac Drive building. That shipping dock can easily handle the latest (as of 1991) legal length for a tractor and trailer. The current limit is 17' for the tractor and 53' for the trailer. That is an increase in length ofI5'. As part of a rearrangement of our manufacturing space, we need to relocate the Shipping Department to 815 Zane Avenue North. Unfortunately, our shipping company is using the longest trucks allowed and can't quite maneuver in the existing space. In fact, when a truck is parked in the south dock, you can't drive between it and the curb. We would like to remove and replace some of the curb to a line 8' west of its current position. Please see the drawing for the location of this change. The displaced area is highlighted in yellow. It will not be used for parking. I have also included a copy of the land title survey and some photos. If you have any questions, my desk phone number is 763-540-1339, my cell phone is 612-801-8409 (but we get poor reception inside our building). My office is less than 2 miles from yours so I could easily stop by in person. Sincerely, 'f1". 0 ___./ 1J~ ~7-' Vince Goodnough Plant Engineer Tennant Company City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application 1. Street address of property involved in this application: 815 lane Avenue North. Golden Vallev. MN 55422 2. Applicant: Vince Goodnouah (for Tennant COmDany) Name 701 North Lilac Drive. Golden Valley. MN 55422 Address City/StatelZip -,,) 763-540-1339 Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone _vince.goodnough@tennantco.com 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. see attached layout 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. see attached memo 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. 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 comn1&nt on the project. Comments can contain language ot' agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other tatements regarding the project. Print Name ~c.. L~~4!'~H.#L 0.. p,'c 1 fA R A"'J " &..~ ,;, d.~~M~ -.;/ ;0, ~?.s<' . 4. /-::? . ~~ '"J ~'tt c::t;- .4~h:' ~ Signature ~...ed T ~~~ Address~ 1/7 A# 5':f"~Z Comment Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address rintName Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name omment Signature Address ** c0'38~dl~101 ** TENNANT MAINTENANCE FAGE 65 ~e/25/2ee6 15:B9 7635131729 c0/c0"d 6c~1~lS~9~-6 01 cS6Sv06c19 ?~~S131729 PAG~. SldW lI~~ dJ ~~ 6c:vl 900G ~~ Sub o,UG 28 2006 12:28 FR UPRR-CONT-REALESTATE 402 997 3603 TO 917635131729 .....~-.r~.....,'_......_.... .....,.."'TW IU..,....,.L-'..L,I.~ I~..."...'I 1.,.,.....I'Ir:J~~ P.02/03 t'1-ll.:Jl:. t:I.I. JlLJI By tigning this tonn. ~ .. only verifying ..at you have been told .llbout tM.1*'Ject, not that ~ )tou neceMMly... or obj8ct to the prajeot. If you wish, you may comment on the project. . 1 Comments can contain language d' agreeing with the project, objecting te, the project or other . S+,,9ti3ments regarding .,. project. . ~rint Name '" ~L- L"",'~A-L ~ ~~~ '1(/ ~ A. . '--:It $!s~ ~ ?:~;,;,~ ~~11;~n~. ~ef.tf~ h. ~1Te(' Ut)'~ ji(,'f,c.-E1L- ~ I 1IW L PrInt Name .:C'~~m~.nt ~~JA Addreea JjQo ~V.G/d~ s+ ~1-of I ~ '10'- . OW\Cl~ IJE ~~171 ~H~.nature ~:l>j1;d Name L~ ~ , '~.~mmem .." ... ~w Signature ACICkMs _ ~ame . Comment I 1 :; ~.r~~Mur. . . l.~ Addreu _, ~""""P'"T Fi'rlntName ~ Address f. W PrintN.... 1 L . " ~Il $f,gnature Addresa_ Ni!tme If C~mmtnt :; i . Signature .. Add.... 6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the owner of this property: . ~ &-II5Slf Print Name 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: vi 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. Variance application fee, as follows: $125 - single family residentia~2;~~-oth~:) ---..._.----~.~- Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners Note to the variance applicant: As part of the variance application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly across the street. If on a_c.omec,.lbi.sJneaos_al"..rn,~.botb..$~ts. ""~"",""",",,,""""""-'-"-'''--'''''''''- .. -.--.."''"''''-""....-...,'-;~_-..._'',...-''''".'~-~.,-~,_.''''...,'-..,,,,._,,,..:.~,;,..",,,,,;.~.-,,,.,,,-,.,.,",,,,,,,,,,.~...,..,,"=,,,,,,,,,,,-~-...."--...""'-",.;"...~,,.,,...,"'''''''-,,~''^#-''-;..'''''..'''.' 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 eceiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting. . . . ~ . 06-09-17 3125 Quail Avenue North . Mary & Robert Shaffer, Applicants . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: September 19, 2006 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development 3125 Quail Avenue North (06-09-17) Mary and Robert Shaffer, Applicants To: From: Subject: Mary and Robert Shaffer own the house and property at 3125 Quail Avenue North. The applicants are requesting a variance from one requirement of the Residential Zoning Code, Section 11.21, Section 1 O(A)( 1), in order to allow for the expansion of their existing garage. The applicant's existing garage is a 1 % stall garage and is approximately 20 feet wide by 22 feet deep. The proposed garage addition would allow for a 24-foot wide by 22-foot deep, 2-stall garage. . To apply for this variance, a survey was required. Attached please find the survey and an explanatory letter from the applicants. The following variance is requested to allow for the construction of the proposed garage addition: . Section 11.21, Subd. 1 0(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements. City Code requires that the required minimum front setback shall be 35 feet from any front property line along a street right-of-way-Iine. The variance request is for 6 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line for the proposed new garage addition. The City's file on this address indicates that the house was built in 1955. There have been no other variances granted to this address. The original building permit for the house stated that the house was to be located 30feet from the street. The survey submitted with the variance indicates the house was built to within 28 feet 3 % inches . 3281 3210 32<<1 :041 3211 3D1 lit I I 3220 3221 i ~ 32U 3210 3211 lit 320$ W1 ne .JUij I%Q. 3220 I%Q. llO22 un 4MS II S042 49l1li I.OWttY 1'1!R ^' 13125 Quail Ave. N. n4S 1m 3030 3OaO 2945 29U m7 .. (l) . 484S 4tlIO <4820 4810 nu 48211 Jao1 3!39 3U5 3UII <t824 310l 30H 30B 3Ot6 3013 3008 3001 2f44 2945 D42 2M3 1940 Z941 293& m7 3~ City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application f()r Offic~lJj;e()nly: Am.()Ul1tR~~i~~ 1. Street address of property involved in this application: 312~ 6l.V~'l \ AveY)1Je. No~ 2. Applicant: Md\r'Q o...V'd f'obe.Yt Shc\~ Name 312..l? &\Jl^\ I MV\\Y<- Nortl--. GJo\c\.e.v\V(}J\~ J~N \:2J'9t'2.'L Address . J City7State/Zip CO\2J,.c;\. ~\&\ %:;.1;&es'3~'C;2. CcBl'~;&1- Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone rl'Ar~. ~V\~ffer @J~V'jet .c.!)\'V\ 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. 5'~~e.. a-kM~oh -to e.'tfX\V\~ eJ<.isiiV\j ~r~e. frOM \1/'2 CAr +0 2- CA.\{ ~Vo..5e. . 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. s~~iT~6V\ed YV\eroo~+ed 3/\IC)(b . 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. s~~ 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 or' the project. Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other .atements re arding the roject. Print Na comment tJ;::' ~'"'" . Signature t~-K;~l~ Print Name ~I::; Lk1i6lv- !1{)fl^, MfJrh tM~ Comment Signature ~~ ~;f/;&#d~S~<t Print Name SheV"II) I M~ \oV\e..... Comment ()J-A ~ ~ Signature ~m ~ Address ~ QlA.o..~ l AIJ~. N. 1)( O)Utlt,'J I\v.N. ~\ Address 3\ 0\ Qua:( ~N . eint Name J'1t>AJIt ;(12.J LE. II ( . 'V t'a 1'\ tV ~ ISt!J Y) Comment Signatur~~ 1fuitcl.w ~ddress 3\60 O?()~il Av..~ ~ Print Name 'f ex '{ c.-n~ Signature Address ~12o ~e.Y\t -Av. t-..J. . Comment Signature 'KQ. \ V\. C"l S ~ yV\ \ 0... V\ ~L~ Ii< Print Name Comment Address ~I ~E\ ~O\t A". N . Print Name omment Signature Address . . . To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Mary Shaffer, AlA Date: 9/1/06 Re: Variance for 3125 Quail Avenue North, Golden Valley, MN 55422 We have looked into all alternatives to expanding our existing undersized garage and feel that this option minimizes any additional intrusion into the front yard setback. The following hardships and site conditions are present on this site: 1. The existing garage is undersized with an interior width dimension of less then 18'-0", therefore the existing garage is only a stall and a half garage. We can only fit one car into this garage. The neighbors have commented to us that they never realized that the current garage was so small, but always wondered why every resident of this house had one car parked outside oftlle garage. We have two cars and would like to park both cars in the garage. A 1 % stall garage is a hardship. 2. The lot has a nine foot change of elevation from the front of the house to the back and further slopes downward towards the North and West, making a detached garage a difficult, if not a nearly impossible prospect due to the excessive slopeS needed for a driveway. This solution would also create a dangerous winter driving condition. 3. The existing garage was built at 29'-1" from the front property line and in order to reasonably expand it to a two stall garage, the design extends the front wall of the garage. 4. The house is not parallel with the front property line which also curves. The garage addition, by staying in line with the existing face ot the existing garage, will actually be further from the front property line than the closest point of the existing garage. 5. The front of the addition is back further than the neighbor's house to the North. Their house sits 28'-3 W' from their front property line, while the new garage expansion will only sit 29'-3" from our front property line. 6. The street presence and the impact to the neighborhood will be negligible. The way the street curves away from our house, along with the larger than normal City right-ot-way, make our house look like it is the correct distance from the street. With the new front porch, new windows, lighting and siding, the house will certainly look improved, but the scale and proportion has been carefully designed to fit into the neighborhood. The design is intended to extend the existing garage so that it will not look as though there ever was an addition. . . . . . . . . , . 06-09-18 6731 Golden Valley Road . Golden Valley Historical Society, Applicant . See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in Planning Department " . Planning 763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: September 22, 2006 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: 6731 Golden Valley Road (06-09-18) Golden Valley Historical Society, Applicant ....~}.. The Golden Valley Historical Society is the owner of the institutional building at 6731 Golden . Valley road. The property at this address features an existing 3,136 square foot building used as the Historical Society Headquarters. The Historical Society is proposing to expand the parking lot by approximately 1,126 square feet and to build a 2,746 square foot museum addition. . According to the applicant's submittal the hardship with this property is the fact that it is deep and narrow which severely limits any additional building construction. Upon review of this application staff discovered that the Golden Valley Historical Society building sits on three separate lots. The applicants have been made aware that they will have to submit an application to allow for a lot consolidation so that the three lots can be platted as one lot and there are not buildings constructed on top of property lines. Any variances granted should be contingent upon the existing lots being consolidated into one lot. To apply for this variance, a survey was required. Attached please find the survey and an explanatory letter from the applicant. The proposed improvements require the following variances from City Code: Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards in the Institutional Zoning District shall not be less than 50 in width and depth, of which at least 25 feet adjacent to the property line shall be landscaped and maintained as a buffer zone. The variance request is for 23 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 27 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (west) property line to allow for a building addition. . Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards in the Institutional Zoning District shall not be less than 50 in width and depth, of which at least 25 feet adjacent to the property line shall be landscaped and maintained as a buffer zone. The variance request is for 7.2 ft. off the required 50 ft. to . . . a distance of 42.8 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line to allow for a building addition. Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards in the Institutional Zoning District shall not be less than 50 in width and depth, of which at least 25 feet adjacent to the property line shall be landscaped and maintained as a buffer zone. The variance request is for 2 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a distance of 23 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line to allow for a parking lot addition. Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Front Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that no building or structure in an Institutional Zoning District shall be located less than 35 feet from the property line abutting a public street. All portions of a parcel of land abutting a public street shall be regarded as front yards. All front yards shall be planted, and landscaped, and shall contain no off-street parking. The variance request is for 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line to allow for a parking lot addition. Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Front Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that no building or structure lh an Institutional Zoning District shall be located less than 35 feet from the property line abutting a public street. All portions of a parcel of land abutting a public street shall be regarded as front yards. All front yards shall be planted, and landscaped, and shall contain no off-street parking. The variance request is for 10ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 25 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (north) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards in the Institutional Zoning District shall not be less than 50 in width and depth, of which at least 25 feet adjacent to the property line shall be landscaped and maintained as a buffer zone. The variance request is for 19 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (west) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. In 2001 a variance was granted from the rear yard requirements to allow for construction of a cellular phone monopole antenna to the rear of the building. In 1961 a variance was granted to convey the East 100 ft. to the adjoining property. The Golden Valley Historical Society purchased this building in 1996. The building was built in the late 1800s. I 1229 64J1 U40 6419 l1B 1111 1126 1101 ~ 1lm. 11m 1l'lO1 ;?".16731 G:d~n Vall~y Rp...d .1 28 2B ~~__At<llMll, ~jC)l.OOlSGlS_ 2lmt . City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (SZA) Zoning Code Variance Application For !,ffice Use On,ly: Apj:>ll~a,ti()~:,,~~.,",:;,'"'''' . . ',aate'Re~~iv,e~:; ";':"':';4',;;',,, ',;', ,,'" .. . -. '.' ....,...,' BZAMeetj~gPate ::::;,' , , . -, . . . - . Am9@l;~~c'eiv~~;":",., 1. Street address of property involved in this application: ~7~1 Golden Valley Road 2. Applicant: Golden Valley Historical Sooiety Name 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427 Address~' City/State/Zip 763-588-8578 Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone maryanddon3030@aol.com Email Address . 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. See attached sheet. 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. See RttR~hpd Rhppt 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. .~llf1>t~ I/JC . ~ 1I,ft.lej /fts1tte./CA-f.., SaG I e."j 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: . Robert F. Provost Print Name of owner ~....G.. ~.--::-::L , e"'~ ~.. ~~ '-- I ~. 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: x Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners. x A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey requirements.", -L- 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. x 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. . x 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 i time and place of the BZA meeting. Note to surrounding property owners: . is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of 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 tatements regarding the project . Print Name L~s )~J l-ftA "lob . Comment Signature . ~~ e~ Address (O{)~ ttlW-r>AI..e ~~,fJ Print Name Comment f( ft / 66 ci{~ ~ "/2/0 {, l4it~. l .. . ' ./ Address r; '11a ~ VtJ4 ~ Signature Print Name Comment 9/IID~ ~~f!z./p" tnif ~ Address 10 (0 \\ .L. 1 ;; _ if fj J! . ~ I Signature rint Name 7~(' h~..-e 1TNt> Pt'R})1...s P-" ul:#..s:,,~ Comment Signature ~ ~ CL,,-~ C? ~ Address 1 Oaf ~ fl..K I/o Print Name \tJ1U(Atv\ D" Mo~rrJ. Comment ~ ~ l Signature ~Jl~ Address-''7 39 ~'LrJJfJ PrintName ~.r~~~~-~~ comment>~ ~1I~,JS'7$'O ~~W,~~r93a.. ~ <. _ Signature ~~ ~ . Address '5~7. ~~~A,4 < Print Name 'omment ql dOlo ~htw/4 V/~o~trWt ~j .. ., Signature Address G~~oMPIA.YbQ2urR~, . . . 3. Description of addition and alterations. The proposed museum addition square foot area is 2, 746 sq. ft. The addition will contain museum display space, storage space, and office/administration areas. Historic vehicles and related items will be on public display. The proposed building addition will be directly south of the existing museum/church. A small 6' x 15' ground-level storage room will be removed to make room for the proposed addition. Fire safety site improvements for the existing and proposed facilities include new construction of approximately 360 sq. ft. of concrete sidewalks connecting fire exits to paved areas. Parking lot alterations will include expansion and striping of parking stalls to improve fire and handicap access. Parking capacity and peak-use function will remain relatively unchanged under the proposed layout. Fifteen >{~5) off-street parking spaces. are provided, including two (2) handicap accessible spaces. The proposed parking lot expansion of the existing lot is approximately 1,126 sq. ft. 4. Statement of hardship. A variance for not meeting minimum building setback regulations, as set forth in the City of Golden Valley Zoning Code, is being requested. The existing site is deep and narrow. This severely limits any type of building construction, if following the current zoning code. The existing historic church building on the site is in non-conformance with the current city zoning code. The proposed museum addition square footage needed for museum operations cannot be accommodated within the current setback requirements. This addition, if allowed, will embrace the historic integrity of the original structure, and keep the spirit and intent of the City's zoning code intact. The visual appearance of the proposed addition is in keeping with the architecture of the historic church (see sketch). There are significant plant material "buffer" zones on the east, west, and south sides of the existing church. Views into the site from adjacent properties would not be dramatically affected because of the generous building setbacks on these properties and the establihed "buffer" zones on the church property. GOLDEN VALLEY mSTORICAL SOCIETY . REVIEW OF WEDDINGS AT TIIE mSTORICAL CHURCH FROM JULY 1, 1997 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2006 WEDDING # WEDDINGDAY- DATE TIME NUMBER WEDDING GUESTS Total 23 Favorite Months - June and October Average attendance - 71 #1 Saturday, February 14, 1998 10: 15-noon 8 #2 Saturday, March 21, 1998 4:00-5:00 PM 40 #3 Saturday, Apri124, 1998 6:30-7:30 PM 80 #4 Saturday, May 2, 1998 2:30-4:30 PM 50 #5 Saturday, September 25, 1998 4:00-7:00 PM 80 #6 Saturday, February 20, 1999 11 :OO-noon 60 #7 Saturday, June 10,2000 4:00-5:00 PM 80 #8 Saturday, June 17,2000 11 :OO-noon 80 ,,<-:.~ #9 Saturday, May 12, 2001 4:00-5:00 PM 70 #10 Saturday, June 2, 2001 3 :00-4:00 PM 80 #11 Saturday, August 4, 2001 7:00-8:30 PM 40 #12 Saturday, October 6, 2001 5:30-6:00 PM 90 #13 Saturday, May II, 2002 2:00-4 :00 PM 90 . #14 Saturday, March 29, 2003 3:45-4:30 PM 80 #15 Saturday, October 18,2003 1 :30-2:30 PM 90 #16 Saturday, June 12,2004 10:00-11 :30 AM 95 #17 Saturday, March 19, 2005 4:00-5:00 PM 90 #18 Saturday, August 20, 2005 11 :OO-noon 60 #19 Saturday, September 16,2005 4:00-5:00 PM 50 #20 Saturday, October 7, 2005 11 :OO-noon 75 #21 Saturday, October 15,2005 2:00-3:00 PM 50 #22 Saturday, July 15, 2006 1:00-1:30 PM 100 #23 Saturday, July 22,2006 4:00-5:00 PM 85 . . . . . . . . . . . G\ o " r 0' m ":I ~ - U1 -J .~ ~ ~ 100 ); 4r ~ " ::j~ .....~ O~l :l, . '~ . 06-09-19 ""':', 5730 and 5750 Duluth Street . local Government Information Systems (lOGIS), Applicant . . lIey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: September 22,2006 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: 5730 & 5750 Duluth Street (06-09-19) Local .~overnment Information Systems (LOGIS), Applicant . LOGIS owns the buildings and properties located at 5730 and 5750 Duluth Street. Currently LOGIS occupies the 2-story office building at 5750 Duluth Street. The building located at 5730 Duluth is vacant. LOGIS is proposing to consolidate the two lots and demolish the existing office building on the 5730 lot to allow for a 15,000 square foot, two-story office addition and an expansion of the parking lot to accommodate at total of 125 cars. The public hearing for the Lot Consolidation proposal was held at the September 11, 2006 Planning Commission meeting and is scheduled to be on the October 3, 2006 City Council agenda. At the Planning Commission meeting the Commissioners approved the proposed Lot Consolidation but expressed concern about the amount of landscaped that would be left along the front as a result of the parking lot expansion (see enclosed minutes). According to the applicant's submittal, the hardship with this property is that there is a storm water pond that consumes a significant portion of the site. Also, in 1981 Hennepin County acquired 17 additional feet of right-of-way for improvements to Duluth Street and setback requirements to the adjoining MnDOT property to the north were increased. There is also a significant embankment along the north side of the property that further restricts use of the site. The required variances for this proposal are the same as those approved for the original construction of the LOGIS building in 1998. The proposed project requires the following variances from City Code: Section 11.45, Subd. 4(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that no building or other structure in the Business and Professional Offices District shall be located closer than 35 feet from the property line along any abutting street. The 35 foot front setback as described above shall all be landscaped. The variance request is for 28.4 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 6.6 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (south) property line along Duluth Street to allow for a parking lot addition. The proposed new building addition does not require a front yard setback variance. . Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Rear Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that in the case of a premises abutting a Multiple Dwelling Zoning District or an . . Institutional Zoning District, side and rear yards shall be not less than 30 feet in depth or width, of which as least the 15 feet adjacent to the lot line shall be planted, landscaped and maintained as buffer zones. The variance request is for 20 ft. off the required 30 ft. to a distance of 10ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (north) property line to allow for a building addition. Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Rear Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that in the case of a premises abutting a Multiple Dwelling Zoning Di~trict or an Institutional Zoning District, side and rear yards shall be not less than 30 feet in depth or width, of which as least the 15 feet adjacent to the lot line shall be planted, landscaped and maintained as buffer zones. The variance request is for 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (north) property line to allow for a parking lot addition. Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Side Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that in the case of a premises abutting a Multiple Dwelling Zoning District or an Institutional Zoning District, side and rear yards shall be not less than 30 feet in depth or width, of which as least the 15 feet adjacent to the lot line shall be planted, landscaped and mafntained as buffer zones. The variance request is for 10ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (north) property line to allow for a parking lot addition. In 1997 variances were granted to allow for the construction of the LOGIS building. I've included the minutes from the November 3, 1997 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting for your information. 'Ii ! J 5750 & 5730 Duluth Street I I j l;i {J tlJ I i ~ii: ;i!L- ,~- 21SS 1!i35 &725 5tiI01 5621 28 1m SR5 1- ~ lti :II! VEH""' )("" w' SAlNT CROIX A Ii sm ~ 1m sm5601 :io'H4S 1610 . ,L ,[ \ ~ a 1 I i ! ! I I '" t . City of Golden Valley FOr.Otfi(*U...Q....y; Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) '~()n"'~" DJt.'iR~d Zoning Code Variance Appl ication .~!.,.l.gg~., . A.Jrj~,,*B_._, .' 1. Street address of property involved in this application: 5750 Duluth Street, Golden Vall ey MN 2. Applicant: Logis, Mike Garris Name . 5750 Du 1 u th Street. Gol de,n Valle.v.MN 55422 Address City/StatelZip .~~ 763"':'543-2600 Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone m<Jarri s@logis. or9 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. See attached Description 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. See attached statement of hardship 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 eXPirM.. . _ .:' rY> OA---- Signature of Applicant . . . 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 regar~~g tfhoe p;.o _je~t. c.. J L /1 1..1> f) . Print Name ~ r t1 f r I '-\,. Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature . Print Name Comment Signature . Print Name Address (I. .-"' l!Jl;J^,b-S~ ])rPARrMcNiOr fPAiJ:spoe:f4rIQ,J ~,~JJ:: Address~$5''''LlLAC :o~.. ~; ..... ~~~\L;r~i:r:~1t~~ Address. 5]'0 \ t>~~ .1'> b-. !:.~-:;~';-;" , -' '".,'- --- '. Address Comment .S- Slgnatu.... .~ \ (1(/ ~+- ClYAd~S . Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature .1 Address Address . ,/ .. " signing this fonn, yo~ are only verifying: that you have been to.dabout 'he proJect, n()t that fOU necessarily agree or 'obJect to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project. . Comments can contain lan9uage of agreeing with the projeCt, objecting to the prpject or other ~ statements regar~g th{ :p~jec:t. c. I LA n.: Print Name ~ (;.' P1 r~ / ~ e: t--. Comment Sign~ure A,~dress. f. Print Name 1:1'iJJJ 0--i~ ))e-PA/.2:F}I\~#tj{ or 7RAiJ:SPo~"cvJ Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature ~ Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment . Signature 6001lJ 1 . d .",: . "'T ~'~~1:lf~tk... _....... ~'. ~;;f:~B..~:jtr;;E1t!~~ ""'0 ,~.".....,_ _, .... ~dress .~O', t)v....l.u.~ '<z>b~ ~~L-$~ , . A~dress~$?lf_,-!~c-1:JI?.- -... .,.,. . Address.:$'%S/ ~~~ . ....... . ._._.. I .; ..... :'H _r , . ~ddress . -.. ~ ......., " ..... Address .: Address .' S WO'1 669ZttSt9L rv~ LO:Sl 9006/t~/80 evO:SO 90 E2 ~n8 PROJECT DESCRIPTION FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION . August 10, 2006 This variance request is to permit a proposed expansion of the existing LOGIS facility at 5750 Duluth Street in Golden Valley. Currently the proposed site consists of two parcels: the existing 1.532 acre (66,732 s.f.) LOGIS site at 5750 Duluth Street, and the adjoining .820 acre (35,716 s.f.) site to the east at 5730 Duluth Street. Bassett Creek flows through an easement on the west end of the LOGIS property. In June 2006, lOGIS acquired the adjoining 5730 Duluth property to the east, and concurrent with this variance request LOGIS is submitting an application to consolidate the two lots and demolish the existing office building on the east lot to allow expansion of the existing building and parking lot. The existing 14,089 sJ. two-story LOGIS office building was constructed in 1998, along with a parking lot for 52 cars and a stormwater pond. The proposed expansion is for a 15,000 s.f. two-story office addition and expansion of the parking lot to accommodate a total of 125 cars. The existing parking lot at 5730 Duluth has an entrance to the east off of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnDOT) driveway, although no record of an existing cross-access agreement has been located in the Hennepin County files after a document search. The proposed parking lot layout calls for an entrance off the MliDOT driveway close to the existing location, so a cross-access agreement or other suitable agreement will be necessary for final project approval. LOGIS has contacted MnDOT regarding this matter, and has received a favorable response. LOGIS is continuing to pursue the conclusion of this agreement. The proposed stormwater management will consist of an underground stormwater structure that will then discharge into the existing lOGIS stormwater pond. The design of the proposed building addition will match the existing building to avoid the appearance of an addition. . Attached please find a Survey dated June 22, 2006, indicating existing conditions and a schematic Site Plan dated August 10,2006 showing the proposed expansion. . STATEMENT OF HARDSHIP FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION August 10, 2006 . When the original building was constructed in 1998, several variances were approved for the project due to the unique difficulties presented by the site. These hardships still encumber the proposed expansion. The setback to Bassett Creek was originally considered an ordinary side yard setback. By the time of the construction of the existing LOGIS building, this had been increased to a 50' setback from the top of the creek bank. Unlike previously approved developments on the LOGIS site, new regulations required on-site ponding of stormwater for the 1998 project, and this pond consumes a significant portion of the site. Similarly, in 1981 the Hennepin County acquired 17 additional feet of right.of-way for improvements to Duluth Street. Setback requirements to the adjoining MnDOT property to the north were increased as well. In addition, a significant embankment along the north side of the property further restricts use of the site. These hardships have left the parcel at 5750 - 5730 Duluth Street as a long, narrow site that is not conducive to an office building and parking lot layout that is appropriate for today's market and design practices. The required variances are the same as those that were approved for the original LOGIS building and consist of: . I. Front yard setback a. 1~94 feet of the required 35 feet to a distance of 23.96 feet for the existing building at its closest point (southwest corner) to the lot line on Duluth Street. Note that this is the current variance for the existing building and only applies to the existing building. No front yard variance is required for the proposed addition. b. 28.4 feet off the required 35 feet tp a distance of 6.6 feet for the proposed parking lot at its closest point (southern edge) to the lot line on Duluth Street. 2. Side and rear yard setbacks a. 20 feet off the required 30 feet to a distance of 10 feet for the proposed building to the lot line on the north side. b. 10 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 5 feet for the proposed parking lot to the lot line on the north side. c. 5 feet off the required 10 feet to a distance of 5 feet for the parking lot to the lot line on the east side. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2006 Page 5 . 3. Informal Public Hearing - Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation SU11-08 - 5730 and 5750 Duluth Street Applicant: Local Government Information Systems (LOG IS) Address: 5730 and 5750 Duluth Street Cera referred t Hanauer landsc nine fee Purpose: The Lot Consolidation would combine two separate lot in order to allow for the expansion of the existi Hanauer referred to a site plan and stated that the properties inv total 1.5 acres. He referred to an aerial photo of the site and d' variances what were granted when the LOGIS building was . explained that the'€ity requested that the building be moved from Duluth Street. ' Hanauer explained that when this project is finis that the access driveway to the 5730 property w Bassett Creek Watershed Commission will be re plan has been requested by staff. 5 parking spaces and ed. added that the proposal and a revised utility . Kluchka asked if the drainage woul pond located on the property. Ha vault and then into to the existi ett Creek and not to the existing drainage will go to an underground Cera asked if the north Ii line as the existing buildl the same line as th xisf in September. ed new building addition would follow the same s that the new building addition will follow along hat LOGIS will be going to the Board of Zoning Appeals questioned the landscaped area along Duluth Street. whole 35-foot front setback area is supposed to be sking for a variance for the parking lot to be located to within erty line along Duluth. Ke anauer's staff report said that the existing retaining wall will be recon c d asked if the new one will be the same height and style as the existing wall. Ste n, Pope Associates, Architect for the project, stated that they will have to rebuild the retaining wall in order to accommodate the new building, but it would be the same height and style. . Cera asked if the entire 35-foot front setback area were to be landscaped how much parking would be lost. Irwin said they would lose a whole row of parking. Hanauer added that his memo stated that the required amount of parking would be 58 spaces. That is incorrect they really need 113 parking spaces and LOGIS has additional parking demands when they have training classes at their site. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2006 Page 6 . Kluchka asked if LOGIS is concerned about people using their lot for overflow parking if the park and ride lot adjacent to them were to be full. Mike Garris, representing LOGIS, said that could be an issue but it would really take an effort to mistake the LOGIS parking lot for a park and ride overflow parking lot. Waldhauser asked the applicant if they really need the 125 parking spaces they are proposing and if their current lot is fully used as it is. Garris said LOGIS currently has 41 employees and there are 51 parking spaces. He said when their Board Members come to the site and when training is happening it is very hard.to find a parking e said they have an arrangement with MnDOT for overflow parking for larg ut he thinks the 125 parking spaces being proposed will be filled severa . Keysser opened the public hearing. S Keysser closed the public hearing. '+-' Kluchka asked if more staff is proposed to be added. Garris s new staff added. Schmidgall said it seems that 125 parking spaces wo Cera asked about the percentage of impervious large increase in the amount of impervious surf and a parking lot covering most of the 573 here will not be a there is currently a building Waldhauser said she is concer LOGIS building is nicely la whole space and leave unt of parking. She said the existing that more parking would virtually take up the 'ngs at all. Keysser asked abo per City requiremen to get more gr s have access to there is a be full parking aisles. Irwin said the parking aisle widths are gested making the drive aisle width narrower in order uth Street. Irwin stated the emergency vehicles need to along Duluth Street there is a distance of green space so that the whole area along Duluth Street in front of their site will KI res the concern about the landscaping and that he'd like to make a com rder to get more landscaping. Keysser suggested they add requiring more I g as a condition of approval. Kluchka suggested language to encourage the maxi Ion of landscaping as a condition of having a parking variance. Cera said he would like to make the words stronger. McCarty said the word "maximize" is too arbitrary. Waldhauser said that large "green" islands within the parking lot would also be good. Garris added that LOGIS added significantly more landscaping than what was required when their original building was constructed. . Schmidgall said he would be willing to cut the applicant some slack because the existing area to the west is very nicely landscaped. Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission September 11, 2006 Page 7 . Kluchka said his hope is to keep that landscaped area going and encourage the same as other sites in the area improve their properties. Cera suggested that the applicant show the Board of Zoning Appeals a color rendering of how the proposed landscaping will look. Kluchka said he would like to see an increase to the landscaping along the street. Kluchka asked about bicycle racks and stated that any opportunity for public art would be appreciated. rove 730 1. 2. 3. 4. . 5. 6. 4. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Kluchka and motion carried un the request for a Minor Subdivision/Lot Consolidation for the pr and 5750 Duluth Street with the following conditions: The final plat will; be consistent with the preliminary plat pr and submitted with the subdivision application dat^ The comments in the memo from City Enginee 2006 shall become a part of this approval. The comments in the memo from Deputy Fir 15,2006 shall become a part of this ap Comments from Hennepin County r ; solidation shall become a part of this approval. A photometric plan showing th 'ghting shall be submitted before final plat approval. The front setback area alon II be fully landscaped. . anal Use Permit #113 - 2500 Mendelssohn as tabled at the applicant's ommission meeting agenda. --Short Recess-- . . . . Minutes of a Continued Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals November 3, 1997 The continued meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held Monday, November 3, 1997, in the Golden Valley City Hall Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN. Chair Robert Shaffer called the meeting to order at 7pm. Those present were: Chair Robert Shaffer; Members Herb Polachek, Mike Sell, Mahlon Swedberg; and Planning Commission Representative Paula Pentel. Also present were Staff Liaison Mark Grimes and Recording Secretary Eve Lomaistro. I. The Petition was: ?.;:~ I Tract A (5800 Duluth Street) and Tract B (Map 11) (97-10-47) LOGIS (current property C?wners: Charles T. And Carol A. Turner and Mark C. and Shirley J. Reinertson) Request: Waiver of Section 11.45, Subd. 5(A)(1) Front Yard Setback -- 1.71 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 33.29 feet for the proposed building at its closest point to the lot line on Duluth Street; and Waiver of Section 11.45, Subd. 5(A)(1) Front Yard Setback -- 22.77 feet off the required 35 feet to a distange of 12.23 feet for the proposed parking lot at its closest point to the lot line on Duluth Street; and Waiver of Section 11.45, Subd. 5(B)(2) Side and Rear Yard Setback - 10 feet off the required 30 feet to a distance of 20 feet for the proposed building to the lot line on the north side; and Waiver of Section 11.45, Subd. 5(B)(2) Side and Rear Yard Setback - 10 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 5 feet for the proposed parking lot and trash area to the lot line on the north side; and Waiver of Section 11.45, Subd. 5(B)(2) Side and Rear Yard Setback - 5 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 10 feet for the lack of landscaping on the north side behind the proposed building; and Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals November 3, 1997 Page 2 Waiver of Section 11.45 Subd. 5(B)(3) Side and Rear Yard setbacks - 2 feet off the required 10 feet to a distance of Sfeet for the parking lot infringing into the side setback to the east; and . Waiver of Section 11.70, Subd. 7(F) Off-street Parking and Loading Regulations (Design Standards) - 2 feet off the required 20 foot depth to 18 feet for all parking stalls on the site. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a 2-story, 14,000 square foot office building to be used by LOGIS. Grimes thanked the board for returning atter the long meeting on October 28, 1997. This gave LOGIS an opportunity to reduce the variances requested. In the interim, Grimes met with John Pope, the architect, and a new plan resulted. The above variance requests reflect the new plan. The new plan moves the building back 10 feet to the north which puts the variance at only 1.71 feet into the front setback. Because the property to the north is a City- owned nature area, building construction is very unlikely, thereby allowing the building to be within 10 feet of the property line is reasonable. . The parking lot moves over to 8 feet from the lot line requiring only a 2 foot variance. The other parking variances are also reduced and the lot will accommodate 62 spaces. There will also be an evergreen lot line to reduce the light reflection in the neighbor's windows. The holding pond could retain trees as it is a temporary holding area. Pentel asked what the elevation will be and was told it is not yet certain, but probably 5%. Pentel asked if a 40 foot aisle is enough for cars to pass in the parking lot and was told yes. Sell pointed out that the slant parking makes the parking lot more functional. Swedberg asked about the grading that would be done on City property north of the proposed building. Swedberg noted that there would be an encroachment on the open space but a price must be paid for development of the property and, in this case, the benefits out weigh it. Grimes noted that nothing was being given up - the slope would be 3 to 1 instead of a retaining wall and retaining walls are difficult to maintain. Swedberg stated that he hopes the space between the east lot line and building will look nice and that the parking will not be too close to the building. Pope stated there would be no cars against the building, and that the sidewalk would end at the entry and create a 12 foot area of landscaping. Swedberg asked if he is happy with the revised plan and he answered yes. . Shaffer asked if the front door is recessed and was told yes. Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals November 3, 1997 Page 3 . Sell commented that the angled parking gives the appearance of more space in the parking lot. Swedberg commented on the aisle being only 19 feet but Grimes pointed out that traffic would go in only one direction. Shaffer asked if the parking lot would be signed for one way traffic and was told that the pavement would be striped. Sell pointed out that after one or two cars park, the others will follow suit. Shaffer and Sell agreed that the parking lot is an improvement. Grimes suggested that the front spaces be reserved for guests. Pentel asked if the parking lot is flat and was told it would have a slight slope. Pentel continued that she is glad the building is moved back on the lot and is pleased to see that the stand of trees would be retained. Swedberg stated that this is a difficult property to deal with and that this plan gives away the least. "~e said it was a good plan. Shaffer asked if anyone from the audience wished to speak and no one came forward. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by Polachek, and motion carried unanimously to approve the revised variances as presented tonight. . II. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:20pm. Robert Shaffer, Chair Grimes, Staff Liaison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06-09-20 2500 Mendelssohn Avenue North . Lena Enterprises LLC, Applicant . . . . . Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: September 22,2006 To: Board of Zoning Appeals From: Mark W. Grimes, Director of Planning and Development Subject: 2500 Mendelssohn Avenue (06-09-20) Lena Enterprises, LLC (Mr. Stephen Saunders), Applicant -';;"'1 Lena Enterprises, LLC represented by Mr. Stephen Saunders owns the Commercial property at 2500 Mendelssohn Avenue. He is petitioning for one variance from Section 11.70 of the Zoning Code regarding off-street parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to add a small restaurant with a drive-through window to his existing grocery/liquor store. The addition of the drive-through window also requires the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. The p'ublic hearing for the Conditional Use Permit will be held at the September 25, 2006 Planning Commission meeting and will then go on to the City Council for final approval. The requested variance would allow the improvements to the existing grocery/liquor store to go forward. However, a variance approval should be contingent on approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit. The proposal requires a variance from the following Sections of City Code: Section 11.70, Subd. 3, Minimum Number of Required Off-Street Parking Spaces. City Code requires that the liquor store portion of the building needs 8 spaces, the grocery store portion of the building needs 4 spaces and the Class II restaurant portion of the building needs 22 spaces for a total of 33 required parking spaces. The variance request is for 10 spaces off the required 33 spaces for a total of 23 parking spaces. At the present time, the parking lot does not provide the number of parking spaces required by the zoning code. The proposed variance request will bring the premises into compliance with the parking requirements. The City's file on this address indicates that the building was constructed in 1961. In 2004 the property received two variances to allow for the resurfacing of the existing parking lot, constructing curb and gutter and correcting existing drainage problems. In 1981 the parcel was subdivided into 3 parcels. At this time the previous owner was granted a variance for parking with an explanation that a hardship arose due to the taking of a large portion of the parcel for an off-ramp to Medicine Lake Road from TH 169. The minutes from the 1981 and 2004 BZA hearings are enclosed. J 26TH AVE N ,~ ',," "." ....MEtm::lHti lAKE fU) .... \: ( l "'165 9405 t201 2500 Mendelssohn Ave. N. 931S Zl104 D10 9as ~ I i -< ~. .... lfl :ill i :ill r ! U- f &l o :E ,ill!': 'r (I) 1~) ..---'-"'--"" t;;:'?' . City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application 1. Street address of property involved in this application: 2SDO 1He:A..J Oeh <S~o tf,J Aue I-) O~Tt+ C:;oc.i)€(J flAU1s.'1 ,..,iJS~'/17 2. Applicant: Le AJA ~f\JT~~ Pt2.r-.sf' S Name LrL, e.. 7(05'- s-ys- ~3~5 Business Phone he ~1)I)-k-.. f'A.p1!J IMIJ $5<{0'7 City/State/Zip to/2- -9@7- 7j/'g (~J2...gt.3- D9oe. Home Phone Cell Phone & <7 y.tg / / ft-r Address SIWN De.. p. S ~ '197 Li) JtIStU t cDp(. Email Address 3. Detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in this petition. The site plans and drawings submitted with this petition will be the basis of any variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit is issued. A-~ \ LeA- T,C 10 c.:'5 Fop.. A- J)/l~IJ(;? r~ l2e.5/i4f?liu<<J7: ,4 t:aIlOCer.t.s rtY/l-IZ" tJ=P t:J~ S-rt:::l3-&' . 4. A brief statement of the hardship which provides legal grounds for the granting of this variance (see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. t2.e~"APf\-"IfoJT ONL'"1 ~€AT FO\.Ji< p,-v~ Poult eP1{Jt.D'jctT" r#& ?~/.</G f!e~(.//~,<Jr pr rtJ,Je;t.J7y 7AJO /-.~ A 1##'0$/-#)::) 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 re t, if granted, is not taken within one year, the variance expires. 6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the owner of this property: /' .. d' // ~7J?j>I{EAl ~. 5!rVNOr!/ZS M./ <=> ~ Print Name of owner ~~ 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 statemenLqf 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. S.s. 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. w~B'O FeEl - "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 ceiving 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 j)arr,. II J6J Comment ~ Signature Z~ Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature rint Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature ~f'ef (Pt Address 25 /0 ,tt1~..,Je /Sfot,/) AtH,.u C':;olOe... 1A11'.:J I /""Ip 554z? /)~ ad- 17 Address8,l,OS rrt . ~k M bb ~ L/D-lt€j- In N (J'\-tCr'l" Tn 51~0 ~.~ ., (Ylt\-IJ~ DlQ107 Address fl1E:.JJ~P:I PAfLlL. Address Address Address Address . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 06-09-21 ....;z 5735 Westbrook Road Kyle Hamilton, Applicant . Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) From: September 20,2006 Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Mark W. Grimes, Directorof Planning and Development 5735 Westbrook Road (06-09-21) Kyle Hamilton, Applicant Date: To: Subject: ~d Kyle Hamilton owns the house and property at 5735 Westbrook Road. The applicant is requesting two variances from the requirements of the Residential Zoning Code, Section 11.21, Subdivisions 10(A)(1) and 11(J), in order to allow for the construction of a shed. The applicant is proposing to build a 12 ft. x 16 ft. (192 sq. ft.) shed. With the existing garage there will be a total of 720 square feet of accessory structure space on the property. . To apply for this variance, a survey was required (see attached). The applicant has indicated that the hardships for the variances requested are as follows: the home has no basement, the lot is irregular in shape and is a corner lot which has more severe front yard setback requirements, there is a severe slope on the lot and there is a utility easement located along the south property line that can not be built upon. The following variances are requested to allow for the construction of the proposed shed: Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(1) Accessory Structure Location. The Zoning Code states that a detached accessory structure shall be located completely to the rear of the principal structure, unless it is built with frost footings. In this case, the applicant can not build the proposed shed completely to the rear of the home because of the utility easement located along the south property line. The applicant could build the proposed shed in the southeast corner of the lot with frost footings, without the need for a variance, however he has stated that it would be cost prohibitive to do so. The variance request is to allow the shed to be built without frost footings to be located in the southeast corner of the lot which is not completely to the rear of the home. Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (J) Accessory Structure Design. The Zoning Code states that all accessory structures constructed after the construction of the principal structure must be designed and constructed in a manner consistent with the design and general appearance of the principal structure. In this case, the applicant would like to build a shed with a "barn" style gambrel roof which is not consistent with the flat roof style of the home. . . . . The City's file on this address indicates that the house was built in 1957. In 2000 there were two front yard variances granted to bring the existing house into conformance with Zoning Code requirements and to allow for a deck to be built to within 30 feet to the front property line along Vale Crest Road. Also in 2000, there were two rear yard variances granted in order to bring the existing home into conformance with Zoning Code requirements and to allow for a deck to be built to within 12 feet at its closest point to the rear (south) property line. Also at the same BZA meeting in 2000, there was a variance granted to allow the existing 36- inch wide eaves on the rear of the house to remain in the setback area. The code allows for 30 inches of eaves and overhangs to be in the setback area. WYNNWOOl) Ill) ms 2UIl zau 9.ilO1 Me uoo - S9ll5 5W1 n2S $920 S9OI) .5CiCiO SQO Wli$TMOU WAY... Wot&R()()1( RI). 591S 215S 57Ol'i S675 I!i6U SQ$ 212S 5930 \ 15735 Westbrook Rd. I 5910 2040 205$ e ;W9(1 . U05 2U$ uos Sl105 55U ,,,; .., Prepared By: SCHOELL & MADSON. INC. '~ fQ^' . "J; , ~Cr . t>.. <J \'" Or \ \~ 'foO'1..' k'? ~ ~.. O(JH , 'P,tI . , ~~ ~ v.,.>... 70 ~ <2 a~~~? ~o ~~", 9rY ., / '/ D '~'>'. ~OAO ~ <.:::, "'c... '/.:$': ~J(~ "'Cf>>.... OESCRIPT/tJN: .c::;>; ~ La t, B/oc k I /- ~ .,....... WE:iTBROOK AI/PI r ItJN / I ' ~ 'QJ J .4: f: ~ Engineers. Surveyors. Planners. Solis Testing 10560 Wayzata Boulevard Mlnnetonka, Mn. 66343 Tel. 646-7601 / / r > ~ ~ .. n /'/ ::: 'D / GENERAL NOTES: J.. .. DeolJles iron monCJmen t 2. Area ': /5, eoo s'/' ft. t . -:v~ ,oJ. ~ " . I ~ , ~ ~~ ~.. l(}~ ((\\) ,~ ~ /-6it'jJ,~ h ~~.5, ~~ '.s~ ~ ~~c)'t"" &- tw~4 . I hereby certify that this survey was prepared under .y supervision and that I am a Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Hf~. tal . ~nt.~ ' heodore D. lIII1a Date: 5.2.Z- OD Lfcens~ No. 17006 ~ E.il~t!lmel1~ 8~~p;;~i30."W City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning 'Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application 1. Street address of property involved in this application: S73-5~ /-tJ a~t/~/ rw ~~S'/.t1. 2. Applicant: . /h ~-~ (~~____J 4-.) Name~ rr- ~ ~'7r' ~~'/?'~ ~LI~..4. # ~5.5-/// .tila..J~A.h~ .~ Address City/State/Zip ..56 .3'Y''y' ~I: Business Phone Home Phone ~-7~..,g/l/ Cell Phone 4~~""i ~ eo ~ ~ .1Vt:..t 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. -f~e-~J.~~<e--~~s~~ ) U-/S~~.ur/ , A~/ef -z;// ~M ~ ~e~.Ir~~ ) &~"'- &,. yo ~~ ~./6-,.__ /7h~ (~~e~/~ ) 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. (1)J!-..k&U>kt2.4~f.. Q)~~M a>~Me/aJ ON 1.~.)~~ @)~s~,; /t?t (2)LlY'it~ e4SfZ~ ~ ~ C..-h.r~ ~ ~~ ~. 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. Signature of 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 "'- ~ "' ~ ~\....... ~ '\ "\.. 0 :J Comment ~~ <\::,~ ~~ Signature Address ~ l?..~ ~~~~ Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature rint Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature ~\ Address ~7.s-S- LtJ,pg~ ~ ~ f' ~QM\ Address ~Ar"'r~A--/~~~~~ ? ( rVl~tr ~O'" &lJdJl! 2J5 ? ~ah ~- c...~ Address ~~()S- t/~ C~-I' Address ~O V~ oed' Address Address 6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the owner of this property: f< ;;;','c .0, S-v/evr Print Name of owner c;~? ^ :~ ..V(.,t.? ~ Signature of owner /J! ~ ~.. 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: --4 Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners. J:!;j A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey requirements. a 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. a 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. . . . . . . . . . . . Stor'tJe Buildings Sizes & Prices . ~ TUFF SHEU The Premier Series~ r;r; - -un "..'" i::;;.:;".......L;: f-II.~ The NEW Garden Ranch model has the same great features of the TUFF SHED Standard Ranch model slarage building, in a smaRer, lower priced package. Modeled alter the original TUFF SHED ranch style building, the Standard Ranch is one of our most affordable starage so/ulions. II is the favorite 01 people who need a contemporary, yet versatile building. The TaR Ranch is by far our most popular design, featuring toller sidewoRs. The higher sidewalls mean more headroom and mare cubic feel of storage. An optional 12" overhang is perfect on this design. The NEW Standard Barn now carnes with tal sidewaRs for added headroom and mare overl\ad storage options compared 10 the'previous versi Same dassic barn style with a lower profile. ~.. The TaR Barn iniidel adds height and even mare rubic feet of storage in a dassic package. An available' loft aptian added ta this model creates even more storage space. WXL .~B as low as+ .~ B as loW as+ .~ B ''Ii '"," ,'", aslOlllas+ .~ B . aslowlS+ .~~al!l .-Illi-.+ .,. . '..' , ase wlPalm (bosedonoo~prirel'" ase wlPalm ~osedonoo~prireJ'" aSewlPalnl ,(oo,edonbose",.J'" ase wlPalnl ~",donboseprirel .,. ~e w/Palnl:..oil "oo~prireJ 6'x6' $1;202 1,322 $21 1,265 1,392 22 1,449 1,594 25 1,265 1,392 22 1,574" IT;' v , 28 6'x8' 1,378 1,516 24 1,450 1,595 25 1,675 1,843 29 1,450 1,595 25 1,817 1,999 32 6'x10' 1,582 1.7'4028 1,665 1,832 29 1,899 2,089 33 1,665 1,832 29 2,065 2,272 36 6'x12' 1,783 1,961 31 1,877 2,065 33 2,12:> 2,332 37 1,877 2,065 33 2,304 2,534 40 8'x8' 1;628 1,791 28 1,714 1,885 30 1,988 2,187 35 1,714 1,885 30 2,147 2,362 38 8'xl0' 1,866 2,053 33 1,964 2,160 34 2,216 2,438 39 1,964 2;J60 34 2,4.)2 2,(>53 42 8'x12' 2,100 2,310 ,,37 2,211 2,432 39 2,489 2;73$ 44 2,211 2,432 39 2;697 2,967 47 8'x14' 2,330 2,563 41 2,453 2,698 43 2,7583,034 48 2,453 2;69843 2,976 3,274 52 8'x16' 2,564 2,820 45 2,699 2,969 47 3,031 3,334 53 2,699 2,969 47 < ," 3,260 3,586 57 10'xl0' 2,174 2,391 38 2,288 2,517 40 2,559 2,815 45 2,288 2;51740 I 2,877 3,105 50 . .~~ ~~~~ .I~~=~~~~. 10'x14' ,", $3,006,$3,307 $53 $3,279 $3,607,$57$3,576$3,934$63 10'x16' 3;181 3;499 56 3,513 3:864 61' 3,902 4,292 68 10'x20' 3;817 4,199 67 4,137 4,551 72 "', 4,570 5,027 80 , 2;953 3,248 52 3,381 3,719 59 . 3,833 67' 12'x16'...,..o!!:> 3,621 3,983 63 4,094 4,503 72 '" 4,5~~;05$ ~80 4,292 4,721 75 4,813 5,294 84 5,3 94 12'x24' F I $4,964 5,460 87 5,531 6,084 97 6,1 8 IV{ 12'x28' I $5,52,6 6,079 97 6,099 6,709 107 """" A 120, 12'x32' ,,$0,,)9Q 6,776 108 6,774 7,451 119 I'x<< 7 ~ m Sales tax not includ' d in above pric. Financir*g;Jl.~il:able." .,1. VISA II-I.JIII*-I ~ Bu,ilt:li"glieights(ApproXi~dl~'9r;~~diitdP;~f(.\. ..(W-A.C.).... .'. .... . . - . . .' -,--- Width Garden Ranch Tall Ranch Barn Please.. Note: Deposil. required...llolonce is due. upon delivery.. Cuslomsizes olso.ovoiloble. AIIIUEE SHEDhuildings ore "'6'" '.9 r3....." subi~tlQl~cClI.,buildingf~c:!~~.P,ric~.~o~e~on.I~Yeblot o?~id8e~i?ot;inc'yd~delire'Y! opti~hs; .:~gine:ri.ngle:s .&;~lJild.ing per!1'1ita/ Ac'ual~eighlS' may.vdry ~ose~i on leyeling on~ end ij~i1ding~sign;<Pri~llubiefllo chong~ without notice. 8' "9"7 " EnQ.i.nee~ed.F'!ansTOY bei.requir:cl tt;r p.er.mil op~li.colion,.on..dorei.?pr,included In. 86.. pve prltes.Chdrg~S8r:reI8fivel().sIyJe 10' 9 I 10 n ands!:e ol;building. Asksolesp.er~? IOF~etoil~'+Monthlrl'oYITI:nlrnClYYClrYbQse.~on cuslomercreait and current A P.R. ," ... . Addltipnoldeliverychare"andlorlalellOxllll'loy opplYf6rautClf IldttfcUllOlI'llrs 12' 1 0' 2'.' ;1;;,.;?;.:: 11 :~ I "I 11.'11 fi1:~ II :~I "I 11.'11 '!mll :~I" :1111 TS PB PS SB TD.2 4ao - ". ," ........ ........ TaU .Barn 1'0'2" 11'2" 12'2" 13'2'1