The URL can be used to link to this page

10-24-06 BZA Agenda e e e I. Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Tuesday, October 24, 2006 7pm 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Approval of Minutes - September 26, 2006 II. The Petitions are: 6731 Golden Valley Road (06-09-18) (continued from 9/26/06) Golden Vallev Historical Society. Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements Purpose: Request: Purpose: Request: . 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. Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . 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. 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 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 bring the existing parking lot into conformance. 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 900 Colorado Avenue (06-10-22) WCL Associates, Inc., Applicant Building Setback Variances: Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(3) Yard Requirements . 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (north) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing building into conformance. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(3) Yard Requirements . 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing building into conformance. e 2 Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(3) Yard Requirements e . 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the rear yard (west) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing building into conformance Parking Lot Variances: Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Yard Requirements . 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. of parking lot area at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into conformance. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of parking lot area at its closest point to the side (south) yard property line. Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into conformance e Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 3 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 7 ft. of parking lot area at its closest point to the side (north) yard property line. Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into conformance Landscaping Variances: Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the front (east) property line. Purpose: To reconstruct the parking lot Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the side (north) property line. e Purpose: To bring the existing landscaping into conformance. 3 Request: e Purpose: Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the side (south) property line. To bring the existing landscaping into conformance. Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the side (west) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing landscaping into conformance. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements Purpose: Request: e Purpose: 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the side (south) property line. To reconstruct the parking lot. Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. of landscaping at its closest point to the side (north) property line. To reconstruct the parking lot. 5900 Olson Memorial Highway (06-10-23) Pictura Graphics, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Yard Requirements Purpose: Request: e Purpose: . 2 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33 ft. at its closest point to the front (east) property line. To bring the existing building into conformance. Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the side (west) property line. To bring the existing building into conformance. 4 e e e Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the side (west) property line. Purpose: To allow for the "future 22 stalls" located at the south end of the property. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . 3 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 7 ft. at its closest point to the side (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for the reconstruction of the parking lot at the north end of the property. III. Other Business IV. Adjournment 5 , Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 . A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board. of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, September 26,2006 in the Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Nederveld called the meeting to order at 7:05 pm. Those present were Members Morrissey, Nederveld, and Weisberg and Planning Commission Representative McCarty. Also present were Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. s Landis and Sell were absent. ant Company is requesting a rear yard setback variance e. He referred to a survey of the property and stated that the to ove the curb back approximately 8 feet in order to provide I:Ioom for their trucks when they park at the dock. He noted that ?llficant drop-off in the property along the west property line next to ks and that it would be hard to notice if the curb was moved the requeste et. He stated that the Public Safety Department has indicated that they would also like the driveway area to be wider because it would provide for better access around the building. McCarty asked if the applicant is proposing to add new bays to the existing dock. Grimes said yes and explained that the trucks and trailers that the applicant currently uses are longer than they were in the past so adding the proposed additional blacktop area would be helpful and safer. I. Approval of Minutes - August 22, 2006 McCarty referred to the motion on page 5 and clarified that no on the requested variance. MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Morrissey and approve the August 22, 2006 minutes with the a II. The Petitions are: . Request: Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements . ed 10ft. to a distance of 2 ft. at its closest rd (west) property line. e curb along the west property line to be moved into equired landscaped area. . McCarty asked if the proposed new bays would require variances. Grimes said no. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 2 , Nederveld asked if the railroad had any comments regarding this proposal since it would encroaching toward the railroad tracks. Grimes said that the City has not received any comments from the railroad regarding this proposal. Nederveld asked if there would be an issue with snow removal or snow being pushed onto the railroad tracks. Grimes said he didn't think that would be an issue. . Vince Goodnough, Tennant Company, Applicant, stated that when they have trucks parked at the dock a fire truck would not be able to get past them. He ex . ed that the proposed new blacktop area would not be used for parking it would ju as a drive area. nd ed at parked at McCarty stated that it looks like there is plenty of access eve asked if the problem is with other cars trying to go around t the dock. Goodnol1gh said it is delivery trucks that can't get the dock. Nederveld opened the public hearing. Seeing an Nederveld closed the public hearing. Weisberg stated that the requested varia and there are no encroaching concern m as an undue request McCarty said that maybe the long hardship with the property itself Nederveld stated that this residential properties onl, they used to be. "ardship, but there may not be a . e analogous to the hardships related to tall garage because the trucks are longer than y Weisberg and motion carried unanimously to e required 10ft. to a distance of 2 ft. at its closest ) property line. The hardship is that the current conditions was created years ago. venue North (06-09-17) Robert Shaffer A Iicants Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd.10(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. . . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 3 Grimes referred to a survey of the property and explained that the applicants are requesting a front yard variance in order to expand their existing one and a half stall garage to a two stall garage. He stated that they are proposing to keep the depth of the garage the same and they are maintaining the side yard setback as required but they would like a more reasonable width for their garage. He noted that the home was built in 1955. At that time the building permit for the house stated that the house was to be located 30 feet from the front property line but the survey submitted with this variance request indicated that the house was built to within 28 feet 3 % inches of the front property line so the garage already sticks out a little further toward the fr e added that the existing situation is conforming and if the variance is approv Id just be a small area in the front that would be encroach into the front set I:) Mary Shaffer. Applicant, stated that all of the neighbors are in garage expansion. She said the neighbors mentioned that t cars were parked oil the driveway when supposedly there w added that two cars fit in the garage but there is not e ugh opened once they are in the garage. Nederveld opened the public hearing. Seeing a Nederveld closed the public hearing. d o why ge.She oors to be ishing to comment, McCarty noted that the proposed new further toward the front than the existi two-stall garage does provide a h not be extending any Iy does and that not having a full MOVED by McCarty, second approve the variance req closest point to the front the fact that the applicant erg a motion carried unanimously to the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29 ft. at its ) rty line along Quail Ave. N. The hardship is Iy hav a one and a half stall garage. (06-09-18) ricalSocie A Iicant er 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 . 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. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 4 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 olden Valley Historical Society is planning a fairly significant erty and in order do the addition there are a number of variances e are also a number of variances being requested in order to bring the existing and parking lot into conformance. He stated that this property is actually thr e lots and the Historical Society will have to go through the Lot Consolidation process to make the property one lot in order to build their new addition and expand the parking lot. He stated that the Historical Society has done a lot to upgrade their buildings and they want to expand their programs. He noted that variance approvals are valid for one year and if construction isn't started within a year from approval they would need to ask for an extension. McCarty asked Grimes to review the site plan again and point out where the existing parking lot is versus the proposed new parking lot. . 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. point to the front yard (north) property line. Purpose: To bring the existing parking lot into confor Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 8 V/ . 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to point to the front yard (no Purpose: To allow for a parking lot a Request: ont Yard Requirements distance of 25 ft. at its closest . rth) property line. Purpose: Request: 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements e required 50 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest e side yard (west) property line. g the existing building into conformance. . . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 5 Grimes showed the Board the existing bituminous area and stated that the new parking lot will be almost the same size but it will be a little wider or closer to the east property line in order to accommodate buses that would need a place to park. Nederveld asked if the request for 35 feet off of the required 35 to a distance of 0 feet at its closest point to the front property line for the parking lot is consistent with what is there currently. Grimes explained that the parking lot would be essentially the same, just expanded slightly to the east. It would not go any closer to the street. Robert Gunderson, ATS&R, Landscape Architect for the project, stated very deep and narrow and anything they would propose to build woul Elena Peltsman, A TS&R, Architect for the project, stated that th church structure and architecture in mind when designing this the setback requirements are fairly large because of the wa side of the church "are zoned. She said she feels they could addition from view in order to minimize the intrusion. reit not anticipating a big change in the parking lot, they a bus to be able to get into the site and park. She already be screened because it is heavily forest would be low impact and the peak times would that ither n the t they are to e room for a of the lot would the proposed use Peltsman explained that the proposed Society and the Fire Relief Associaf Engine Number One and will be proposed size of the new additi depth. The Historical Socie proposing a new entry an ture between the Historical new addition will house Old Fire he m seum. She stated that the ause the fire engine is determining the s a lot f storage space and they are pliant bathrooms. king for special events and weddings. Gunderson rking spaces at Seeman Park located one block ,he Director of Parks and Recreation Rick Jacobson es. He added that generally the rest of the overflow eets in the neighborhood, but there haven't been any ,he past and there are only a few events per year. Peltsman people attending weddings will not increase because they are 'sting museum and there will be a dramatic improvement over what Morrisse d Grimes if parking is allowed on Golden Valley Road. Grimes said he believes there is parking allowed on Golden Valley Road and that if it were to become a problem, the City would put up "no parking" signs. He added that the Historical Society does meet the parking requirements for a museum and thinks the parking can be managed and won't be an issue. Weisberg asked if the hardship in this case would be that the existing building on the existing lot is non-conforming. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 6 Nederveld referred to the west side of the proposed addition and asked the architect if . any thought had been given to lining up the new addition with the plane of the existing building. Peltsman stated that they need that dimension on the west side of the new addition for the fire truck that will be housed there. She reiterated that storage space is an integral part of this museum addition. She explained that there is more vegetation on the west side of lot so it feels like it is less of an encroachment. She added that room for circulation, the proposed new pedestrian ramp and the new accessible facilities all take space. Nederveld opened the public hearing. same , but even isting McCarty asked if they felt they could get the storage they need an s plane as the west side of the existing building. Peltsman said it c it wouldn't be ideal. McCarty noted that the proposal would sti if the new addition did follow the same plane along the wes museum is non-cd'rlforming. Kenneth Huber, Historical Society, stated that t unfinished and that part of this proposed new a lower lever. He said that the scope of thi for this facility. He asked that languag them more time than the one year al consideration given to the Histori of t existing building is t would be to finish the ould be a quantum leap lances approved granting . He said he would like special r extra time for fundraising. . Seeing and hearing no one hearing. ropose additions would cost. Don Anderson, 'cal Society explained that the costs would be in two ould cost approximately $300,000. He explained g fire museum working in conjunction with the Fire rred to the survey of the property and stated that the Verizon ming down so the easement shown on the property will be n't know if language could be added by the BZA to extend the iance. Grimes said they can not add language to their approval to extend t" th of time for variances granted, but the Historical Society can ask for an extension after a year. Morrissey asked if there should be another variance request added regarding bringing the existing parking lot into conformance. Grimes agreed and said that request could be added to the fourth item on the agenda. Nederveld stated he is having difficulty given the BZA's constraints trying to figure out . what the hardships would be for the proposed new addition other than the fact that it wouldn't allow the applicant as large of an expansion. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 7 . Grimes stated that it is a fairly narrow lot with two apartment buildings on each side of it which have large setbacks requirements. He added that the setback requirements for the Institutional zoning district are wide and he is not sure if that much setback area is needed. He stated that the property didn't require a large parking lot when the building was constructed in the 1800s. Weisberg stated that the goal is to get Fire Engine Number One inside of a structure. He said the purpose of the addition creates a hardship and it is not simply because they would like the addition to be larger, it needs to be a certain size. Gunderso stable, to the s ey to ive McCarty said the goal of this proposal is to get the fire engine shelter don't need this much space to get the fire engine protected and' approve the requested variances because this proposal could in its scope of work. Morrissey said she has less trouble with the variance west side of the property because the existing buildin added that if the zoning designation of the Histor" the properties on either side of it, it would confo Nederveld explained to the applicants th have the option of tabling their reques vote that means the requests would could appeal a denial to the City a full board present they rd because if there is a tie explained that the applicants . Morrissey stated that knowi they could use the 3 feet fire engine. Peltsman st feet won't give them uc and they can make worse the soil nditl ent for e cell tower will no longer be there if that easement in order to accommodate the ome room to make changes but adding 3 . She said the plans are still fluid enough to change ave to, but the further south they go on the lot the he property is a "fill site". He said the existing structure is d it would be an economic hardship to have to build further ey are proposing the addition go east/west on the property. pplicants if they need fill for this site with this proposed plan. they would need some, but not as much as they would if they built uth. . Nederveld suggested tabling the more controversial items and voting on the others. Grimes said it would be easier to table the whole request. Peltsman clarified that the Board is asking them to look at moving the additional three feet to the south and further away from the west property line or more in line with the plane of the west side of the existing structure. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 8 MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Weisberg and motion carried unanimously to table . the requested variances in order to allow the applicants to come back with an alternate plan. 5750 Duluth Street (06-09-19) Local Government Information Systems (LOG IS), Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(A)(1) Front Y Requirements . 28.4 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distan point to the front yard (south) propert Purpose: To allow for a parking lot addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Requirements . 20 ft. off the requir point to the rear ce of 10ft. at its closest line Purpose: . Request: Subd. 4(8)(2) Rear Yard Setback e req ed 15 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest e rear yard (north) property line from Section 11.45, Subd. 4(8)(2) Side Yard Setback rements . 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. Grimes stated that the applicant is proposing to add an addition to their existing building that would almost double the size of the building. He stated that the applicant is also going through the Lot Consolidation process in order to combine their existing lot with the lot next to them at 5730 Duluth. He discussed the access driveways and stated that the Planning Commission had some concern about the amount of landscaped area in . the front along Duluth Street. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 9 . Nederveld referred to the third variance request listed for this proposal and stated that the survey shows that there will be 10 feet of rear yard space along the north property line, not 5 feet as written. Grimes reviewed the variances requests and agreed that it should read 5 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 10 feet at is closest point to the rear yard (north) property line. McCarty stated that the fourth variance request listed is incorrect. It should read 8 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 7 feet at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Grimes agreed. Nederveld opened the p Nederveld closed the pu watershed or any adverse n underground stormwater exis g pond. He added that the reatly. Steve Irwin, Pope Architects, Architect for the project stated that he the variance to allow the parking lot to be within 5 feet of the no to give themselves enough room and flexibility for the parking come back to theBZA with another request in the future. H very challenging site that has a history of hardships. Bassett leaves 175 feet of the property unbuildable, Hennepin ount south property line and the setbacks from surroundin property squeezed by setbacks from all sides. H yard requests are consistent with what is alread landscaping on the east parcel will be brou ht u . Weisberg asked if there would be any . impacts. Irwin stated that they are pr storage container and they will b amount of impervious surfaces eing and hearing no one wishing to comment, McCarty said he is and that the ap Ii Duluth Street. is proposal from the Planning Commission meeting ,odated the request regarding the landscaping along "e hardship with this property is the narrow shape. , ded by Morrissey and motion carried unanimously to iance requests: . r uired 35 ft. to a distance of 6.6 ft. at its closest point to the front roperty line along Duluth Street to allow for a parking lot addition. . 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. . 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. . . 8 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line to allowfor a parking lot addition. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 10 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 Grimes explained that the applicant is re parking spaces. The parking ordinanc feet of gross floor area for Class II site is 33 spaces. He stated that restaurant will have 8 sit-down have on the site is more th . 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 requ' Grimes referred to a survey of the property and explained tha has a smallliquor~tore and a small grocery store in the exi would like to add a third use which is a small restaurant with within this existing footprint of the building. He stated the drive-through window requires a Conditional Use P Commission recommended approval of the req September 25,2006 meeting. regarding the required 22 pace for every 40 square ,~king requirement for the entire as indlcated that the proposed 23 parking spaces that they currently . an ounts the entire square footage of a building staurant seating area. Grimes stated that the entire counted, not just the seating .area. He stated that he nt in this case because he doesn't think this o parking spaces with only 8 seats and 2 or 3 the applicant has made several improvements to the site he uses. ;':i:(S Inc., Engineer for the project, showed. the Board some eYparking lot before and after they reconstructed it in order to solve blems. He stated that the proposed restaurant will actually only have 4 seats an not many cars will park in the lot and the parking lot is practically empty most of the time. He explained that when they first started talking to the City about doing this restaurant project over a year ago the parking ordinance was different. He said that they have tried to add more parking spaces and follow the parking requirements but because of the irregular shape of the lot it is impossible. Nederveld asked if this parking variance would apply only to this proposed restaurant, or if any Class II restaurant could potentially go into this space. Grimes said the variance approval goes with this plan which only has 8 seats. . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 11 . Nederveld opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nederveld closed the public hearing. Weisberg said this proposal seems straightforward to him particularly for what they understand the seating to be. MOVED by Weisberg, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request for 10 spaces off the required 33 spaces for a total of 23 parking spaces for the liquor store, grocery store and Class II restaurant e with the condition that the indoor seating will not exceed 8 seats. . Y of e property and stated that the applicant would like to th east corner of his lot. He explained that sheds are pletely to the rear of the principal structure but in this case imp ssible to build a shed completely to the rear of the home. He d variance request is regarding the design of the proposed shed. e states that accessory structures must be designed and constructed in tent with the design and general appearance of the principal structure. In this ca e 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. McCarty asked where the shed would have to be placed in order to be conforming. Grimes said there really is no other location to build it. He explained that if the.proposed shed were built where it is being proposed with frost footings, the applicant wouldn't need a variance. He added that there are not a lot of sheds built with frost footings and that requirement was meant more for garages. 5735 Westbrook Road (06-09-21) Kyle Hamil~on, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Su Location Requirements . The proposed shed will the principal struct . Purpose: Request: 1, Subd. 11 (J) Accessory Structure . d will have a gambrel "barn style" roof not flat roof style of the existing home. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 12 McCarty asked if augured pillars would count as footings. Grimes said he didn't know. . Kyle Hamilton, Applicant stated that this is a very challenging lot and the proposed location is really the only flat space on the entire lot. He said that if he builds the shed with frost footing it would kill two large, mature trees. He said another hardship is that his home doesn't have a basement so he really needs this proposed shed for storage space. MOVED by Weisberg, s approve the following va match the color of t ou ping around the shed. that he could include Grimes asked Hamilton if his neighbor to east would be able to see the p Hamilton said his neighbor to the east is fine with the proposal. He sai ' be able to see it. He added that flat roof sheds are not available and wants the gambrel type of roof is for the storage space it provide ri that one concern the City Council has regarding the large "bar e makes a garage really large and they don't want "barn" typ Valley because it is not a rural area. Nederveld opened the public hearing. Seeing and he Nederveld closed the public hearing. Grimes asked the applicant if he plans on doing Hamilton said he has plans to do landsca' . some around the shed. Nederveld stated that he thinks th the lot, there is no basement a property line. lot are the shape and slope of ot easement along the south (rear) . y issey and motion carried unanimously to uests ith the condition that the shed be painted to cated completely to the rear of the principal structure ave a gambrel "barn style" roof not consistent with the flat ome. IV. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 1 0 pm. . ... . 06-09-18 (Continued from 9/26/06) . 6731 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley Historical Society, Applicant . . Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 18, 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) - continued from September 26,2006 Golden Valley Historical Society, Applicant . The requested variances for The Golden Valley Historical Society property were tabled at the September 26, 2006 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting in order to allow the applicant to come back with a revised plan that incorporates the comments from the Board. The Golden Valley Historical Society has since submitted the same variance requests but they have included further information and an explanation which address the suggestions made by the Board at their last meeting. Attached please find an explanatory letter from the applicant along with additional renderings of the proposed building addition. 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 stat~s 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 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 bring the existing parking lot into conformance. Section 11.46, Sub~,. 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 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. . . . ATS&1\ ARMSTRONG TORSETH SKOLD & RVDEEN INC October 18, 2006 Mr. Mark Grimes City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 Re: Golden Valley Historical Museum - Addition and Facility Upgrades Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) October 24, 2006 Hearing ATS&R Project Number: 06037 Dear Mr. Grimes: I am writing this letter to inform you that we are resubmitting the request for variances for the Addition to the G.V. Historical Society as it was presented at the September 16, 2006 to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Please review 3 additional graphic exhibits that we believe will help you and the Board members to better understand our request for varIances. On behalf of our client, we have carefully analyzed the modifications proposed by the Board members, such as, utilization of the available 3' feet along the south side of the lot and aligning the west side of the proposed addition with the existing building. However, after careful consideration, we feel that implementation of them will not benefit the proposed plan. 1. As the architectural plan indicates, the addition provides a clear and direct accessible route to the existing, currently un-accessible lower level of the building, allowing it to become the main exhibit hall. The required ramp needs to have a certain length and is configured in the most efficient and safe way. 2. The addition ,houses only the minimum required spaces for a public building of this type: visible entryway with a vestibule, entry lobby with a place to gather and to seat, reception / gift area, public accessible toilets, a small office and storage / work area. 3. The required museum storage / work area is located directly next to the existing door of the lower level, assuring the ease of daily operations. Reconfiguring and relocating the storage area down to the available 3 feet on the south side does not present the best space utilization, as storage needs to be closer to the display area and not spread along the south side of the building. 4. The additional 3' on the south end does not benefit the showroom space either, as there is no requirement for storage in this space and we have the needed depth and clearances to house the fire engine truck and a police car. ARCHITECTURE . ENGINEERING . PLANNING . TECHNOLOGY . LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE . INTERIOR DESIGN 8501 GOLDEN VAllEY ROAD SUITE 300 MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 55427 PHONE 763.545.3731 763.525.3289 FAX . . . Mr. Mark Grimes October 18, 2006 Page 2 of2 5. Relocating the fire engine truck to this new home will free up a valuable space in the G.V. Police / Fire station, which is currently a hardship for the fire station staff. 6. The existing parking lot will be significantly improved, as the plans call for a pedestrian well illuminated sidewalk, concrete curb and gutter, clearly marked parking stalls, designated handicapped stalls and overall improved safety on the site. 7. The neighbors: the group home on the west and the apartment building on the east, were informed about the proposed plans and they do not feel there is an infringement on their properties. Also, as you mentioned at the previous meeting, placing the proposed addition in line with the existing church on the west side, does not reduce the number of variances that must be requeste9' If adequate space for storage was added on the south end, additional variances may be required, as it would easily exceed the available 3' setback. If you need anything else to be clarified, please contact us at 763-545-3731. Sincerely, ~~ 72rrWJJ.0~ Elena Peltsman, AlA Partner Robert J. Gunderson, ASLA Partner ELP@ Enclosures: Variance exhibit, building floor plan, proposed image (6 colored copies each) Cc: Don Anderson - Golden Valley Historical Society Paul Snyder - A TS&R Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 3 . MOVED appro e variance request f cl t point to the front yard t fact that the applicant hey are proposing to keep the depth of the side yard setback as required but they arage. He noted that the home was built house stated that the house was to be the survey submitted with this variance ithin 28 feet 3 % inches of the front little further toward the front. H ed e variance is approved th ould just ach into the front setb e to a two stall garage. He stated tha ga ,e same and they are maintaining would II ore reasonable width for their in 1955. At ime the building permit for t located 30 feet the front property line b request indicated t e house was built to property line so the ga already sticks out that the existing situation I' forming and i be a small area in the front tli 'ould be enc Mary Shaffer, Applicant, stated that garage expansion. She said the neigh cars were parked on the driveway when 5 . added that two car~, fit in the garage but there opened once theyare in the garage. N -ela opened the public heari Nederveld closed the public he . '9. McCarty noted that the further toward the fr han the existing two-stall garage s provide a hards . "''elron carried unanimo red 35 ft. to a distance of 2 long Quail Ave. N. The hards nd a half stall garage. 6731 Golden Vall Golden Vall , Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . . off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 27 ft. at its closest int to the side yard (west) property line. To allow for a building addition. Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements . 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. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26,2006 Page 4 . 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 bring the existing parking lot into conformance. ""1~, ", . 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distanc point to the front yard (north) property t Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Subd. 8 Yard Req . Purpose: 'To allow for a parking lot addition. Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, . 10ft. off the required 35 point to the front y nce of 25 ft. at its closest line. . Purpose: Request: 'red 50 ft. to a distance of 31 ft. at its closest ard (west) property line. Purpose: xisting building into conformance. Grimes stated ~,.Go istorical Society is planning a fairly significant addition to their \nr d in order do the addition there are a number of variances necessa number of variances being requested in order to bring the existin g lot into conformance. He stated that this property is actually t d the Historical Society will have to go through the Lot C lidati s to make the property one lot in order to build their new addition and and parking lot. He stated that the Historical Society has done a lot to upgra i1dings and they want to expand their programs. He noted that variance approvals valid for one year and if construction isn't started within a year from approval they would need to ask for an extension. .. McCarty asked Grimes to review the site plan again and point out where the existing parking lot is versus the proposed new parking lot. Grimes showed the Board the existing bituminous area and stated that the new parking lot will be almost the same size but it will be a little wider or closer to the east property line in order to accommodate buses that would need a place to park. . . . Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 5 Nederveld asked if the request for 35 feet off of the required 35 to a distance of 0 feet at its closest point to the front property line for the parking lot is consistent with what is there currently. Grimes explained that the parking lot would be essentially the same, just expanded slightly to the east. It would not go any closer to the street. Robert Gunderson, ATS&R, Landscape Architect for the project, stated that this lot.is very deep and narrow and anything they would propose to build would need a variance. Elena Peltsman, ATS&R, Architect for the project, stated that they kept church structure and architecture in mind when designing this additio the setback requirements are fairly large because of the way the pro side of the church are zoned. She said she feels they could ade el addition from view in order to minimize the intrusion. She reit th not anticipating a Qig change in the parking lot, they are jus bus to be able to get into the site and park. She stated that t already be screened because it is heavily forested. S adde would be low impact and the peak times would be we re for a would posed use Peltsman explained that the proposed addition i Society and the Fire Relief Association. The ro Engine Number One and will be a large proposed size of the new addition is s depth. The Historical Society also re proposing a new entry and new ure tween the Historical ddition will house Old Fire She stated that the re engine is determining the ge space and they are oms. McCarty asked about overf! said there are approxima north and that they have about possibly renti tho parking would be 0 problems or cotllplai added that the '\1'21" not chan t is ther r specl I events and weddings. Gunderson paces at Seeman Park located one block . ctor of Parks and Recreation Rick Jacobson s. He added that generally the rest of the overflow the neighborhood, but there haven't been any >and there are only a few events per year. Peltsman attending weddings will not increase because they are useum and there will be a dramatic improvement over what . es if parking is allowed on Golden Valley Road. Grimes said he p king allowed on Golden Valley Road and that if it were to become a would put up "no parking" signs. He added that the Historical Society does m arking requirements for a museum and thinks the parking can be managed and won't be an issue. Weisberg asked if the hardship in this case would be that the existing building on the existing lot is non-conforming. Nederveld referred to the west side of the proposed addition and asked the architect if any thought had been given to lining up the new addition with the plane of the existing building. Peltsman stated that they need that dimension on the west side of the new addition for the fire truck that will be housed there. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 6 . She reiterated that storage space is an integral part of this museum addition. She explained that there is more vegetation on the west side of lot so it feels like it is less of an encroachment. She added that room for circulation, the proposed new pedestrian ramp and the new accessible facilities all take space. McCarty asked if they felt they could get the storage they need and still follow the same plane as the west side of the existing building. Peltsman said it could probably work, but it wouldn't be ideal. McCarty noted that the proposal would still require a variance even if the new addition did follow the same plane along the west side becau existing museum is non-conforming. McCarty said length of v extend extensi ing is . sh the tum leap app ved granting would like special or fundraising. Nederveld opened the public hearing. Kenneth Huber, H~s,torical Society, stated that the lower lev unfinished and that 'part of this proposed new addition proje lower lever. He said that the scope of this proposed pr . ct for this facility. He asked that language be added to a them more time than the one year allowed by th consideration givel:l to the Historical Society to . Seeing and hearing no one else wishing hearing. eld closed the public Weisberg asked how much the p Secretary Treasurer for the His sections. The lower level re that they would be a self- Relief Association. He r monopole is going t be going away. ns uld cost. Don Anderson, lained that the costs would be in two ost a roximately $300,000. He explained useum working in conjunction with the Fire .ey of the property and stated that the Verizon own so the easement shown on the property will be guage could be added by the BZA to extend the es said they can not add language to their approval to r variances granted, but the Historical Society can ask for an ere should be another variance request added regarding bringing ing lot into conformance. Grimes agreed and said that request could be urth item on the agenda. Nederveld stated he is having difficulty given the BZA's constraints trying to figure out what the hardships would be for the proposed new addition other than the fact that it wouldn't allow the applicant as large of an expansion. . Grimes stated that it is a fairly narrow lot with two apartment buildings on each side of it which have large setbacks requirements. He added that the setback requirements for the Institutional zoning district are wide and he is not sure if that much setback area is Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals September 26, 2006 Page 7 . needed. He stated that the property didn't require a large parking lot when the building was constructed in the 1800s, Weisberg stated that the goal is to get Fire Engine Number One inside of a structure. He said the purpose of the addition creates a hardship and it is not simply because they would like the addition to be larger, it needs to be a certain size. McCarty said the goal of this proposal is to get the fire engine sheltered. He said they don't need this much space to get the fire engine protected and it would 'fficult to approve the requested variances because this proposal could be vie nsive in its scope of work. Morrissey stated that knowing the e they could use the 3 feet to the s fire engine. Peltsman stated tha feet won't give them much s and they can make it wo worse the soil conditions e s e same as Morrissey said she has less trouble with the variance for the west side of the prQperty because the existing building is n added that if the zoning designation of the Historical Society the properties on either side of it, it would conform. Nederveld explained to the applicants that since have the option of tabling their request to allow vote that means the requests would be denied. could appeal a denial to the City Council. board present they rd be use if there is a tie ined that the applicants . I tower will no longer be there if ase ent in order to accommodate the om to make changes but adding 3 id the ans are still fluid enough to change , but the further south they go on the lot the erty is a "fill site". He said the existing structure is , Id be an economic hardship to have to build further roposing the addition go east/west on the property. ts if they need fill for this site with this proposed plan. Id need some, but not as much as they would if they built sted tabling the more controversial items and voting on the others. Grimes ould be easier to table the whole request. Peltsman clarified that the Board is asking them to look at moving the additional three feet to the south and further away from the west property line or more in line with the plane of the west side of the existing structure. . MOVED by McCarty, seconded by Weisberg and motion carried unanimously to table the requested variances in order to allow the applicants to come back with an alternate plan. . Hey Planning 763-593-8095 I 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~n 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. uv 6&2iQ 1229 Ml1 1140 6419 1ta 1111 112& 1100 1115 1101 1105 11M1 1041) IiOV 1l'lJ1 10B um. 1001 28 28 ~_"W._S,~igltlCIMXllSG\S_ zmt . City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application F()r ()'ffice Use Only: AP~lirttti~~,,~o. ., OateRe'c.:eiV~(I... ..' . ..-..... . '. .... ........... ........,............. BZAMe~etingDat~':;;'i:;. . . . Am9lfnl,R!;jc;e~yi3:(j:.;...... 1. Street address of property involved in this application: 6'7~1 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. S~P attRch~n ~h~PT 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, th'r variance expires. ~ IFf>f~ INC. ~ /ItfUE1 ~CIr~ Sac/elf 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 B. Provost Print Name of owner c::7'...4..t7~ c.. I .e'"~-c .- 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. -X- 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; $225 - other Signatures of Surrounding Property Owners Note to the variance applicant: As part of the variance application process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all surrounding property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly across the street. If on a corner, this means across both streets. To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your project and gives them opportunity to comment. If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at home, you may simply write something to the effect "made two attempts, owner not home" and then write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the time and place of the BZA meeting. Note to surrounding property owners: This is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of . possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting. .By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project. . Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project,-objecting to the project or other tatements regarding the project . Print Name . L ~S l e 1 {.f l.I Il.-b . Comment Signature X.uir f2~ Address (ODS" Hlpr> A t\.e ~.o Print Name Comment 9ft/D6vi{~; 9/z/o' ~Iw,.;,. . - ., Address C, ?fa GP4 If J4 ~ Signature Print Name Comment 9/I/D~ ~,f!z/p(, ~.~ - Address ! 0 (() ~J.,., ~. f.{ )J Signature .int Name T..Q..,(' P\$.,-e. ft1$ t> P\ 'RP1...s p~ u4.s; ~~ Comment Signature ~.{ ~ Q ti.<.~ Address I Oat ~ ctv-c 1'10 Print Name \J1@tv\ D.. MO~/rJ. Comment Mud: ~ l.. Signature PJtt~.. Address_b'" '3tf ~l/rh# PrintName ~'f~~ct.ff~~.~~ comment> ;;A.i~:trJv;.,rJS'7~O ~~WJkLf-ol~~J"93q' .fl; ~ Signature ~~~ ~ Address 'S}'1 (,}t;{~.1A,J)6~4 <: Print Name amment ~1J/o(P~~/. r/~()~mt ~j .. . . , Signature Address '<o~ 0 ~14. yt2fi1 R~ . . . 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 fadlities 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 (15) 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 THE mSTORICAL CHURCH FROM JULY 1, 1997 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 2006 WEDDING # WEDDING DAY - DATE TIME NUMBER WEDDING GUESTS Total 23 Favorite Months - June and October Average attendance -71 #1 Saturday, February 14, 1998 lO:15-noon 8 #2 Saturday, March 21, 1998 4:00-5:00 PM 40 #3 Saturday, April 24, 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 #lO 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 11,2002 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 1.1 :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,Jillyl5,2006 1 :00-1 :30 PM lOO #23 Saturday, July 22, 2006 4:00-5:00 PM 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . ~r~~$ fIl '" A ~. ~ ~. ~~ r ~ O~~ ~~~ ~~ ~.~ < tl J? ~ ~ ' ~ ~4 . :: ..... tit '" ~ ~ r .~ fI1 ..J I~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ 6~ 2. . I . . t ~.> . ~, ~ <; .... \::~ IiE.W aXIT ~ "b~~ i b ~() ~ UNIT~ q'-2- DISPLAY GAS!: E.Xle,'TI Go *ISPLAY GASE II II DISPLAY ACGENll . r-l DISPt...'Iy L-J r~ II~:( II MUSEUMII 22.0' X 221'>' = II 453 ...f. ISPLAY GAS!: HEW 9 !ll I WORK I staR. I lob' x "1.0' I:~ "I=" ..J. I ~ I I 10'-0- 5'. I I ~ in " in 10'-6" ..., I I INFILL EXISTlN6 DOOR HInt I'EW Hl~ . MASONRY . REPLAGE \ Il'iIND0\0'6, I T'fPIGAL I IC=:J II- - -l IC=:J II- - -l IC=:J II- - -l _ ...JC = :J EXlSTIN6 I STAIR I ABOVE -IC--l Ii: = :J \r--l I~=:J Ir--l I~=:J \r--l C=":J 12'-0" 96'-011 HE..y.J _f;tin,."C _ \ . ~ ~I ~ 9 2 \--..,\ I " \.,- I Proposed Floor Plan .MS&l\ 4WSnCNi1:lllntSIIDD'~N: -,- "- - ___ \--,/IlI:IIIIaW . GOLDEN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS ,. PRELIMINARY FLOOR PLAN .".. ............... 56Q1 &:--' ~A~ING ~DDlr.lQN 4 4)FeEQUEST; 'WAIVE~ F~OM SECTION 11.4b, SUeD. 1 """A~ ~QUI~MENTS 35 FT..OFF TI-IE REQUIRED 35 FT. TO A --- - DISTANCE OF ~ FT. AT ITS CLOSEST : POINT TO TJ-IE FRONT .,.. ARD (N~TI-I) p~Rrr LINE. ' ~I TO ALLOW FOR A pAf;KING LOT ADDITION. F.:~6KIN~T ADDJT~,?~ I . - ! iU ~..-;;-r-.r-/ "'I ~ - - >0 SECTION 11.46, sueD. , I-rx >w> y A~ ~QUIf'EMENTS wOwz 2 FT. OFF T+-IE REQUIRED 25 FT. TO A -I 0 ...J ~ -I ....J DISTANCE OF 23 FT. AT IT5 CLOSEST <tn<~ ..- POINT TO TI-IE SIDE"" Af'iijJ (EAST) > >::i F~~ LINE. ...J < ~I TO ALLOW FOR A pAf;KING Z <: ~> LOT ADDITION. LUUO~ O-..JC eUIL.DING 6ETeACK ~ O-J ....J 0 8. ENVELOPE Ot-(J --- - FRONT.,.. ARD: ~5 FEET t.:Jtnt- SIDEI6ACK .,..ARD; 5~ FEET - C"t') J:~ ~ GOL.DEN VALLE.,... OFF-6TREET PAFiKING ~QUI~TS MUSEUM USE: 1 SPACE FOR EYER"( sa. FT. OF GROse FLOOR AREA EXISTINaI eulLDINaI 3)36 MUSEUM ADDITION TOT . . €< f1Dt;O--- /"""'- /' / I / I I t ...------.... \ ~~ '.. ~ p.p." - "- EXISTING 6~G .~ @ r;a:QUEST: WAIVER FROM SECTION 11.46, 5U6D. 8 FRONT YARD FEQUltEMENT5 1~ FT. OFF TJ-IE REQUIRED 35 FT. TO A DISTANCE OF 25 FT. ATI ITS CLOSEST FOINT TO TI-IE ~T .,.. ARt' (NORTI-I) ~PERrr LINE. FUFP06EI TO eRlNG n.e EXISTING eulLPING INTO ~ANCE. 0 ~ 1M2 ~ I 1 I 1 EXISTING 6UILDING @ REQUEST: WAlve~ F~OM 1 ~lel.El.I,' 5ECTION 11.46, SU6D. 1 YARDI .c PATIO"'" ." REQUIFeEMENTS -. " r- --:'-lj'x', 1~ FT. OFF TI-IE REQUIRED 5rz;l FT. TO A I ~ -"" -r:J~ DISTANCE OF 31 FT. AT ITS CLOSEST 1;';"'- POINT TO TI-IE SIDE 'T"ARD (weST) ~..::fOEGI,Il~. &:f?f2",~. PROPERTY LINE. ,; Gf&N FACE ' ~I TO MINCi THE EXI6TIt-ti I!UILPING INTO cc:N=OR1ANCE. o o . 6UILDING ADDITION . 0 C9 FeEQUi:6T: WAIVER FROM p.p. SECTION 11.46, SUBD. 1 Y ARC> REQUIREMENTS 23 FT. ot=F TI-IE REQUIRED 5~ FT. TO A DI5TANCE OF 21 FT. AT IT5 CLOSE5T FOINT TO TI-IE 51DE 'T"A~ (WE5T) ~FERTY LINE. ~: TO AU...OW FCPl A elJU..DINCi ADDITION. o o~-....... o .........., ...... I I I ----~ I ".." " L "--:-.- -~ ~_,- -- .......... ---- -- o o. ~~~~ ---- -- ----- 6UIJ...DrNG ADDITION <V~QUE5T: WAlve~ F~M SECTION 11.46, SU6D. 1 Y A~ REQUIREMENTS 1.2 FT. OFF TI-IE REQUIRED 5~ FT. TO A DleTANCE OF 42.8 FT. AT Ire CLoeeeT pOINT TO TJ-IE SIDE Y A~ (EAST) ~FERT"" LINE. ~s TO ALLOW FOR A elJll-CllNG ADDITION. . ATS&~ ARMsna<<i DlSEiH SIal) " JlYIIlH k ~ EIIiIIBlUIll . ~ TmtIIlLDliY JrmIIOIlIlel&ll lJlIaCAfE AIOmmURI 8501 GolDEN \Iw.EY RoAD SUne SOO MINNEAPOUS. MN 65427 1a.: 7llU45.3731 FAX: 783.S25.328lI WEB: _.Ilsr.com @ AIIIISlIIllNG lOIIIlEllt IlKDUllllYllWl, I( SHEET NAME LOCATION OF REQUE5TED VARlANCE5 DRAWN BY aS6 OiECKED BY rJS M're OCT. 24, 2"f?)6 PROJECT NO. "6"31 SHEET NO. . i . 06-10-22 . 900 Colorado Avenue South WCL Associates, Inc., Applicant . . Hey Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 18, 2006 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Bryan D. Gadow, Planning Intern Subject: 900 Colorado Ave. S (06-10-22) WCL Associates, Inc., Applicant . WCL Associates, Inc. owns the property located at 900 Colorado Avenue S., and wishes to renovate the existing structure, formerly Mid-America Printing, into their corporate offices. The existing structure is a one-story building with 14,976 square feet of building coverage. Office use is a permitted use in the Industrial Zoning District. WCL Associates, Inc. intends to redo parking area with new paving, concrete curb, and gutters. In addition, the site will "be extensively landscaped with over-story trees, ornamental trees as well as shrubs and perennials." The applicant's submittal also proposes 3,910 s.f. of landscaping and patio area in the front yard (east) compared to the current 700 s.f. of landscaped space. According to the applicant's submittal, the hardship with this property is at time of purchase the current setbacks of the building and parking lot were non-compliant with the regulations for the Industrial Zoning District. The applicant desires the following variances to bring the site into compliance in order to begin the process of renovating and landscaping the property. To apply for this variance, a survey was required. Attached please find the survey and an explanatory letter from the applicant. The proposed project requires the following variances from City Code: BuildinQ Setback Variances Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(3) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District shall not be less than 20 ft. in depth. The variance request is for 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (north) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(3) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District shall not be less than 20 ft. in depth. The variance request is for 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at 1 the building's closest point to the side yard (south) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(J) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side and rear yards setbacks in the Industrial Zoning District shall not be less than 20ft. in depth. The variance request is for 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (west) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. Parking Lot Variances Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that no building or structure in an Industrial 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 (east) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the side yard (south) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 3 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 7 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the side yard (north) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. Landscaping Variances Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 35 ft. off the required 35 ft. of landscaping to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. The WCL proposal calls for 2' to 4' of landscaping along the east property boundary. Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. of landscaping to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (north) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. of landscaping to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (south) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. 2 . . . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10 ft. of landscaping to a distance of 5 ft. at the building's closest point to the side yard (west) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. of landscaping to a distance of 5 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the side yard (south) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. The WCL proposal calls for 5' of landscaping along the south property boundary. Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements. The Zoning Code states that all required front yard setbacks shall be landscaped, and one-half (1/2) of the required side and rear yard setbacks shall be landscaped. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. of landscaping to a distance of 5 ft. at the parking lot's closest point to the side yard (north) property line to bring the proposed parking lot into conformance. The WCL proposal calls for 7' to 13' of landscaping along the north property boundary. Upon review of the site, staff discovered that the existing site layout was not well landscaped or maintained. A review of the City file indicates that the building permit was approved in 1959 and the building was completed in 1960. The B.F. Goodrich Company was the initial owner of the property at that time. Prior to WCL Associates' submittal, no previous variances have been filed for this property. 3 . ~all e Public Safety Y Memorandum Fire Department 763-593-8055/763-512-2497 (fax) To: Mark Grimes, Director of Planning & Zoning From: Ed Anderson, Deputy Fire Marshal Subject: Proposed Remodeling Project at 900 Colorado Avenue South- Variance Application Date: October 9, 2006 cc: Mark Kuhnly, Chief of Fire & Inspections The Golden Valley Fire Department staff has reviewed the variance application for the proposed remodeling project at 900 Colorado Avenue South. Comments listed below are focused on the remodeling of the building, the proposed landscaping and the remodeling of the parking lot. Building Remodeling . 1. The proposed remodeling for the building shall meet the required fire and building code regulations. 2. Currently, the building has a fire suppression system for the entire building. The impairment during construction of the fire suppression system shall be in accordance with the fire code. 3. The proposal indicates vehicles parking inside the building and the vehicles shall meet the requirements of the fire, building and mechanical codes. Remodeling of the Parking Lot and Site 1. The proposed plans indicated the redesign of the parking lot. The fire code requires an approved fire department access road and an approved fire department turn around for any access road that is 150' in length. 2. The site plan indicates that the post indicator valve for the fire suppression system will be relocated. The post indicator valve will remain in the same location and vehicle protection bollards will be required around the post indicator valve (PIV). 3. "No Parking Fire Lane" signs will be required to be installed at the entrance of the driveway. The installation of the required signs will be installed in accordance with the City of Golden Valley city ordinance. . 4. A fire department rapid~entry lock box is located in the building. Relocation of the lock box will be determined by the fire marshal. Landscaping Plan 1. The proposed landscaping shall not obstruct or hinder the fire department connection for the fire suppression system that is located in the building. . If you have any questions, please contact me at 763-593-8065. . . 1900 Colorado Ave. ) ~, aij ~I ~I ~ 11\ ~ '< I Ii $440 1l4OO <l) lkl;l Cl'UlN '.\~Wj N'd\.fS.' C';;17.r'~{l)t ~C~ t/Xii13 Q"l$ 2))5 . LAURel. AVE 715 W"'''''' ''''J1rA .. .., Vb Ll..aUreJ AvenueGi~nbeJt:J 7{)Q 800 6300 6Z50 6224 6210 Sa H:Wy lOll S 1'0 ..... :,!nJ3!14 ... lItTE . RSr.lll'S3.!l4 liVr1:~AtE <I$).; o III ~ 8 ~ ::'7 w-- 6$0 GOLDEN lUllS DR G1US :l3Hl October 3, 2006 . Mr. Mark Grimes City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals 900 Colorado Avenue Dear Mark, Please find enclosed our submission to the Board of Zoning Appeals for this property. Discussion of Existing Conditions: . As discussed, the property was developed in 1959. the single story industrial building was constructed at the very rear of the site with minimal setbacks on the west, north and south faces. All of the parking as well as the loading docks are on the east face. The building presents a decidedly industrial character to Colorado Avenue with truck doors and trash readily visible. The current tenant also parks large trucks in this front lot. The building has no architectural detail with minimal glazed openings. The current zoning is INDUSTRIAL. A brief review of the zoning code indicates: Code Actual Site Coverage 50% 46% Building Setbacks Front 35' 138' +/- Sides 20' 5' Rear 20' 5' to 9' Parking Setbacks Front 35' 0' Sides 10' 0' to 5' Rear 10' N/A Landscaping . Front 35' 0' Sides 10' 0' to 5' Rear 10' 5' to 9' In compliance In compliance Non-conforming Non-conforming Non-conforming Non-conforming Non-conforming Non-conforming Non-conforming G:12006\59_WCL OFFlCE\900 COLORADO\L_1003MGj.0NINGSUBMISSION.DOC ~ WCL ASSOCIATES, INC. Architecture Interiors m~ ~ 1433 Utica Avenue South, Suite 162 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Phone: (952) 541-9969 Fax: (952) 541-9554 Page 1 of 3 . . . Note: There is no landscaping in the front between the building and Colorad~ Avenue. Parking Code 15 stalls Actual 26 stalls In compliance Proposed Project: WCL Associates, Inc., a local architectural firm would like to purchase the building and renovate it into their corporate offices. Watson Forsberg General Contractors would also be a part of the building ownership and would complete the occupancy of the building. Office is a permitted use in this zoning. The building occupancies are listed on the plans as gross building area including exterior walls, etc. A net reduction of 5% seems appropriate for the occupancy calculations. The plan before you includes the following occupancies within the building and the subsequent parking requirements: Office Storage Parking Total: Gross 10,735 sJ. 750 sJ. 3,491 s.f. 14,976 s.f. Spaces 41 stalls 1 stall Net 10,200 sJ. 710 sJ. 42 stalls The current site will support 33 surface stalls on the existing parking area. An additional 7 stalls are planned for within the building. By adding a bicycle rack to the plan, we receive a 5% bonus or 2 additional stalls. Site Building Bonus Total: 33 stalls 7 stalls 2 stalls (5%) 42 stalls The site would be in compliance in terms of parking. As discussed, our use of the building and the existing site is acceptable to the city and we could apply for a building permit immediately. As we prepare the building and site for occupancy, we can repave the existing lot. However, as soon as we try to add concrete curb/gutter or landscaping, the site would be open to review by the city staff/councils, etc. and the existing site may now need to be brought into compliance with current city codes for setbacks, landscaping, etc. It is not our desire to leave this site in its current condition. The site is sorely in need of repair, upgrading and landscaping. For this reason, we request that our project be presented to the Board of Zoning Adjustment for discussion so that these outstanding issues of nonconformance can be formalized into a PUD document that will govern the use of the site. Project Description: G:\2006\59_WCL Of'FlCE\900 COl.ORADO\l.._1 003MG ]ONINGSlIBMISSION. DOC Page 2 of 3 . This simple building will be turned into a new office building. The parking area will be completely redone with new paving, concrete curb and gutters. The site will be extensively landscaped with overstory trees, ornamental trees as well as shrubs and perennials. The landscaped areas, including the existing boulevard will be irrigated. Boulevard trees will be added. Site lighting will be installed. The building itself will get a complete facelift on Colorado Avenue. A majority of this face will receive full glazing....a strong, glass corporate image. Signage, will be simple and understated. Variance Requests: The following variances are necessary to complete the PUD: · Building setbacks varied to existing conditions. · Parking/landscape setbacks varied to the following: Front South side North side Existino 0' 0' 5' Provide hedge at boundary Proposed 2' to 4' 5' 7' to 13' Current Landscaped Area in Front Yard: Proposed Landscaping/Patio Area in Front Yard: 700 s. f. 3,910 s.f. Variance Summary: . The variances are a result of the following: . A desire to upgrade the building to office · A desire to upgrade the existing site with new parking and significant landscaping . The unusual placement of all building services in the front edge of the building... any demolition of a portion of the building with the resulting relocation of services/to create more site area for parking cripples the project because of cost. · The variances requested are in keeping with the existing adjacent buildings on Colorado Avenue. Each of these properties has parking areas out to the front property line. The proposed project is a worthy compromise to maintain and upgrade the current building and its site. The next generation of change on this site... with the demolition of the existing building.. . .. would create the freedom to comply fully with the zoning regulations. If you have any questions, please contact me at 952-541-9969. Thank you. . 1P David Clark, AlA Principal WCL Associates, Inc. G:\20G6\59_\t'VCL OFFtCE.\900 COLORADO\L,-1003MG_ZONINGSUBMJSSJON.DOC Page 3 of 3 From:CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY 7B3 593 8109 09/22/200B 13:37 109B P.004/00B " City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code'Variance Application 1 . Street address of property involved in this application: 400 Co (...o~~ ~e' 2. Applicant: Wc::/L k;~c::::.1At~. \~. Name 1447~ UT\6A' ~.C:? Addres~. . ~.,-: t.eoC6 ~~. M ~ t;;St..f I~ City/State/Zip 1c;6, 54-I. ,,(;, 0; Business Phone '152. 9'~4- --14~o Home Phone Cell Phone d^VG. Co ~ WGL-..... . ~tY\ Email Address 3. Detailed description of bullding{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-rr~D 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. t0~ .A-""T\ AG~ 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 nol taken wllhln one year, the variance eXPlre~ _ . Signature of Applicant Oct-03-06 12:24P M;d-Amer;ca/Hum hre Oct-03-2D09 01 : 14 pm Frorn-KAYHARRISREAL ESTATE P Y Froll. CITY or GOLDEN vAlLEY m 599 8109 +1 612-546-2895 P.Ol T-84G P 002/002 F-7T6 D81~/Z[)OIi l~; _ ..... Y. uu.uuua S. If ttle appncaot Is not the owner of aU property Invol\l8d In this application, please name the owner of this prope~ /I I . ~Ol..,"" H0-~ h~ . M Print Name of owner f Variance Application Submittal: The following Information must be submItted by the appllcation deadline to make a complete application. If an application Is Incomp'ete, It will not be accepted: Completed applicatton form, indudlng sIgnatures of surrounding proporty owners. A current or usa~', survey of the property muat be attaohed. s.. 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 detallttd desCription of .bullding(s). addltion(s), and alteration(s) invo1ved in this pmject. The site plans and dl1ilWlngs submitted with this application will be the basis of any variance that may bo approved and cannot be changed before or after the butlding permit is issued. Variance application fee, as folluws; $125 - single family f88ldllntlal; $2?5 - other signatures of Surrounding Property OWners Note tD the variance applicant: As part of the variance appticatlon process, you will need to attempt to obtain the signatures of all surrounding property owners. This Includes all propertfes abutting the applicant's property and directly ac:ross the streellfon a comer, 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 slang II wPV of your building plans) and have them sign the are.. below. The elgnature Is meant only to verify that you have told them about your project .nd gl".. 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 hams" and then write their address. City staff wlll also sand a wriltIan notiCe Informing these property owners of the time and place of the BZA meeting. Note to surrounding property owne,.: This is an application by your neIghbor far a variance fi"om the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of eny posstble effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be receiving. written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting. . From:CITY OF BOLDEN VALLEY 763 693 8109 09/22/2006 13:38 #096 P.006/0OS By slgriing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that ou necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project. omrnents can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other statements regarding the project. Print Name c;~ l~[)ne:s- "-rD 'ISS~ ~~~ Comment Signature ---- Address GOtlo W'7~~ BivJ.. Print Name \\'\e'i. -F n \""""\ ~\\~ :f''\ Comment 100 '~--.....~\.. ~ ~ ~ /7' Signature #/tad(. -/ ~~ Print Name ~ / ( -'fr4'~>-)dJ ~ ~ :~:~~~~ ~p~ Address (r0!SO LUa\ i7n..b_fSlud I ------- Address 6 J (J (J ~ YZ'P ~ lJ~fl. . r . rint Name "f--bN - \J \ ~ Comment 1"'f \ .ea ~ t.ol1. ~ G T 1w \ tJ-e... I . LH1 Ci v~ \ \~ bl-e.... Address ct,OD ColD~do ~Sa. ' Signature Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Address ?c> ~ --h .14....J.c. -t'd .' r 10/02/06 14:04 FAX 952 541 9554 WCL ASSOCIATES. INC. From: GITV OF GOLDEN VAlJ...EV 163 593 8109, 09/22/2008 13: 38 ~002 flD9G,P.DDS/ODS 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. " . . '-'" r-.- Pr';nt Name . ('/e' ~ - ! l;;>(~~ )' " " I-'j ~.-{;--\ . 4,'~ .. _ rc. __ ,.l IV .:::,_ Comment ' /!i \, Q -. SJgnatu(~ '/~>r ,I:' /,i-t tL --' j'Z/[.d8.?e..-c.c-,,~,~ Address (P I 0'; t;z 0 \:02:.eY) '-h\..u$ Address Address Address Address Address Address . . . . . . 900 Colorado.....8.30.2006 . . . . FlZct-:>( ~'1,(, L.II..J~ l,.ec::>t:--,.......6\ C;.E>v'"l'"H-. 900 Colorado.... .8.30.2006 .... ____....., ~.......... .....,--r:......, ~.._..~ . ___ VA. ,,--.. , ~-T . . . 900 Colorado.....8.30.2006 . . . r~~\ . e)(lc::;.T. ~,vE..' 900 Colorado.....8.30.2006 . 06-10-23 . 5900 Olson Memorial Highway Pictura Graphics, Applicant . See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in Planning Department . Hey Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) Date: October 13, 2006 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Teresa Murphy, Planning Intern Subject: 5900 Olson Memorial Highway (06-10-22) Pictura,Graphics, Applicant Pictura Graphics is the owner of the property located at 5900 Olson Memorial Highway. The property includes an existing 12,958 square foot building. Pictura Graphics is proposing a 10,892 square foot building addition and a reconstruction of their parking lot to hold 62 parking stalls at the north end of the property. . According to the applicant's submittal, the hardship with this property is that the existing building does not conform to front or side yard setback requirements. The variance request is to make the existing building conforming. The building addition conforms to setback requirements. The proposed project requires the following variances from City Code; Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Front Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that front yard setbacks in the IndustrialZoning District shall be at least 35 ft. from the right-of-way line of a public street. The 35 foot setback shall be maintained landscaped green areas. The variance request is for 2 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33 ft. at its closest point to the front (east) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side yards in the Industrial Zoning District shall no be less than 20 ft.. in depth and shall be landscaped one-half (1/2) of the required side yard setback. The variance request is for 15 ft. off the required 20 ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the side (west) property line to bring the existing building into conformance. . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side yards in the Industrial Zoning District shall no be less than 20 ft. in depth and shall be landscaped one-half (1/2) of the required side yard setback. A parking lot must be set back at least one half (1/2) of the side yard setback or 10ft. The variance request is for 5 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 5 ft. at its closest point to the side (west) property line to allow for the "future 22 stalls" located at the south end of the property. These stalls are considered "proof of parking." They will only be constructed if it is determined by the City that the spaces are needed to meet their demand. . . . Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Setback Requirements. The Zoning Code states that side yards in the Industrial Zoning District shall no be less than 20 ft. in depth and shall be landscaped one-half (1/2) of the required side yard setback. A parking lot must be set back at least one half (1/2) of the side yard setback or 10ft. The variance request is for 3 ft. off the required 10ft. to a distance of 7 ft. at its closest point to the side (north) property line to allow for the reconstruction of the parking lot at the north end of the property. In 1989 a variance was granted on this property to FluiDyne Engineering Corp. to allow for construction of a parking lot. There is no evidence that this granted variance request was acted upon. The granted variance request expired on April 14, 1990. . 28 . . . . " . I . . 6UU. "" . . " " . . . .. . .... .. .1~ . 9QO .28 . . . II . . . " " . 28 t 15900 Olson Memorial Highway , $llOZ 6100 Sl104 5llO6 5738 . " " " SllOll .. .. OUlOIIM.MllRIAt_... '\...... -\ ... _n, OtSON MOtUIHAL H:WV HIGHWAY 5S 5Z5 51>>1 SZO S73S S729 MN :\{:bC'und.....\1'\hcl\~S< ~l"tj9tt~C}~lSGtS2))S . S73U 561Z 56ZO 5616 s.w 510 City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Zoning Code Variance Application For Office Use Only: Applicati()n No... . Date R~(:eived BZA Meeting Date ... Am()unt Received 1. Street address of property involved in this application: ~Ot> 1)1.~OU t46.w..C>(ll"'l.. t:>J2.,61L , "bLOW VA-U.l.'1 "N. t ?'5~""L. 2. Applicant: tp1l.-"11al2A ""~P.~~I~S - 'rJan.U- U.~"M~A-l.. . p(Z...,.'~..:r Name 6~Ob 1.)c...4$oC)Jo..) M~(l.tM.. OrL\.uL ADL.OlStJ VM.(.&."t Mt-1 ~4)~~l.. Address I City/S\ate/Zip . ~?"~l#'Z.c;If5 Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone PL., L\ ~N"Mlrl.~j ~t2A ~~'Hc:.~. ~"M. 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. \ · . i Ape> It.! " ,...~ 'f.l11JU ~1f'-I1 \\0)( ~(, '\'I> t-lPf1~ of te."''''''''Ju~ ';t..Ct4. Arol'n.~ I~ ~'T ~'-'? t>FF t:~-r f'pr.ei.. .05' 1'1.> ~ ,." I m'~ ~r~~~ UNir.,. Ni.ZIaJ ~"lc- ,~ J.J~-r ~u~t:o C>[t. ~t-{c~iP A'1J1:> J~;;;. 6t~~~ ~~N. (pI -r~bt-t\. ~~Prc~ . 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. a'IG~TIr-J'" p..U>4 1='b(S.c, NbT ~'IoJPo(z"'" 11> 'F~T pn. "'5>>CDI. ~f\'A.d)~~A-~~. v~ ~u~~-r ,"t& "1'b ,,^,A-~.Ii-~~nM.. ~o~ L..IJ\~. ~ p~ ~blP-loJ"""'-4b"'Fbf!.W,.I"'4 5. t . · ~~ - Z. ,)AJ'f1Z.o....,.. "'(Mf) - t.orz.~lUl i>F p,.t..be, ",... ~(Ol.. ~C>Oln~N '''''-FWt.M.S ~ ~"'f?~~ - l!o8' (>~flre.fI)~'f'Y~() ~ f,\\ ~fVc;.(OCL 1!:""PAf\JO'''''' 1n ~5'i' 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 Applicant . SEP-29-2006 09:32 FROM:WJR TO: 9529275444 P:2/3 6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application please name the owner of this property: ' ' ~ ~O//t/6~ Print Name of owner LLcl (~C/~ 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 incompfete, it will not be accepted: Completed application form. including signatures of surrounding property owners. A current or usable survey of the propertY must be attached. See the handout on survey requirements. A brief statement of the hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this variance (see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. 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 aCf()SS both streets. To obtain these Signatures. you will need to personally visit each of these properly 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 not.ice 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 ofthisvarlance could have on your property. You will also be eceiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting. TO: 9529275444 P:3/3 . SEP-29-2006 09:33 FROM:WJR 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. ....omments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other ~tements regarding the. project. ~./ / Print Name /I~ C9-1.&$6 comment. 5/1''1 e_,S. f/. ? C-~~ Signature . .:; . Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment ~ Signature &tName Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Ament Signature ~OIb~L Address 70 I /V~ L/~,I(J~ /J1l.. W IT;<<f 1#/ '$ Address Address Address Address Address Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .