09-28-04 BZA Agenda
e
e
e
Board of Zoning Appeals
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
7pm
7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
I.
Approval of Minutes - August 24, 2004
II.
The Petitions are:
535 Janalyn Circle, 55416 (04-9-23)
Chuck & Martha Moline, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 1 0(A)(1) Front Yard Setbacks
Purpose:
Request:
Purpose:
Request:
. 1.36 ft. off the required 30 ft. to a distance of 28.64 ft. at its
closest point to the front yard property line along Janalyn Circle.
To allow for the construction of an open front porch.
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 1 0(A)(1) Front Yard Setbacks
. 3.03 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 31.97 ft. at its
closest point to the front yard property line along Janalyn Circle.
To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setbacks
. 2.01 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12.99 ft. at its
closest point to the west side yard property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
301 Westwood Drive North, 55422 (04-09-24)
Ivan & Tina Rafowitz, Applicants
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks
Purpose:
. 11 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 24 ft. at its closest
point to the front property line along Loring Lane.
To allow for the construction of a garage and home addition.
e
e
e
855 Hanley Road, 55426 (04-09-25)
Scott Thuleen, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 1 O(A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks
. 16 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 19 ft. at its closest
point to the front (south) property line.
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
2136 Orchard Avenue North, 55422 (04-09-26)
Lois Sjogren, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setbacks
. 12 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 3 ft. at its closest
point to the south side yard property line
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
III. Other Business
IV. Adjournment
2
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
.
August 24, 2004
A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday,
August 24,2004 in the Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley,
Minnesota. Chair Cera called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Chair Cera, members Duff, McCarty and Sell and Planning
Commission Representative Keysser. Also present were Planning Intern Adam Fulton
and Recording Secretary Lisa Wittman.
I. Approval of Minutes - July 27, 2004
1411 Tyrol Trail, 55416 (04-8-17)
Carol n Berman A Iicant
MOVED by Keysser, seconded by Sell and motion carried u
minutes from July 27,2004 as submitted.
II. The Petitions are:
Request:
A)(2) Rear Yard Setbacks
.
.0 . to a distance of 14.13 ft. at its
north) yard property line.
Purpose:
truction of an addition to the home.
Request:
Section 11.21, Subd.10(A)(1) Front Yard Setbacks
;the required 35 ft. to a distance of 27.59 ft. at its
int to the front yard property line along Alpine Pass.
w for the construction of an addition to the home.
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 11 (A)(3) Accessory Structure
Setbacks
. 5 ft. off the required 5 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest point to
the side (east) yard property line.
Purpose: To allow for the accessory shed to be moved to the property line
rather than having the shed encroaching on the neighboring
property.
.
Fulton stated that the applicant is proposing to build an addition to the rear of the house
and is requesting variances from the front and rear yard setback requirements. He
explained that when a survey was done for this property it was discovered that the
applicant's shed encroaches on the neighboring property so the applicant is also
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 2
. requesting a variance from the accessory building requirements in order to have the shed
be located right on the property line. Fulton stated that that the addition includes
expanding the dining room and kitchen and also addresses a safety hazard with the
stairs being located right at the entrance. Fulton stated that the applicant has stated that
the hardship in regard to the shed is that they would like to retain several spruce trees
that are fairly large in size. He added that the house was built in 1939 not 1952 as the
property file stated.
McCarty aske
that acce
1 0 feet
Keysser asked for clarification on where the shed is currently located an
proposing to locate it. Fulton referred to the survey and showed the p
is located on the neighboring property. He explained that they would
completely on to their own property, but that it would be right on p
ere they are
hed that
d
Carolyn Berman, applicant, stated that they've got an irregu
yards. She said she never realized that the shed was over th
survey was done. She explained that in order for the s d to
property line as required, they would not have 10 feet
which is also required. She explained that their
by 17 feet so the shed, in her opinion, is a nece
tools and everything they need in their small a
leading to the basement are right at the
situation because people could fall do
refrigerator door and oven door ope
o front
ntil the
y from the
Ir h se and the shed,
arage is only 11 feet
the can't store cars and
ted that the current stairs
is a really hazardous
is also the area where the
.
Cera asked the applicant if the
addition. Berman said yes,
stair location is determin
accomplish anything. Sh
because, new street hav
more grassy area.
different options for the location of the
e poin he proposed addition was larger but the
aring walls so moving the addition wouldn't
t hed will not look like it is on the property line
ut in since the survey was done and now there is even
somehow be attached to the house. Keysser clarified
an't be attached to principal structures and that there must be
uctures.
applicant that she try to make the shed fit in better with the style of
ed that she would like the shed to look nicer.
Cera as applicant if she thought about adding another garage stall on to the
existing garage. Berman said they thought about that but it would be cost prohibitive
because they would almost be underground and it would still require a variance.
.
Cera opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one, Cera closed the public
hearing.
Sell stated that the proposed addition is a reasonable request and it would be a big
improvement to the area. He suggested to the applicant that the shed be moved at least
one foot away from the property line for maintenance purposes.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 3
. Cera stated that he is uncomfortable allowing variances into front yard setbacks but
because of the elevation changes on this property the proposal seems reasonable for
where the addition is going to be. He also recommended that the shed be moved to be at
least one foot away from the property line.
MOVED by Keysser, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve
the following variance requests:
.
. 9.9 ft. off the required 24.03 ft. to a distance of 14.13 ft. at its closest p
(north) yard property line.
. 7.41 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 27.59 ft. at its clo
yard property line along Alpine Pass.
nt
. 5 ft. off the required 5 ft. to a distance of 0 ft. at its closest
property line.
3049 Kyle Avenue North, 55422 (04-08-1t
Brent & Karen Nelson A licants
Request:
A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks
.
a distance of 9.62 ft. at its
property line along Kyle Avenue North.
Purpose:
nstruction of an addition to the home.
have a single stall, tuck under garage and
e from the front yard setback requirements in order to
space above. He added that if the proposed garage
ould also require a variance.
discuss the hardship in regard to the lot.
n , stated that the main hardship is that the house is not handicap
on. He explained that based on the elevation of the house to the
n't wheel up the incline and that is why they would like to come out
with this proposed addition. He stated that they are also proposing to
install an ator in the proposed addition so his son can get to the second floor which
is the main living space in the house. He said that another hardship is having a single
car garage and that because they drive larger vehicles to accommodate their son, their
cars won't fit in the current garage. He referred to a picture of their house, explained
where the new addition would be located and stated that many times the only way to
. get their son into the house is to piggyback him on their backs.
Cera asked the applicants if they had a drawing of the proposed new addition and the
elevator. Brent Nelson said they want to get through this variance process first and then
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 4
. work on the design of the addition. Karen Nelson, applicant, referred to the photo of
their house and stated that the proposed addition would be the same height as the
existing house and that an accessible bathroom and bedroom would be above the
existing garage. Brent Nelson said he would like the addition to look like the home
across the street to the north which had received a front yard variance.
Fulton stated that when the City reconstructs the street there will be 20 feet of right-of-
way instead of the typical 15 feet so that would lessen the impact to the front yard.
Brent Nelson stated that the house with the new addition would still be a imately
30 feet from the street.
.
McCarty asked the applicants if they knew how big of a variance
north received. Brent Nelson said he wasn't sure but that they
property line.
e
the
Cera asked the applicants if they had thought about p
addition in the back and the elevator inside the existin
hoped to lower the grade in the front to make it
Sell asked the applicants if they had thought ab
starts driving. Karen Nelson said that is
proposed garage to the front because'
vehicle that is in a garage.
son will get into a van if he
hey want to build the
ier for him to get into a
Keysser asked the applicants if
rather than to the front. Fult
existing garage and it wo
a variance. Karen Nelso
because the garage can'
on a cement slab.
red building the addition to the south
there a retaining wall to the south of the
e amount of excavation and would still require
also can't build to the rear of the house
ack on the lot because the kitchen was built
venue North, stated that they have known the Nelsons since
at she has seen Karen Nelson carry their son on her back to
he said they are great neighbors and she thoroughly supports the
i at not only the house across the street to the north received a
ost all of the homes across the street have received variances so one
sn't going to make that much of a difference.
Cera noted that the Juliar's home is the one that would be the most impacted by the
proposed addition.
.
Sell stated that the City gave a blanket variance to the homeowners on one side of Kyle
Avenue. He said that he thinks the Board has an obligation to do what they can in these
types of situations. He said he realizes that the request is going far into the front
setback area but there is nowhere to go in the rear or side yards and since the neighbor
most impacted by the addition supports the proposal he supports it as well.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 5
. Keysser agreed with Sell and said he realizes it's a huge front yard variance and
normally this proposal would not be approved, but under the circumstances he supports
the proposal.
Duff referred to a section of Minnesota statute that says it is the policy of the State that
handicap persons not be excluded from the benefits of normal residential surroundings.
He stated that he thinks it could be argued that this proposal falls into that specific
provision of the law.
McCarty stated that the proposed addition is drastic given the intimat
neighborhood but because the neighbor most impacted by the pro
because of the condition of the family he would support the requ
or renderings of the
he proposed addition will
MOVED by Sell, seconded by Duff and motion carried unan'
following variance request:
· 25.38 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 9.6
property line along Kyle Avenue North.
Cera suggested that the applicant show sta
proposal when they are complete in orde
fit in with the neighborhood.
.
Sell suggested the applicants as
done to reduce the front setbac
t, once they hire one, if anything can be
5224 Golden Vall
Jennifer Nelson
Request:
10(A)(3)(a), Side Yard
ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.30 ft. at its closest
t to the side (west) property line.
To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(2) Rear Yard Setbacks
· 9.34 ft. off the requi~ed 22.09 ft. to a distance of 12.75 ft. at its
closest point to the rear (north) yard property line.
Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition.
.
Fulton stated that the applicant is asking for two variances, one in the side yard and one
in the rear yard, in order to expand the garage and to construct an addition above the
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 6
. garage. He stated that that the home was built in 1941 and that there are several trees on
the property.
Cera asked if the applicant is proposing to build a new garage or is just adding the
addition above the existing garage. Fulton stated he didn't know for sure, but he thinks
the applicant will be adding the addition onto the existing garage because of the stone
work that is on the front of the garage.
Cera referred to. the 6 foot addition on the back
would be going straight back, following the line
and that she is asking for the bare minimum of
Jennifer Nelson, Applicant, said the hardship regarding her lot is the fac
piece of property and the house is tucked back into the corner. She a
existing 22 feet x 22 feet garage is rather small and explained that th .
wants to add to the garage would be going out toward the back.
Cera asked the applicant if she is keeping her existing gara
Nelson said she is keeping the existing garage and that she
and build the addition upward.
sked the applicant if it
gar e. Nelson said yes,
er to build stairs.
.
Keysser asked how the proposed addi .
she will be creating an upstairs door
rest of the house.
house. Nelson explained that
. 'on would not be separate from the
Keysser referred to the nei
neighbor's signature and
behin he applicant. Nelson said she got the
ake any comments.
Nelson showed the
high and won't look
and explained how the windows will be located up
oring property in order to give them privacy.
Cera opened t
hearing.
. Seeing and hearing no one, Cera closed the public
ould see from the street is the roof and that the situation is not
the hardship in this case could be the way the house is sited on the lot.
MOVED by Sell, seconded by Keysser and motion carried unanimously to approve the
following variance requests:
.
. 7.7 ft. off the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.30 ft. at its closest point to the side
(west) property line.
· 9.34 ft. off the required 22.09 ft. to a distance of 12.75 ft. at its closest point to the rear
(north) yard property line.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 7
.
900 Mendelssohn Avenue North, 55427 (04-08-20)
Lube-Tech - Scott Beraman, Applicant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6 (C)(2), Side Yard Setbacks
. 6 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 44 ft. at its closest
point to the side yard (north) property line
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of dock space.
. Cera noted that the existing building g
Scott Bergman, Applicant, repre
proposal for the loading dock.
considerably. He stated tha
without cause a traffic ja
Fulton stated that the applicant has requested a change to his ori '. a
proposing to make the dock space larger so the variance reque n
the required 50 feet to a distance of 22.83 feet at is closest p 0 th
property line.
Fulton explained that the applicant wants to enlarge t
business is expanding. He stated that this is a uni Sl
the north is zoned Institutional which is typically
50-foot setback requirement. In this case it is zo
and uses it for public works storage.
ch, handed out a drawing of his new
tube-Tech has been growing
t their rucks up to the current loading dock
ir facility.
Keysser asked the
Bergman referred t
work and how' diffe
plain how the new proposal ties into the.original plan.
and showed the Board how the proposed plan would
inal request.
s use the loading dock and asked if having more dock space
traffic problem. Bergman explained that some of the current
b ilers holding pallets and empty drums. Duff asked if this
ntially be freeing up the area. Bergman stated yes.
the property to the north was zoned Industrial instead of Institutional that
ouldn't need a variance.
Cera asked Fulton if the property were abutting another Industrial property what the
setback requirement would be. Fulton said the setback requirement would be 20 feet if
the abutting property was zoned Industrial. Cera stated the hardship could be tied to the
fact that the City owned property to the north is zoned Institutional but is really using it as
Industrial.
.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 8
. MOVED by Sell, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the
following variance request:
· 27.17 ft. off the required 50 ft. to a distance of 22.83 ft. at is closest point to the side
yard (north) property line.
7101 Glenwood Avenue, 55427 (04-08-21)
Johnnv Gentrup, Applicant
Keysser asked about th
that the deck is almost do
property until the a
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd.
. 13 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance
point to the front property line along 0
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of a de
Fulton stated that this request is for a front yard varia
He stated that the property is a corner lot and th
corner of the house and is almost completely b
significant amount of right of way along Olson
.
Cera referred to the applicant's narrati
between the I nspections Department
but guessed that maybe the Insp
start building his deck before th
of the property along Olson
o explain the confusion
. Fulton stated that he didn't know,
men aid it was ok for the applicant to
f the property and realized that the side
eded to be considered a front yard.
d eing almost finished. Fulton said staff is aware
built and that a stop work order was put on the
Ie to obtain the variance needed to finish.
that when the City originally looked at the property it
rty line along Olson Memorial Highway would be considered a
aid when a survey was done they realized that it really is
y operty line and that his deck encroaches 3 feet into the 75 foot
Highway 55.
pplicant when he started building the deck. Gentrup said 10 months ago
the neighbors across Glenwood have no problems with the deck.
Cera opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one, Cera closed the public
hearing.
.
McCarty said he has no issues with the proposal. Sell agreed and stated that there is no
access to Olson Memorial Highway on Glenwood.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 9
. Cera stated that technically the property line along Olson Memorial Highway is
considered to be a front yard property line but it doesn't act like a front yard. Sell added
that some of the applicant's property was taken for Olson Memorial Highway.
MOVED by Keysser, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve
the following variance request:
· 13 ft. off the required 35 ft. to a distance of 22 ft. at its closest point to the front
property line along Olson Memorial Highway.
ul, 552 Rhode Island Avenue North, stated he would like to speak on
licant. He said that the applicant built a beautiful pond which is the
highligh neighborhood and that the deck is the only place that the applicants can
enjoy the pond from.
1548 Rhode Island Avenue North, 55427 (04-08-22)
Ter Burns A licant
Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10
· 9.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. t a dis
point to the south side yard r
Purpose: To allow for the re-construc
.
Fulton stated that the applicant is asking
requirements. He said the proposal is
received a variance in the past for th
side yard setback
Isting deck and that he
ll@....~...~.\....'.......e.,.". zeway addition.
..,,'.1".....
Terry Burns, Applicant, stated t
added on a garage and fam'
room he thought the cont
he recently found out th
that with the varianc he'
property line but th
this house since 1968 and in 1970 they
said at e time they built the garage and family
d a building permit for the deck as well. He said
a ver obtained for the original deck. He explained
ng for, t e deck would be three feet away from the
e deck has always been located.
McCarty clarifi
Fulton sai at .
t is re-constructing the deck in the existing footprint.
Hearing and seeing no one else wishing to speak, Cera closed the public hearing.
.
Cera said that the hardship in this case could be that there is no where else to put the
deck and that the Zoning Code allows existing structures to be three feet from side or
rear yard property lines.
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
August 24, 2004
Page 10
. MOVED by Keysser, seconded by Sell and motion carried unanimously to approve the
following variance request:
· 9.5 ft. off the required 12.5 ft. to a distance of 3 ft. at its closest point to the south side
yard property.
III. Other Business
The Board Members welcomed and introduced themselves to new me
IV. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm.
.
.
t.
~.
04-09-23
Chuck & Martha Moline
535 Janalyn Circle
See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in
Planning Department
te
te
te
''''1;0%:1
""'~';r ";;:i';~~~
Hey
,-" ';:':'~
'cPfatlning
763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109, (fax)
~:'
fi
"
Date:
September 22,2004
To:
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
From:
Adam W. Fulton, Planning Intern
Subject:
535 Janalyn Circle, 55416 (04-8-23)
Charles & Martha Moline, Applicants
Charles and Martha Moline own the house and property at 535 Janalyn Circle in the North
Tyrol Hills neighborhood. The applicants propose an expansion to the existing two-car garage,
a covered front porch, and an addition to the north side of the house. The proposed additions
require three variances from Section 11.21 of the Zoning Code. A survey was required to
determine the existing structure's placement on the property. The existing two-car garage is
approximately 20 feet wide and 21 feet deep. The interior of the garage is 18.5 feet wide.
Attached please find the survey and an explanatory lette~ from the applicants.
The project requires variances from the following Sections of City Code:
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks. City Code states that an open
front porch, with no screen, may be built to within 30 feet of a front property line along a
street right-of-way. The requested variance is for 1.36 feet off the required 30 feet to a
distance of 28.64 feet at its closest point to the front yard property line along Janalyn
Circle.
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the
required minimum front yard setback shall be 35 feet from any front property line along
a street right-of-way. The requested variances is for 3.03 feet off the required 35 feet to
a distance of 31.97 feet at its closest point to the front yard property line along Janalyn
Circle.
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(3)(a), Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the
required side yard setback shall be 15 feet from any side yard property line for all lots
having a width of 100 feet or greater. The requested variance is for 2.01 feet off the
required 15 feet to a distance of 12.99 feet at its closest point to the side yard setback
along the west side yard property line.
A review of the City file indicates that the house was built in1 940. In 1960, a garage addition
was completed. No other major additions have been made to the house since that time.
.
r-
S-I w's.$T
:SiDJi c"P
G A'.P--ttt:;.a:
.. "" ~~... &....... ......
.. -... ~
)i ..../')
.;;, r f~ gJ
s;; t.1:: 0 ;=
c;- /H:L4.c>-lZo
· ....d..
IQ'tf/6',- rr- I
.
.
~._. ,..".,.. ,."" ",,""" ""'--
"""" -............
.'=-- ~,,---
I
"
"~'"
I
.. .~ /).-/).. .I"'r'
Vt::./<;. rjG.<;Ji.Iv j
~_.~"... L) -
,:') I t;.. r" j
t.
t.
I.
Zoning Code Variance Application
Address: 535 Janalyn Circle, Golden Valley
Owners/Applicants: Chuck and Martha Moline (owners)
Background and Rational
Allowing the garage expansion would give us the ability to park 2 vehicles and
store items such as lawn mowers and garbage cans inside the garage
eliminating the need to build a storage shed. Permitting us to put a canopy over
our front steps Would stop ice build up and make the steps safer.
'INs hope that the committee finds our request is "keeping with the spirit and
intent" of the City's zoning laws and would not substantially change the character
of the neighborhood.
Proposed Items Requiring a Variance
Priority # 1
Originally the garage was a single stall. Years ago it was expanded slightly, but
the interior is still only 18.5 feet wide. Thus, it is nearly impossible to park 2
vehicles in the garage and get the vehicle doors open.
We would like to widen the garage by 5 feet to the west. The west side of the
garage is currently at 18 feet from the property line and the setback is 15 feet.
Therefore, we are requesting a variance of 2 feet.
Priority # 2
The interior of the garage is only 19.5 feet deep leaving almost no storage space
in front of a parked vehicle. We would like to bring the front of the garage
forward 3 feet. The front of the garage is currently 35 feet from the property line
and the setback is 35 feet. We are requesting a variance of 3 feet.
Our property line is 16 feet from the street, so the proposed front of the garage
would be 48 feet from the street.
te
te
--
Priority # 3
We would like to put a canopy over our front steps. This would keep the front
steps dry and free of ice, making it much safer for the mail carrier and anyone
else visiting our house. The proposed canopy would come out 5 feet. The front
of the house is currently 33.5 feet front the property line. (Since the setback is 35
feet it was apparently originally built inside the set back or the setback changed
since the original construction in 1940.) Therefore we are requesting a further
variance of 5 feet.
Our property line is 16 feet from the street, so the proposed front of the canopy
would be 44.5 feet from the street.
Items not requiring a Variance
In order to inform the Board of Zone Appeals of the entire scope of our project we
offer the following additional information: We are planning on expanding part of
our house 12 feet to the north. Since the north side of the house is 38 feet from
the property line and the setback is 20 feet no variance is requested. In addition,
we are planning on expanding our garage 7 feet to the north. Since the north
side of the garage 46 feet from the property line and the setback is 20 feet no
variance is requested.
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
It Zoning Code Variance Application
3.
.
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
535 jAWA-LYN ~I Rt..LlC...
2. Applicant: c.lt~aE:b MOLl NE:
Name
535 JANAL'1N C,,~~Lr=.. CtOLDe.N \JA-lL6"1 554/(0
~~~;S; - (P'fli3 c\'\~~ City/State/Zip
(,1-;;> . <1',;)~' l-aOL( I'\()~ 1l.P3. 374. IObY
Business Phone Home Phone Cell Phone
CMJ J.l\ A<<r\-tf) MOR.&r%.!
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.
Pi-fAfE. SEE l1+E E,NLWSED S'ul2ifE-V
,
FI2.oN1 kEA1(J~~ + ~.dC/J4-n;s J:A/t!..
11f,~cJ PLf514~E -SEe DIlA-l#lN(;-- all-ll1fT.# /
4.
A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or 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
P'-G145E SEe
,~
7-- () IV I N6-
2
C v/)E
(JA6-t.
VM.I!7vCE
[)E5c(21 (J /JoN CA-tLELl
ffl II Cfmdtl' I II
5.
To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also
understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
is not taken within one year, the varian~h ~
Signature of Applicant
t
6. Ifthe applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this proRerty:
eJ/I-/ltlD:l'" /f.. /~f.'::j" /.yE v1 /)1'1/(/,/11,... I. -, .
Ovv(VfA2 f~ rrrr<-~-
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
Y Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
V A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
~A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or 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. .
V You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in
this project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of
. .. any variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit
is issued.
/ Variance application fee, as follows: $50 - single family residential; $150 - 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:
is is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statemen "ng the project.
It
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
i1lb~)(f{
Address S:ifl ]{lilt; ii f\ e!1 Itt ~
Print Name KO ((i IJJ V ( l (
'\
Comment
Signature
~int Name
~mment
Signature
-~~ S lw-Jl
/In . .~
i a L- I <A Y ~l II,; (/--,
" I
opp; Y-ov~ IItt01'tftht-e
/)r~ fr1/H ~
Address 1/1::,- ~(ohrleJf /(,1
Address -5:3;).. ,k~t~ CvidR..
Print Name h#c:- ~ kC"oj
Comment 4//~(7"E
Signature :Z-~ ~L-Z-- 2
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
mment
Signature
Address pi? ..Ie; /lee. 7'" Urc (~
Address
Address
.
04-09-24
I.van & Tina Rafowitz
.
301 Westwood Drive North
.
.
.
.
Planning
763.593.8095 I 763.593.8109 (fax)
Date:
September 22, 2004
To:
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
From:
Adam W. Fulton, Planning Intern
Subject:
301 Westwood Drive North, 55422 (04-09-24)
Ivan & Tina Rafowitz, Applicants
Ivan and Tina Rafowitz own the house and property at 301 Vv'estwood Drive North. The
applicants are requesting a variance from Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), in order to construct
an addition to their existing two-car garage. The applicants intend to add an additional garage
stall to the west of the existing garage and to extend the existing garage 11 feet to the south.
The existing garage is a tuck-under two-car garage that faces Loring Lane. The City had an
existing survey on file, so a new survey was not required. The applicants have emphasized the
fact that the lot is irregularly shaped in their application. The property has street frontage on
two sides - along Westwood Drive North and along Loring Lane.
Please note the attached comments from the applicants.
The project requires a variance from the following City Code:
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the
required minimum front yard setback shall be 35 feet from any front yard property line
along a street right-of-way. The requested variance is for 11 feet off the required 35 feet
to a distance of 24 feet at its closest point to the front yard setback along Loring Lane.
A review of the City file indicates that the house was built in 1956. In 1963 a swimming pool
was added to the house. In 1971 an addition to the kitchen was completed. In 1999 an
addition to the west side of the house was completed. No other additions have been made to
the house since that time.
^.....
\"jJ / '.
. (4,
. F
.~
'::>
=- ~~-~:-
o....~
".'......,
i
I
I
~
'.
-------
- -----~
./ 1"
.... '.
/
. . ..~ .....::.~.... :~..,K -.'..,~~.':.l.:~"'-.:"_"""
-~-:-~:~:~~;~;j'A~i:~ '.
.,':':,:,,;'::~:l'
I
\,
J,,;
\J
.
.tl-..
'o:>ri;;..:..._
'. -,::!.':'f'" ",
.' :,'j'
.~--_.
~" .~'L:';i:i~;:i".
. -~ - -,~~..,. ...~~~~~..~l':...
:-.::::;\-L\t:.1; . '~"':"'~""'. ~~~ ::-;:-'-.
'.
l
J.
>/_j
/'1
:1
J
\t>
-.'
""
\~~
\\~
1;....J~
i
I
I
f
..\'~,
~. \ \1.....
. . "
t....l'" J \ "'\"
'\ . :' '\. "
'--..
":;1"",.
C\ t'J "V"O
.
;:;~fK~~. .
'l>.:.
I)
t
3.
.
.
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property imvolved in this application:
- ? 0 I We~+wooc;( j)(; "It NOf-t'"
2. Applicant: =.LVt( n a V\C{ ~tl K f-l +0 t ^) I" k
Name
!J 55'iJJ
C ity/State/Zip
I \leu" - (}JJ) 7:1'7 -3tiJ{) KJV}
Business Phone
010 3) J 7 t~i, t () f.r-
. Home Phone
t:'-14 //11;;) <1L{O..iJ5~
Cell Phone
!TV\t'l b ; vl Ci. J r; 2 a l> t. r tfYV1
Email Address
4.
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.
Ildd 3 r(t..oY-l.iiVt:- La."l~) J.' I
If ,. 1"0 .Ydrd'!e ~ or-! JO~+1, Loel>T 2J J~C6t
-to f ~ ( 5. TiN 1 do,", b Ie idV'dj e.. fVt:J -h. t;;;xfev! f
U'-iT r #.' ~ T kL.. r ~. ttv\ <; l CJ N 0 ~ I j Ii { 1\
rbOrvt aGl\cV 0 {~c'(." d.-(?O(K~_ l/le.v0 Cjdra'1€.. )( ltP/fc.J.r..
A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or hardship whrch proVide grounds for the granting
ofthis variance (see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach
letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate
, e.-f6e.. c/c S
r
cJ.1 b.1C~j.,{J {'llM ~ f" D (,lf/~
b) 60. v ~c '; IJ I'S I\) vJ ct ~
5.
.~
-Jee b"d~k_
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.... ........ ,/' A' .//. .'
. ./j '/
;:;<./ I .,
.; ',j 1/ a.~ .' /Yt:/--;:./
/
Signature of Applicant N . Y' ' / /\ 17<. .~'
(l'V'1.. l-f- L , (--<--1
(.
L",j ; C.(.1::t\. IS
1'1t:1. (" (C~
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
L Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
--L A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
/" A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or hardship which provide grounds for the granting
of this variance (see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach
letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in
this project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of
any variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit
is issued.
.
1
Variance application fee, as follows: $50 - single family residential; $150 - 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, tellthem
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:
.is is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By'signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding the project.
rint Name Le c n
Comment
s+( ."bu;) ,
w~~~
31 I
lAJf,1+ w(}od
]) r. !\} d,
l.t ~ c
Address 3' \ w~o~d
G,A- iLA;C~'+'~ ~oo 0DeSTiVc/)6 bR.. 1\.1.
-1/ . /j"",f) (
Comment tf'''^-i ~GM"".J..- , )U'lHt.1 u.J.e.lU 'f-t~ tf1d:-4 :~yV:.J. tv -ht- t-tv J.i.1~ j tJfFtirt....( ftrt J\.
Signature ....--~J. ~~ Address S-v<. c.. ':.>'''t/--L
\'ll j. ~~.
/ rint Name \\/ .~ ~t
~.
lk. N.
Signature
Print Name
b,V.5Yf2Z.
COmment
~ignature
1)Ci If
Gfyd;n
Address
.iint Name
~omment
Signature -(f. ~:a-v
l' \
~f\, e~\ Ov\ \v\ S
\ ~L
~
--
Address ~~( uJ u::h..v~~ ~ J J
~4~,
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Address
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Address
Print Name
.mment
Signature
Address
.
.
.
.
.
""
..
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
04-09-25
Scott Thuleen
855 Hanley Road
See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in
Planning Department
.
.
.
Hey
Planning
763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
September 22,2004
To:
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
From:
Adam W. Fulton, Planning Intern
Subject:
855 Hanley Road, 55426 (04-09-25)
Scott Thuleen, Applicant
Scott Thuleen owns the house and property at 855 Hanley Road. He is requesting a variance
from Section 11.21 of the City Code for an addition to the existing two-car garage. Because of
the location of the existing structure, a survey was required. The existing garage is within 25
feet of the property line, but was within the appropriate boundaries at the time the house and
garage were constructed. The applicant has indicated that 10 feet of the property was taken by
the State as part of the construction of Interstate Highway 394. The proposed garage will come
to within 19 feet of the property line along Wayzata Boulevard, a service road to 1-394. It will fit
within the rear setback requirements. The applicant has stated that the addition will allow the
garage to retain its existing dimensions while a portion of the former garage will be converted
to alternate uses.
At the site there is an existing violation of City Code that must be addressed prior to the
issuance of a Building Permit. The existing shrubs to the west of the driveway are in violation
of City Code, Section 7.04, Subdivision 2, "Corner Visibility". No plantings in the City right-of-
way may exceed a height of 12 inches. The existing shrubs are approximately 5 feet tall. As
such, they pose a safety hazard to the public and must be removed regardless of the approval
of the variance. However, should the variance be granted, the shrubs must be removed prior to
the issuance of a Building Permit.
The project requires a variance from the following City Code:
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(1), Front Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the
required front yard setback shall be 35 feet from any front yard property line for all lots
with frontage along a street right-of-way. The requested variance is for 16 feet off the
required 35 feet to a distance of 19 feet at its closest point to the front yard setback
along Wayzata Boulevard.
A review of the City file indicates that the house was built in 1957. An addition was completed
in 1993 and no other additions have been made to the house since that time.
City of Golden Valley
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
<B~f) I-JrfJJLE4 /2-0/TO ; ~. V. J11ti, ~'I24>
,
..---
2. Applicant: ,:::>c...o cc
Name
.-r/1. 4/ ec...;,,\
9~~ fhtrtJ ~ R-O .
Address
'1~2, &/7', 7f'7..j
Business Phone
bLoeJ Vlh.-Let? tYlJ >~'-l2-~
City/State/Zip
'7~.~-~'1~-fpJl
Home Phone Cell Phone
'5.L.o. Q. _-f:J,tI..d~E.t1 aJMJu'\Ill\ IC , Co",",
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.
AD::> irlDrJ {}/- If l~lr'~ - IRf'.~ 2-2- /h;Jo,-r/cAi 7U
ix/srI tV f.:.. (;-1?rUl?:>-G 7C
~fJ,-t1-~ 5~,.\~
fbl'~
{k.~ itt:eQ
'Jb r'1ltc:...it-lllrr'G 11 VC-rtrt,-1'tL LI P1 FvJ2- }f/JNt)f ClIP ~5"I>'LI n.;}
I;.J :[j,...1 ~T q./'i: ~~.
4. A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or 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
o StIff 2~t I.) p- Jt.f, f./enn ClUJ ~-((?il Ccrz.e&/2I1L /lR1-$'( - f;a::::os'. !/!-1,;/7'::-C-:f7ZO
vr}~nQh111t Itc~G5.J1 'i'-l '"'1 r12<J~ OUTS;ere. JI!I ~. i-Iff? -u.."'!>,$iJ-/
fJ~t;v tl2~ ~'ub iC ,.c;;?n-t-.
Q) '~N~ /If Ijttl~ 10 r ,t:j;/2- ~eJ2.'[(u 1k41>
!
/
is. To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also
I understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted,
i
e., is not taken within one year, the variance ex . ej'
(3 ~f.>r 'S'(l-Ifpc;:- IS
5'~ #'Ie tlUlCc7.;( t-m*-( "
~.yi~1T .
(01
' .' "I
.y~
6. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application f an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
e:- C~eted application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
~ current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
\/ A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or hardship which provide grounds for the granting
of this variance (see- Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach
~r..photow~phs, or other evidence, if appropriate. _
L YOU~~tt-~it 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
. ~n'y variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit
- rsued.
L Variance application fee, as follows: $50 - single family residential; $150 - 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.
.te to surrounding property owners:
~is is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting.
By signing this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that
you necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
_atements regarding the project.
Print Name ZDfJv It ILO 5"pAC.:re/L
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
.int Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
Comment
Signature
Print Name
amment
Signature
~~[JJ)A(b
..:J"h~0\ S .~ O'Y"'\
Address 1::,05
H AI-lLEy /4JflO
/1/"'. ,
, l1~'J f-~
Address S 3d tA-~ 4v~ s:.. 4
Address
Address
Address
Address
Address
.
00
c:=> .
C)
"n
"-D
r--
September 21, 2004
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
City of Golden Valley
7800 Golden Valley Rd
Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588
Dear Board:
We are in receipt of the notification of request for variance at 855 Hanley Road.
The applicant, a Mr. Scott Thuleen, appears to be requesting a variance in order to
construct a garage addition. The Minnesota Professional Fire Fighters owns all
property on the west side of the subject property, as well as the west side of the two
and a half properties to the north of the subject property.
During the construction of Interstate 394 and the adjoining service drive the
properties along the old Highway 12 service drive lost south depth to the new
construction. As property owners look to improve their residences they should not
be penalized because of the new conditions and should be given special
consideration given the fact they put up with the inconveniences ofliving along the
Interstate.
We support Mr. Thuleen's application and feel that property improvements are a
good thing for all. of us in the area when they structurally equate to the property and
neighborhood. We look forward to Mr. Thuleen's project and will attempt to assist
he and his family during the construction with parking, storage or whatever else we
may do to keep the impact low for the other neighbors.
Sincerely,
Mike Stockstead, President
Minnesota Professional Fie Fighters
, .
.
.
. .
.
04-09-26
Lois Sjogren
.
2136 Orchard Ave. N.
.
.
.
.
Planning
763-593-8095/ 763-593-8109 (fax)
Date:
September 22, 2004
To:
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
From:
Adam W. Fulton, Planning Intern
Subject:
2136 Orchard Avenue North, 55422 (04-09-26)
Lois Sjogren, Applicant
Lois Sjogren owns the house and property at 2136 Orchard Avenue North. The applicant is
requesting a variance from Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A)(3)(a), Side Yard Setbacks, in order to
construct an addition to her existing one-car garage. The applicant intends to add an
additional garage stall to the south and east of the existing garage. A survey was required to
obtain information regarding the existing garage's location on the property. The existing
garage is 14.4 feet from the south property line. The proposed addition to the garage will
bring it to within 3 feet of the property line.
The project requires a variance from the following City Code:
· Section 11.21, Subd. 10 (A){3){a), Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the
required minimum side yard setback shall be 15 feet from any side yard property line
for any property of 100 feet or greater in width. The requested variance is for 12 feet
off the required 15 feet to a distance of 3 feet at its closest point to the side yard
setback along the south side of the property.
A review of the City file indicates that the house was built in 1953 and that no other additions
have been made to the house since that time.
.
4.
City of Golden Valley
Board o.fZoning Appeals (BZA)
Zoning Code Variance Application
For Office Use Only:
Application No.
Date Received
8ZA Meeting Date
Amount Received
1. Street address of property involved in this application:
,;y.46 it-I' /ztPT'-'/ <Jh't'- J1f
2.
Applicant: j:~ (l, ?i'pqI1l/b~
r~/.~ 6. (JI (' it/frt! /Ir;'f {(
Address
r;J/J,ry' 1f/ff{ ~1i~
Clty/State/ Ip
0/0~ 8/9-;VcP~
Cell Phone
10.:>~(5;~9- 9of.:J~
Business Phone
.~
Home Phone
~~if/Jj~~~'\ (! ('AYVJtY/~i tlYJ-)
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
appro~ed a(~~ changed before or after !h~ ~Uildi~9 permi!,;S issue~.
#41 fin ~M4Ld;qI' hcr'ifC' A/tT51 ~""'.;,? "~"fL"
t )( , ({ · I ' S1."jt';\,_1! .Q-....l;,/?r/v~ 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.
iftf/~~'-
Signat e ot .' cant
5. If the applicant is not the owner of all property involved in this application, please name the
owner of this property:
.
Print Name of owner
Signature of owner
Variance Application Submittal:
The following information must be submitted by the application deadline to make a complete
application. If an application is incomplete, it will not be accepted:
. Completed application form, including signatures of surrounding property owners.
A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. See the handout on survey
requirements.
A brief statement of the reasons, necessity, or hardship which provide grounds for the granting
of this variance (see Frequently Asked Questions for an explanation of a "hardship"). Attach
letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate.
You may submit detailed description of building(s), addition(s), and alteration(s) involved in
this project. The site plans and drawings submitted with this application will be the basis of
any variance that may be approved and cannot be changed before or after the building permit
is issued.
Variance application fee, as follows: $50 - single family residential; $150 - other
~innatur13~of ~lIrrOllnrling Propert" n\Aln~.r~
__::JI . -."'" I _.... ... .'dl' . - ~ ........11'. 1_ _
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
.oss the street. if on a corner, this means across both streets.
To obtain these signatures, you will need to personally visit each of these property owners, tell them
about your project (we encourage you to bring along a copy of your building plans) and have them
sign the area, below. The signature is meant only to verify that you have told them about your
project and gives them opportunity to comment.
If you have attempted to contact a property owner on two separate occasions and not found them at
home, you may simply write something to the effect "made two attempts, owner not home" and then
write their address. City staff will also send a written notice informing these property owners of the
time and place of the BZA meeting.
Note to surrounding property owners:
This is an application by your neighbor for a variance from the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of
any possible effect the granting of this variance could have on your property. You will also be
receiving a written notice informing you of the time and place of the variance meeting. By signing
this form, you are only verifying that you have been told about the project, not that you
necessarily agree or object to the project. If you wish, you may comment on the project.
Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other
statements regarding)he project.
Print Name ::r (~ L-(t(~~t?(ftt
ament fLit" [~
~~
-
Signature
~/~Cll{{ffi1k- '
~ Address 4~ &" ~tlrd ~ t-.
.
Print Name ':'k,'\ V,40 S
? '. + /
,iomment ~.ti. C~ ~ vffC?f ·
~gnature ~44',-(A- c..J0--'1/-(,~ '.
CJ
Print Name lMeLo__~ 'AJt L'(/l (%1/>
Comment
Address~ 7U4~71
0/1 ~ 0-/ /111153
Signature vl~ ,M-Eld(A.NV1 Address ?-\'-\0 Drrborrl Ave .
" Gol&i,V) \J C\lLt1\/j l.,tlJ Vfml,
Print Name r:pATI2 Ie If/- ~E1J p I iJe; TOM
Comment
Signature~~ f1~~i~
G
Address G:vliQ~~~.J~'L-\' I ~&
- -// ~
,:6 -;'t2~
Print Name Do~ bv",.z:.l '" h.lI\
emment " J<-
Signature
,
LQ ({Ylf'fVt, &J67.kjl~
(J
Address Jt iJ 9 ( Ord W4.4
./
&t> LJ~V\. ~ t t e 7/ /YJ,J 7? Sit 1/L
Print Name~lJ..../~
Ii
Comment OK
Signature
Comment
Signature
Int Name
Comment
Signature
~5~
I _/ u-~
U
Address~1)1d Q
Sb~~..
U' ~
d
Address
041065 18/29/24 SJOGREN, LOIS
ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERING CO.
5300 S. Hwy. No.1 01 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Phone (952) 474 7964 Fax (952) 4748267
SURVEY FOR:
LOIS SJOGREN
SURVEYED: September, 2004
DRAFTED: September 5, 2004
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 11, Block 4, Westurban, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
SCOPE OF WORK:
1. Showing the length and direction of boundary lines of the above legal description. The
scope of our services does not include determining what you own, which is a legal matter.
Please check the legal description with your records or consult with competent legal counsel,
if necessary, to make sure that it is correct, and that any matters of record, such as easements, that
you wish shown on the survey, have been shown. ...::
2. Showing the location of existing improvements we deemed important. 1::
3. Setting new monuments or verifying old monuments to mark the comers of the property. Q
~
~I
.. I
~ }Q e::-,
.... ..... J e::-,
..... 'I::t- c:5
::: ~ e::-,
~ e::-,.......
;.. e::-, I
~ <: I
STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS:
" . " Denotes 1/2" ID pipe with plastic plug bearing State License Number 9235, set, unless
otherwise noted.
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 0 10 20 40
~II I
( IN FEET )
~
...
25
~
~
~
..:::
~
~
c
.-
Comer of fence lI)
is 0.5 South of ~ c:;
the lot line ~
5 88"55'52" E
--12506--
~
r 3' Chain Link Fence
X X
i
"l-
ll)
....
~
....:
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, report or survey was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a licensed Professional Engineer and
Professional Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
~*
~lm~~ 11 .rt~Jln
am s it Parker P.E. & P.S. No. 9235
30.9
30.8
J-
I /' l.-
f,- \.J
~
'"
\.
'-
Comer of fence /'
is 0.4 South of
the lot line
--12500-- )
N 88"55'50. W .
6' Wood Fence
1/1/
"
End of fence /"---"
is 0.4 South of
the lot line
.
\
C)
....:
I~
I ::
~~
c:5~
e::-,~
.......e::-,
Ie::-,
IV)
.
I "
" Found pinch top
--
.
Drw. No. 0410651