The URL can be used to link to this page

01-22-02 BZA Agenda . Board of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Tuesday, January 22, 2002 7pm 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Conference Room I. Approval of Minutes - December 11, 2001 II. The Petitions are: 2004 Hillsboro Avenue North (Map 19) (01-12-58) Roy Smith. Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback . 2.5 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.5 feet for the existing home and proposed garage addition at its closest point to the front yard property line along Hillsboro Avenue North. Purpose: To bring the existing home into conformance with front yard setback requirements and to allow for the construction of a garage addition to the existing home. . Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C) (1) Side Yard Setbacks . . 6.5 feet off the required 13.5 feet to a distance of 7 feet for the proposed garage addition at its closest point to the north side yard property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition to the existing home. 426 Westwood Drive North (Map 8) (02-1-1) Behzad and Caroline Mazloom. Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C) (1) Side Yard Setbacks . 3.45 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 11.55 feet for the existing home at its closest point to the north side yard property line. Purpose: To bring the existing home into conformance with building setback requirements. 4501 Merribee Drive (Map 5) (02-1-2) Jacqueline Dav, Applicant . Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback . 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the proposed porch addition at its closest point to the front yard property line along Lee Avenue. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a porch addition to the existing home. 8641 Winsdale Street North (Map 20) (02-1-3) Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback . 13.4 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 21.6 feet for the existing home at its closest point to the front yard property line along Winsdale Street North. . 2.2 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.8 feet for the proposed room addition at its closest point to the front yard property line along Boone Avenue. . Purpose: To bring the existing home into conformance with front yard setback requirements and to allow for the construction of a room addition to the existing home. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C) (1) Side Yard Setbacks . 4.3 feet off the required 10.4 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet for the existing home at its closest point to the south side yard property line. Purpose: To bring the existing home into conformance with side yard building setback requirements. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 12 (A) Accessory Buildings . 9.7 feet off the required 10 feet to a distance of .3 feet for the existing shed at its closest point to the existing home. . To allow the existing shed to be located in the side yard ofthe existing home. . Purpose: To bring the existing shed into conformance with accessory building requirements. 2 . 1324 Tyrol Trail South (Map 10) (02-1-4) Aaron Lerner, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C) (1) Side Yard Setbacks . .7 feet off the required 11.7 feet to a distance of 11 feet for the proposed room addition at its closest point to the west side yard property line. . 4.9 feet off the required 12.3 feet to a distance of 7.4 feet for the proposed garage addition at its closest point to the east side yard property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a room and garage addition to the existing home. 6920 Wayzata Boulevard (Map 18) (02-1-5) The Restaurant Companv, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6 (C) (4) Yard Requirements . To reduce the parking lot setback requirements for the proposed restaurant for the east side from 35 feet to 6 feet, on the south side from 35 feet to 0 feet, and on the north and west sides from 10 feet to 0 feet. . Purpose: To allow for the construction of new parking spaces for the site. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 7 (F) Loading and Parking Requirements . To reduce the parking requirements for this land use from the 108 required parking spaces to 96 parking spaces. Purpose: To allow for the construction of new parking spaces for the site. III. Other Business IV. Adjournment . 3 ~ ' Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals . December 11, 2001 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, December 11, 2001, in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley,.Minnesota. Chair McCracken-Hunt called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Those present were members Lang, McCracken-Hunt, Sell, Smith Commission Representative Pentel. Also present were Staff Li . Recording Secretary Lisa Wittman. Absent were members C I. Approval of Minutes - November 27, 2001 Planning Olson and er. MOVED by Smith, seconded by Sell and motion carried November 27,2001 minutes as submitted. II. The Petitions are: . Request: n 1'~21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback equired 35 feet to a distance of 32.5 feet for the ~;, 0 nd proposed garage addition at its closest point font yard property line along Hillsboro Avenue North. existing home into conformance with front yard k requirements and to allow for the construction of a garage n to the existing home. Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C) (1) Side Yard Setbacks · 6.5 feet off the required 13.5 feet to a distance of 7 feet for the proposed garage addition at its closest point to the north side yard property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a garage addition to the existing home. . Olson stated that the applicant is proposing to build a garage addition, which requires variances from the front yard setback and side yard setback requirements. He stated that during the planning process it was discovered that the existing home also does not meet setback requirements. McCracken-Hunt clarified that the issue is how many garage stalls are appropriate. Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2001 Page 2 Sell stated that he noticed a survey was done in 1984 and asked what prompted that. Olson stated he wasn't sure what prompted the survey, but the files didn't show any variance requests in 1984. . The applicant was not present. MOVED by Smith, seconded by Sell and motion carried unanimously to move this variance request to the last item on the agenda to allow time for t icant to arrive, and if he didn't arrive, the request would be tabled until the nex oning Appeals meeting. Req uest: ) Front Yard Setback 5411 Circle Down (Map 9) (01-12-59) Carlson Brown Investments A Iicant . 21 feet off the require existing parking I line along Circ . 18 feet off th existing p line alo o a distance of 14 feet for the point to the front yard property feet to a distance of 17 feet for the its closest point to the front yard property ssroad. . Purpose: struction of a parking lot for the site. Request: Section 11.45, Subd. 5 (B) Rear and Side Yard et off the required 10 feet to a distance of 4 feet for the roposed parking lot at its closest point to the south side yard property line. The property to the south is zoned Commercial. ''l; To allow for the construction of a parking lot for the site. Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 3 Loading and Parking Requirements . To reduce the parking requirements for this land use from the 61 required parking spaces to 57 parking spaces. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a parking lot for the site. . 2 . . . Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2001 Page 3 Request: Waiver from Section 11.45, Subd. 3 (A) Loading and Parking Requirements · To reduce the size of the parking spaces from the required 9 feet in width and 20 feet in depth to 9 feet in width and 18 feet in depth. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a parking lot Olson stated that the applicant is also going through the pro property from Institutional to Business and Professional 0 variances are based on the Business and .Professional requirements. He stated that the existing building meet however, the parking lot would require variances. g the the requested District setback ack requirements, Smith asked if it was appropriate for the Boar variance requests prior to the rezoning heari City Attorney and he said it was okay as upon the City Council's approval of th Appeals to consider the tated that he spoke with the riance approval is contingent Pentel stated that in the applican ' asked if they were included in t stated that the six spaces ar ey show six proof of parking spaces and ac hat the applicant is proposing. Olson in the 57. Lang asked what the par District. Olson stated gross floor area and t be 61. uirements are in the Business and Professional Zoning rking space is required for every 250 square feet of . n that the required number of parking spaces would Douglas Bro possibility 8 stated that th 1f7o. neighbo yzata Boulevard, Applicant, stated that he is excited about the location and he feels it would be a good use for the building. He had a neighborhood meeting and the feedback from the sitive. Sell asked the applicant if they will occupy the whole building, or if they would be subleasing some of the space. Brown stated they would occupy approximately 11,000 square feet and look for tenants for the rest of the space. Smith asked the applicant what sort of tenants they would look for. Brown stated they would look for a professional tenant with the same working hours. Smith asked the applicant how large their firm was. Brown stated they have 30 employees. 3 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2001 Page 4 McCracken-Hunt asked the applicant what their plan was if there isn't enough parking. Brown stated that there is parking across the street at the Metropolitan and the Colonnade Building where they could possibly rent space. . Pentel stated that she thought it was a good use for the site, but that she was concerned about the size of the parking stalls and about the size of lanes. Olson stated that the Public Works Department has seen the plans and they didn't have any issues with the parking spaces. Lang stated he was concerned about could easily get more employees stated that the building is made offices and that they normall ack space to de of the site. se there isa d they could always Pentel asked about snow removal and stated that there is n store snow. Olson stated that they could possible store it Brown stated that they didn't foresee snow removal as significant amount of space on the east side of the site. have the snow hauled away. Pentel asked how many parking spaces the a Brown stated that he would guess about 100, 20,000 square foot building. as a their current location. ey are leasing space in a of parking stalls and stated that they t~~ausing the parking lot to get full. Brown s '~t1iey could n't move any of the existing .15 e a lot of visitors. . McCracken-Hunt asked practiced insurance Brown stated they Smith stated that4 t would be placed on but not enou iii t i was a good use for the land and liked the idea that it rolls. He stated that the variance requests are significant roval. conded by Sell and motion carried unanimously to approve the . 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the existing parking lot at its closest point to the front yard property line along Circle Down. . 18 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 17 feet for the existing parking lot at its closest point to the front yard property line along Turners Crossroad. . 6 feet off the required 10 feet to a distance of 4 feet for the proposed parking lot at its closest point to the south side yard property line. . To reduce the parking requirements for this land use from the 61 required parking spaces to 57 parking spaces. . . To reduce the size of the parking spaces from the required 9 feet in width and 20 feet in depth to 9 feet in width and 18 feet in depth. 4 . Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2001 Page 5 -. 3065 Glenden Terrace (Map 4) (01~12-60) Terry McDonald, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback · 2.7 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.3 feet for the existing home at its closest point to the front yard property line along Glenden Terrace. Purpose: To bring the existing home into conform setback requirements. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, . 1.5 feet off the require :~1fd'~ from the shed to a distance of 8.5 feet from the exist ho to the proposed shed. · 7.2 feet off the re ~ to a distance of 27.8 feet for the proposed she ard property line along Triton Drive. . The shed is n mpletely behind the existing home. . Purpose: ion of a shed on the property. Olson stated that the appli shed. He stated that the needed variances an ubm the existing home als r sing to replace an existing non-conforming t stopped work on the shed when he found out he a survey for the property where it was discovered that eet setback requirements. Terry McDonald, , stated that the shed was on the property when he purchased it. at the shed collapsed so he just started rebuilding it without realizing h a permit. He stated that that he's spoken with the neighbors and that th hav cems. He discussed the topography of the lot and the various trees 0' 's pr rty that would shield the shed from view and stated that where the shed is n . ally the best place for it. He stated that he would be using the same siding and that he matched the shed door to the garage door. Sell asked the applicant how long he has lived there. McDonald stated he's lived there since 1979. . Smith asked if the shed was on a slab. McDonald stated that the new shed is on a slab a little bigger than the old slab. Smith asked if he expanded the slab to the front or to the rear. McDonald stated he expanded it to the rear and explained that if he had to move the shed back it would cut his yard in half and it would also be difficult because there is a hill at the back of the property. 5 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals December 11, 2001 Page 6 i . Sell stated he didn't see this as a problem because the shed has been there for more than 20 years and the neighbors have been notified. McCracken-Hunt clarified that the hardships are that the property is a corner lot, and that the topography limits the options of places to put the shed. MOVED by Sell, seconded by Pentel and motion carried unanimously to approve the request for 2.7 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.3 f he existing home at its closest point to the front yard property line along GI ace, 1.5 feet off the required 10 feet from the shed to a distance of 8.5 fe r sting home to the proposed shed, 7.2 feet off the required 35 feet to a di feet for the proposed shed to the front yard property line along Trit :he shed is not located completely behind the existing home. Due to the fact that the applicant from the first a Avenue) did not arrive, the following motion w MOVED by Smith, seconded by Sell and request made by Roy Smith, 2004 Hill Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. III. Other Business A. IV. 6 oy Smith, 2004 Hillsboro rr unanimously to table the North until the January 22, 2002 . . . 200411illsboro Avenue North 01-12-58 . Roy Smith . . . . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095 I 763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 2004 Hillsboro Avenue North (Map 19) (01-12-58) Roy Smith, Applicant Date: December 5,2001 Roy Smith, with property located at 2004 Hillsboro Avenue North, is requesting variances from the Residential zoning code (Section 11.21). The applicant has approached the City to build a garage addition. This addition requires variances from building setback requirements. During the construction planning process, a survey was submitted for the property and it was discovered that the existing home also does not meet setback requirements. Below are the requested variances: · The first requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the existing home and proposed attached garage is for 2.5 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.5 feet at its closest point to the front property line along HiIIsboro Avenue North. · The second requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width between 70 and 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15% of the lot width. The requested variance is for 6.5 feet off the required 13.5 feet to a distance of 7 feet at it closest point to the north side yard property line for the proposed attached garage. The City's file on this property does not contain the original building permit for the home, but Hennepin County's property record system states that the home was constructed in 1950. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . Subject Property: 2004 HilIsboro Ave N Roy Smith, Applicant (:.5" ."n. 5'1." OUTLOT ":'l! .~l >= 3= :I: ~ ., ~ ~ .~ ... ; \. ~..; f"oJ r:": . , , ...-.. :...:... :':", . (/) . ::> '" ... ::> o ::E ~ ... ;:; ~) >- .I~ C3 5 In.It . . . (Revised 1/~9) Petition Number 0/- /2 -::) B Date Received I i 1/1/ ;)/ . Amount Received ~J .)0, OJ) ($50 residential - $150 other) PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: ./ ~ <J D i.f ~i;~n-- .~ ~--:lJ 2. BZA Petition Date r 1- ./ 9'- :2. (:.>.(j- J .' 3. Petitioner:".-A ~ ~-~7!-/t/ . ( :i~~s~ Lj ~JZL'r ~-AJ 8 ~s~~~ cn~ ~~.. 5/1 \. . 7 ~ 5, - J:'lfC,. 3 j7C? Business Phone Home Phone J 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: 5. Legal Description of property involved in this petition (found on survey): ( 13 'i I ~f l IV 0 11 Q If S ';' #'2..0~ "'. 6. Type of property involved in this petition: Residential: i Single Family _ Double Dwelling _ .Multiple Dwelling Industrial Commercial Institutional Bus. & Prof. Office . Other . . . 7. Detailed descriptiQt1 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 issued. If) I. clO(Aio/e: Car '1 ((. r.(. '1 e.. ~ ".. 8. (Staff will complete this item) Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief statement of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. 10. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepared by a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. The distance from the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed. if in question. Also. the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven additional copies of the survey for use by the Board. 11. To the Applicant: To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount of $ representing the Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. -t <rl? TI) ~t/ <,(::~jl. . Signature of Applicant UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ACTION APPLICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. . The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent 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. NOTE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: This petition is application for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of any possible effect the granting of this waiver could have on your property. All property owners adjacent to the subject property will receive a notice of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other statements regarding the project) Print Name Comment r;;l(6 # /f'(lIL katJ"t.€; -I S1J41V{)S (;f<$J I . Signature ~~ ~~.:: Address OO/~ HI((SgolD AU€' Print Name . Comment . Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address SURVEY . . Ju.. .1(,/"" & A___I.. PllQP'II"IONAL LAND ....vrro.. _0 LAND DIIVI:LO~".HT CDfiIIIU..TAN1'a t8121 s.w.'..7 33117 WlKONIIN AVL NO. MINNEAPoLIs. MINN. SNZ7 FOR: ROY SMITH ;:)00 If HILLSBORO y AVENUE 11 NORTH zs,o Z~. 0 ------~--- .~- -1- - r.------ ~ ,.--- - 90.00 . _. ~ I' J)j ve I /1'011 b.t) h.O .... ~ t>" '1- ,,( -tv' w .. "' 'i- \ - "- \.,; I>"- l'\l (\l \ ~ ... o ,+ I ; Irol1 6.0 ,1,.0 DESCRIPTION, Lot 17 and that part of Lot 18 lying South ot the North 30.00 'feet there~f including the West halt of.the adjoining vacated alley, Block 2, LAKBVIEW HEIGH~S, City ot Golden Valley, Hennepin County, Minnesota. I ~ ~ ~ l\) \ , j -. ...- ,/ ...<.. - -} .../ (-...- - z-) I ' ~//../ I ..- ... - ,/ - ,... Or / '-- () .L, -, " , '<:f / .;. 9tJ,oo- -(-,v'cYeafet:/. .1;J//O/7 1".:: J hereby certify that .hi. survey wosprepored by me or under myaupervi.iOf and thOt I am a duly Registered Professional Surveyor under the laws of tht State of Minnesota. dz by Q~.r~ i/3:.~ DaIod 5/Z3/8'f. Ileg.I'ln./LZ107 :) 0 .(J {' et- . . . . . . www.ci.goUm"vll~ Y 11-28-01 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 2004 Hillsboro Avenue North Rov Smith, Applicant Roy Smith, with property located at 2004 Hillsboro Avenue North, has petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for variances from the Residential zoning district. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition onto the existing home. Also, as a result of this construction, it was discovered that the existing home does not meet current setback requirements. This construction project requires variances from the following sections of City Code. . Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the existing home and proposed attached garage is for 2.5 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.5 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Hillsboro Avenue North. . Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C}(1} Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width between 70 and 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15% of the lot width. The requested variance is for 6.5 feet off the required 13.5 feet to a distance of 7 feet at it closest point to the north side yard property line for the proposed attached garage. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, December 11, 2001, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. . 426 Westwood Drive North 02-1-1 . Behzadand Caroline Mazloom , . . . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 426 Westwood Drive North (Map 8) (02-1-1) Behzad and Caroline Mazloom, Applicants Date: January 16, 2002 Behzad and Caroline Mazloom, with property located at 426 Westwood Drive North, are requesting a variance from the Residential zoning code (Section 11.21). The applicants have approached the City to build a room and deck addition to the existing home. These additions conform to the building setback requirements. However, during the construction planning process, a survey was submitted for the property and it was discovered that the existing home does not meet setback requirements. City Staff has allowed the applicants to sign off on a "Hold Harmless" form in order to receive a building permit for the remodeling project. This was done only after the applicant had submitted the required survey and application materials. The Hold Harmless form is attached. . The requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width of over 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15 feet. The requested variance is for 3.45 foot off the required 15 feet to a distance of 11.55 feet at it closest point to the north side yard property line for the existing garage. The City's file on this property reveals that a permit was pulled in November of 1948 for the construction of the home. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . Subject Property: 426 Westwood Drive N Behzad and Caroline Mazloom, Applicants . - t"0.11 "5. .. "4~... tjQ..55 HIGHWAY) ~ :- - - - uCW- --i I I r- - -i1iJ4- ---, I I ~ ~; I I Z~$.7~ 11 S.. I.I'R~C I.. ~ ,I I'~" r" I I' ;;; kl I ~ : ~ ~ I i ~ 'SOutH I, f""\ I -..' , I ,. AI ~ ~ ". . . . '(Revised 1/99) Petition Number () J - I - I Date Received I-.;J../ 1'1 / of , Amount Received 5" o. 00 ($50 residential - $150 other) PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: 4'2..<0 w~\uiocd ~(. N. 2. BZA Petition Date ~o. C\ u a. r ~ .2..,2. ~ \ ~ 00 2- 3. Petitioner: ~z...C\..d C\.f\.d QcuolLl\.e..- ffiO\.zJoom Name J+.2..b We..~~LOecd ro r. N. 8D de.A. C\. m N SS 2.2. Address City/Sta e/Zip 65\ ~g4-tt--- 3,S~5 /63 ~311-110l Business Phone . Home Phone 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: 5. legal Description of property involved in this petition (found on survey): 6. Type of property involved in this petition: Residential: _ Single Family >S.... Double Dwelling _ Multiple Dwelling. Industrial . Other Commercial Institutional Bus. & Prof. Office . . 10. 7. Detailed d~scription 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 issued. k 'f i s~. <O~~ JOel:> -(\0 b .eLk LU<iL ~et.ho.C'b 8. (Staff will complete this item) Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief stateme~t of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepared by a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. The distance from the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed. if in question. Also, the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven additional copies of the survey for use by the Board. 11. To the Applicant: To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount of $ 5 0 representing the Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. s~nt r -:--.. . . ---:. . UNLESS CONSTRUCTioN OR THE. ACTION APPLICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. " The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent 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. . NOTE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: This petition is application for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of any possible effect the granting of this waiver could have on your property. All property owners adjacent to the subject property will receive a notice of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other statements regarding the project.) Print Name (V\) C AU G~ t<.~ fl--- Comment cr k:.. ~ ks I " Signature ~~ Address ,Y ~7 Ai W4IT)Nh.-e () ~J" . Print Name LOft 5; U D IT . Comment Ok uhf/1) bl~ .f Signature t1J~~'j bid 1)- . Addresslf3b ~1ltstz(1tJ(d JA. h-i') , Print Name J!r:i? 877aJ<OJ<e'i! Comment . Signature Address f/&.: .' dJ?/tT/cs'/;::;;:' /'?C. ~ Print Name l Comment J ,:' /:;/? (<.J ./' I ) I ( .', r~' ., ... t,./ 4" ", ....---/ I' .{" Y 1 r"\ !!-' -~. _ . Signature \'I';Z;'-;-~ :.::;l, l i \.../ {-f- , '/;1,/1. ,.I )/2,A.<:--r...4":).I::'.:-'Ji Address /3/':7 ~:/Lr.!r;';-~')5 "(";'-: /.~. l1 '/ ;11 i 1 }~ ". I ,~r . Print Name ~ (\A f e..wS . Comment oul nls -rc1l.u{'\ ~(lx L0LI'\\Q-r Signature Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment Signature . Print Name Comment Signature Print Name Comment: Signature Print Name Comment Signature . Address 4-1 b Wi?~~woC()DJ . N' . Address Address Address Address Address .J-., l . . . \1-.2..h W E. ~rU)o OD "DR . NTH. Street Address "HOLD HARMLESS' I, ~Q.-\306. rY\Q~\OOffJ am requestipg the City of Golden Valley to allow me to procee with a(n) ac\d~b a f\ onto my house. I understand that my existing structure is nonconforming and that I will proceed to the next Board of Zoning Appeals meeting to request a variance(s) for this nonconformity. At this time I submit this "Hold Harmless" letter which would allow me to proceed with my construction plans. I understand that if the variance is not granted I will discontinue what I am doing and put the land back to its original state with no fault to the City of Golden Valley. dJ ~ cJ~ City of Golden Valley Staff Signature \'J...\ \0\0\ Date . Establl8hed In 1962 LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED tiNDER THE LAWS OF STATZ OF MINNESOTA 7801 73rd Annue North 783-580-3093 Faz No. 783-580-3622 MlnneapoUa,MlnnOllota 5542ll iPurU,.y nrs Qt,.rtifiralr INVOICE NO 61663 F.B.NO 915 - 42 SCALE: 1" - 30' o Denotes Iron Monument o Denotes Wood Hub Set for e.covoUon only MR & MRS MAZLOOM Property located in Section 19, Township 29, Range 24, f1ennepin County, Hlnnesota *-.. ~~"'" ~ J'~ 4-Q 00 () ~~ ~ l' LOT 8. BLOCK ~ GLENDALE The only. easements shown ore- from plots of _ record or - inrormotion provided by client. We hereby certify thot this is 0 true and correct representation of o survey of the boundaries of the above described land and the location of aU buildings and' visible encroachments. if any. from or on said land. )1) (.i s~~V(h\ ,I /' : ~ Cui:,!,.. Surveyed by us this--1!!!:L-doy of December 2001. Charlloto F. IIrm....."'" Mim. Reg. No.7175J or Gregory R. Prosch, Mim Reg No. 21992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . www.ci.gOMm_vlt~ Y 1-3-02 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 426 Westwood Drive North Behzad and Caroline Mazloom. Applicants Behzad and Caroline Mazloom, with property located at 426 Westwood Drive North, have petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance from the Residential zoning district. The applicants are . proposing to construct an addition onto the existing home. This addition meets all applicable building setback requirements. However, as a result of this construction, it was discovered that the existing attached garage does not meet current setback requirements. This construction project requires a variance from the following section of City Code. . Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width of over 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15 feet. The requested variance is for 3.45 foot off the required 15 feet to a distance of 11.55 feet at it closest point to the north side yard property line for the existing garage. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, January 22,2002, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. . 4501 Merribee Drive 02-1-2 . Jacqueline Day . . . . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 4501 Merribee Drive (Map 5) (02-1-2) Jacqueline Day, Applicant Date: January 16, 2002 Jacqueline Day, with property located at 4501 Merribee Drive, is requesting a variance from the Residential zoning code (Section 11.21). The applicant has approached the City to build a porch addition to the existing home. This addition requires a variance from the following building setback requirement · The requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the porch addition is for 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Lee Avenue. Previously, this property received a variance. In June of 1997, variances were approved for this property for the existing home and for a two-level deck addition on the south side of the home. The minutes from that meeting are attached for your review. At that time, the applicant received variances for the existing home to be located 14 feet to the front yard property line along Lee Avenue and to be located 14 feet from the west side property line. Also, a variance was approved for the deck addition to be located 14 feet to the front yard property line along Lee Avenue. According to the survey submitted by the applicant, a fence exists in the City's right of way. In speaking with the City Engineer, Jeff Oliver, staff would like to request that the applicant receive a right of way permit for this fence. This permit would make the fence the responsibility of the applicant. Therefore, the variance is contingent on the following condition: 1. The applicant apply for and receive a right of way permit prior to applying for a building permit for the new porch. The City's file on this property reveals that a permit was pulled in July of 1952 for the construction of the home. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . Subject Property: 4501 Merribee Drive Jacqueline Day, A plicant '.'.1$ I ., . - 11.:- 4700 :. ! .....!J 6.' '!'lD "'0 1= 7.. ;1" " :-. ~ ~ I -~~ '" " . . ., . ~~ !:! .... :: II 1 , ~ . ~ ;;; , ~ . Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals June 24, 1997 Page 5 . To allow for the construction of a conforming three-season porch on the east side of the house. entedVan Thuy Tran who WaS out of town. . Staff Liais rimes plained that Ms. Tran approached thelnspectiol1,. partment in mid-June reqtl~~Jing a rmit to construct a conforming three-season; ch onto the east side of her housi3~,~}he st ge area under the three-season porch ' I be accessed from inside the garage ar~ia. She ad told staff that she had lined uR . meone to do excavating and the company cotll~. only p arm the work in June or she uld have to wait until fall. Staff reviewed the City's{ile and nd that the previous 0 r attached a porch onto the southeast side of the hous~,flnd di ot acquire a pern" do so. Also, when the first survey was done on this lot;:itmay ha been deter . ed that there was no rear yard, making the southern property lin.~a side tback. e only other variance needed for this lot is at the northwest corner for On~foot. n asked if there was anything staff could do to provide assistance so the exca,(c:i~or c9 dig the hole for placement of footings. The City Inspections and Planning Departm~n ," agre to allow Ms. Tran to proceed only after she presented staff with a "hold harml!t'\;;Ietter wH notes that she was allowed to do cement work with the understandin . at ifth~ Board cided not to grant the variance requests, thatshe would need to ove the'fq~ndation ark. Staff accepted this hold harmless letter under the circ ance that the'r~c:lr yard sack was caused by an addition put on by a previ9~ wner without a permit ,and tha e proposed three-season porch would be confor~fi,,;'~: on all sides. Grimes concluded by ting that the side yard could have been in c'" iance at the time the house was built. MOVED by Sw rg, seconded by Sell, and passed unariit]ously, to nt the waiver of Section 11.2 bd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback -- 1.0 foot off th~required eet to a distance at feet for the existing house on Orkla Drive; and the,waiverof S . tion 11.21, SUbd.7" ear Yard Setback --12.99 feet off the required 27.67f~~t to a dist e of ,t for the house at the southeast corner to allow for the co~truction of a ing three-season porch on the east side of the house. (3) 4501 Merribee Drive (Map 5) (97-6-25) Jacqueline Day Bemis Request: Waivers of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback -- 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the existing house, at its closest pointto Lee Avenue; and . --21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the proposed deck, at its closest point to Lee Avenue; and Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals June 24, 1997 Page 6 ~. Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setback - one (1) foot off the required 15 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the existing house on the west side. Purpose: To make the existing house legally nonconforming and to allow for the construction of a two-level deck onto the southeast side of the house. Jacqueline Day Bemis was in attendance. Grimes explained that a building permit for the construction of this house was pulled in July of 1952. At that time the house exceeded the required setbacks on the east and west side by one (1) foot. In 1965, the Crowl's, owners of the property at that time, dedicated a certain amount of land to the City in order to continue Lee Avenue as a through street. The dedication made the east side of the lot nonconforming because a street now abuts this side of the property. It is unlikely that Lee Avenue will be widened. Ms. Day Bemis took down an existing deck and is rebuilding in the same space. She was surprised that a variance was needed. . Grimes noted that the appli'cant's chain link fence lies mostly in the right-of-way along Lee Avenue. City Planning and Engineering staff are requesting that the BZA condition the approval of the variance for the deck as follows: at the time the City deems it necessary to remove the fence from City right-of-way the applicant will do so, at applicant cost, or if the fence needs repair or has run its useful life, the fence will be moved or rebuilton the applicant's property. Shaffer asked the proponent if she understands the fence issue and she asked if she wanted to build a prettier fence in the same location would it be approved? Grimes stated that the City could be asked to vacate a portion of the right-of-way. The street is wide and the hill precludes putting a fence on the owner's lot. MOVED by Polachek, seconded by Groger, and motion passed unanimously to approve the waivers of Section 11.21 J Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback -- 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the existing house, at its closest point to Lee Avenue: and __ 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the proposed deck, at its closest point to Lee Avenue; and waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7 (C)(1) Side Yard Setback -_ one (1) foot off the required 15 feet to a distance of 14 feet for the existing house on the west side to make the existing house legally nonconforming and to allow for the construction of a two-level deck onto the southeast side of the house. (4) od Drive North (Map 9) (97-6-26) . . . . . . . www.d.goUm"vll~ Y 1-2-02 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 4501 Merribee Drive JacQueline Day, Applicant Jacqueline Day, with property located at 4501 Merribee Drive, has petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for a variance from the Residential zoning district. The applicant is proposing to enclose a porch on the existing home. This construction project requires a variance from building setback requirements: . Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the porch addition is for 21 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 14 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Lee Avenue. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, January 22,2002, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. r . . . ]ACQl1ELINE DAY .9leah~or/!7IroA;er ~55oce:a~e December 20, 2001 To: City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Re: Petition for Sunroom Addition at 4501 Merribee Drive Attached please find a current survey and sketches of preliminary plans for enclosing a large portion of our existing upper deck. Since purchasing our home in 1991 we have taken great pride in maintaining and improving it. All of our neighbors have enjoyed our improvements, and we have inspired many a project in our neighborhood. I am also Golden Valley's top selling realtor and am a strong advocate for our city. In 1997 we received approval from the City of Golden Valley to add a large bi-Ievel deck. We now wish to enclose most of the upper level, and have it open to our kitchen. Our home is missing a dining room, and we plan to use the addition for this purpose. Because of a berm and trees to the east, and a deep woods that surrounds the rear yard, the location of the room is quite tucked away and protected. There will be little or no impact on any of our neighbors. We will be using a top construction company with first class materials. The project will not only blend with the original structure but enhance it. The same timberline roofing material, matching stucco exterior, and walls of Marvin tempered glass windows and doors will be used. Please feel free to visit the site at any time to gain a personal perspective. I look forward to answering any further questions you may have. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, l\au~~' eJr ~ueline Day ~ CJf/ na~ a diffe rence a !ZJ ay ~aA;e5. 1400 Highway 100 South. Minneapolis, MN 55416 . 763/522/9000. Fax 763/522/9021 e-mail: jacquelineday@edinarealty.com. web site: www.jacquelineday.com .: (Revised 1/99) . . . 6. Petition Number 0 '). - J - ~ Date Received J;f ~I /0/ ".. . ...: ~ ii,'. Amount Received 5D. ()/) . ($50 resideritial-$150 other) PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: II ~5c)1 ff.cYYi'/u. l)Y'IVC., Co#-. tIa/1-;. S-f~:l;L 2. BZA Petition Date 3. Pelnioner: .... J (2C!.~~<- . D au- Na~s-o/ /'-1~w~'/u. VVnif.., c;,/e(;.. v....~ ~s'~ Address . 'City/St.a~lZip 7~3"s~;,. '()dO 7"3-r;u. - 96:ttp Business Phone Home Phone 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: 5. legal Description of property involved in this petition <fyund on s~r;t:J: /.,r s: 7J1od:. ~ ~YYi6t!t. I/; .J . Type of property involved in this petition: Re~idential: V Single Family _ Double Dwelling _ Multiple Dwelling Industrial Commercial Institutional Bus. & Prof. Office Other " . 10. . '\ 7. 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 issued. ~Jce;:r.#C. ft1~C!L adot.t4-. tUt .A1t'~f,:';' ~I'~. dc.c.i. R. oo~ (~ /~ ~ 1"1 w~l'f . ~ ~ ~ ,..~..A J~(! ~ 1"" i tic f.4!...c... a.. C! d rL ~..,it..'1' Q~Y . (Staff will complete this item) . 8. Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). > Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief statement of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. . " ,.. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepatedby a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. The distance from the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed. if in question. Also. the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven Eidditional copies of the survey for use by the Board. 11. To the Applicant: To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this appli~ion are true and correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount of $ S representing the Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. Si . UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ACTION AP . ICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. " . . . The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent property owners. This includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly acros~>the street.. If on a comer, this means across both streets. ';. .; ",' .', ..,. . - l' .' _:.:. .....,. .", ... . . ...." ",- .. ' ;, -., NOTE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS:\.Jhis petition is application. for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please ba awan:'!' of :ahypossibie effect the granting of this waiver could have on your,property. All property owners adjacent to the subject property will receive a notice of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. ...~";'.;." ~r.... . ~-- "'::- ~ ~. (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other statements regarding the project) Print Name Wt\L"T'Ef2.. .. L ~ A F"~Srr\ \I""\~ CommentJ.Tl+1u\r!.l\+i'S l..dbuc...D '""BCA~~ ~'V7o~L Signature t:IJk -IIJq)~~ Address44<<L4fEFb~ rR. Print Name-1Y\o n i C(;l.. J~D n ~ Comment -=:1'nt ~i -hhh uJou.aJ.k () A\ . - Signature $i:r::y ~ GL~5P~LJ.o ~ ~~rb~, A<;Idress c;/ 50l) I~~ Av. }J. Print Name ~~ M~F. ~ Comment -.r~ <7wu.... lk ~ ~ ~ ~~ Signature ~ A,.., ~ ~~ ::::::e ~-!!Jf:~~ ~ _ ... _" _:# ~ ~~"4~ GA.. Address <<eo ~_ bl. Signature ~ 0 ~l.. ~~<> Address ~//~4."4~"'~_ U . " . Print Name Frt211. ~hlJft..___( Comment J'.....1t Ev"... df!C~ 'pt!-6lfi...: 1. ...u.T I ~ - d~/;" r~ rt.,...-A /s t:J. It" -t- /it r~~ A-t./ "IfJI--I()4d / ~. Signature au-f or ~<=VA.. Address U.t... .JJ: Print Name Comment Signature Address Print Name Comment Signature Address . \ . ;. . . Print Name Comment . Signature Address Print Name Comment: Signature Address Print Name Comment '. .. ,,".. .,. 'tr Signature . Address ,. CERTIF.:cCA.TE OF FOR J:4CQUE oAyBEMIS ~ -~501 Merribee Drive " " SURVl;!:Y lIJe~R.llJee. DRIVE ~ FCV;-6 C....;... Legal Description: .ot 5, Block 1, MERRIBEE HILLS. - Jo3.fJO G'4sr- ...- \~ j";t- ,. "~) ;,,\;: ILl "- N". "- 45''// , ,N'&' 11\' sry. ~ _ l\I 'It. tVt.I<'-pu/ 1Jp. It I I '~ I /4 ,:------ 1'1 lv ~ ~ ~ .0..., ~ ~ ~ ~ ...... ;:tl "I I I'. '" (J 'oJ Scale: 1" = 20' . o Denotes iron ~onument Bearings ar~ aS$umed ' I I I I ~I ~I I I I I .. LPT~ 4-.e/l4=/3,9~~.~3St<~tf Z8 . .' ;.;.;! . ~ ,- ~ . F If I I (;. /"i.A I. G' In. , ~, I !If' 16 , --,it-- ,.. r ,. ze #.0. 4-50 / t>/V.c ST~PI.t' FAl4AI.c W,4 t.;.(-G)~ r #04$1{; ... 1M ~ ~ W/lJL'R ~ .~" fJ.4TIt:' e"/'tIt:./UILi IJL,~ R4/iQ./lt/iv' /U4Lt../ Ct>~t:".Q6r-= WAU- -IDi.DO 5BB~65'z.Snw- - 4< ~ ./ ,... : 10 ...... - 111<; - 70 "- \ 81 I ~ "- ~ ~ ~ ~ fl1 I ~" ~" ~ " ~~!\ l ~ I r- ~ {'\\ 1\ ~ ~ 0. (' .... I::::... c::::. \n ~ s:::: ~ lI. I / r -- .hereby,certifY that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of e boundaries of the above described land and of the location of all buildings any, thereon, and all/visible encroachments, if any, from or on said land. As surveyed by me this 2nd day of June, 1997. LLPD/JL~ :;/U/fl. Ikf. !/~-R71- . ,j:Jtt~... ~r Minnesota Reg. No. 13349 .' ..! - '" ____ - 38-..' -t-.-. ... r'--" .--.: .' --~J+'-'!.- ;... . . . t j"--. ... .__~. I ' , --'----T-r-~ ! i --. ...._-_.~- 4 .- ~~ ~ . t ~. ~ i _.~ - .:...- ! ' - -_. .--. ~_.-.J.._.- '/ -r---I..... ~ I J I +-t--;.. -=- ...... .- - t..";" ..... . / -~"'./. .~~.~......:.//.,...;'~.~ ....//;)~ _.~:/ j'~;;~:' r" / . ,../. " ..'>:' '. . ",.' " ,. . /' . ' / '/.' " // .// /' ..,/ /';/ ,: ///. .'. ,,: /'" ... / ,'./ / / ,/ /,/." /. /. / /;. " -/::../.- / /. . ;/ /"'. 'W:'% ,">i.<~; . /;;>:":. <~; / /.' ' ./~~<::.:.. . '/.' //.... /.,' ,.'.:'. ..".~:...r'./~..,'~..~..::'./.;.~:.~;."./,..~'" /_'/;:<:.~.;<;1:", ~ . . -.' ,/. / . /, //~. J ,_ /" ..' '.'../.I/~/ _,.' ~,/:/" / /'r' . '-...,. ,., ./ ."-' /. ',' . ' / .., /,"- --... .. . , ./ " . .. ., r' .' . .. /", ,". /~.,/ ~'/~ :;.'//' -< ~..,.1//~'>: /.' /' ." , ' /' . J/ /' /' . / /'. " /' /, / " ," .' ." .// /' .J' '. /', /.' ,/ " ' . / ,I" t . I' . " .;< ,/\r/> --:.' /,//.>" .' ','. --... ."-,' - I . ,. // /,"):c. r',' .// >,,:,,:,/,;,[ -" ..', " . 1'-// / """1"'" .,~' /, J /.. ,/' ',,I" ,...../..' // ' / /"~ ... //.' - / /- / ,/ ,/' ".~~'~/' // .'.' /. ./ /./. . " ./.' " /'. / ,/ " " ,////..' . . ~'-' :', ;// ..,:,- .~/ >:<~, ",/). ~. .' " "ZA / j- /".,., "_f" . ,.' / . . .. //' . r"" ' / .'. 0."//...~,'. ,/,./..', . . r" " .f...'. / ,/' ,'- /" , ~ / ..' / . "~J'" . . . , . .' ,/. " / . I ,/., " -' . J ./ /.... .///<<,~/." f. ,~'/, // . ..f"- )~/ />..... //. ',/ '///r-', // ./ //./>/ ,/;// . > /,/,:/../ ,T...."'.. ," / ;//;;:,;/)- y-?>;?;.:' /'. ;>1../)'/.,.....- / " - /- . J -" -f".... "'_~~/. ,""'- ;./~. /.~> :',,/:(: - :-' ,0: I /' " /. ,., .' /.., " / .' . i j"./ ..' .'> ;,' .' / " .' ," '. - // "...' .f/" ;".,,//, /',' "./ /~y. . /.- . h ,,<...'/' .. /' /", ./o"/ /,/ /".. // _-J / ).. ,./j-' ,.....- /" / .,A' .,/ ./ ' " ,'/' . ~ . .. ..f o',/ _. -' ,If , .;'/'<>' <<:/,,>/' '/' ~._, / /.., ,/... I..,;' /~/_' . . 2:~~~a~~{1/::'.i/;:;' f;' ./ , , ,. / ,/.// ..../ .. ,~,,/.'..../ . -,.1' I . f-~ / --r .J \It. { '---'-r ~~--~ . ',j ...._....-r-'-..-j--~..~~; .'" .~. ...,-.---i----.,.. , . r ! r--.-.-t- .t.--. ~_.- I ,( ...... .1" " f -",..'-", "Y//'''' , ,/ , . .' '..' '-7 " ,,~-,.. .,.f , " ..t' ' r' /..('- r ' . .. J r ~ . _':/ r ~tI ~ t'''' ," ! ~ I '.-' '.,' //' / "J," --:..,' ,-' ~. - I>""/~ '/ .>.... ">^, {j'~ .., . ), _ ,,' ro' :~ 1"", ~ .J -4 '.r . . , ,.','. ..., f ",' ..!... , . J! ,. ,..' , ....-----~-- ---- ,. .. . . t -tAr jl p :+- - ,... ..' jI rt I' . 'f 0,"2\ ~ {~ Ii ~ !i i 't.,! " . ' + ! 1 It : I .. It. . . ~"'''') ,,~~ .,~~ ~~ . )~!! ~ ..... "" . li I \ \ ) f 1 f t .. ~ tt _.. tt.~ .. . . . I I I I I I I . ...: .. ,..., OJ. OJ t...,. '. ":"' t I- n . 8641 Winsdale Street North 02-1-3 . Kevin and Wendy McKenzie . . . . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 8641 Winsdale Street North (Map 20) (02-1-3) Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, Applicants Date: January 16, 2002 Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, with property located at 8641 Winsdale Street North, are requesting variances from the Residential zoning code (Section 11.21). The applicants have approached the City to build a room addition onto the west side of the existing home. This proposed room addition requires a variance from building setback requirements. Also, during the construction planning process a survey was submitted for the property and it was discovered that the existing home and shed do not meet setback requirements. The following are the variances requested: · The first requested variance is from Section 11.21 , Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the addition is for 2.2 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.8 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Boone Avenue and for 13.4 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 21.6 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Winsdale Street North for the existing home. · The second requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width of 70 feet or less, the south side yard setback shall be 20% of the lot width. The requested variance is for 4.3 feet off the required 10.4 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet at it closest point to the south side yard property line for the existing home. · The third requested variance is from Section 11.21, Subd. 12 (A) Accessory Buildings. City Code states that any sheds be located at least 10 feet from the home and be located completely to the rear of the home. The property owner is requesting a variance for the shed to be located .3 feet from the existing home and be located to the side of the home. Previously, this property received variances. In May of 1986, variances were approved for this property for the existing home and for a garage addition on the east side of the home. The minutes from that meeting are attached for your review. At that time, the applicant received variances for the existing home to be located 23.4 feet to the front yard property line . . . along Winsdale Street North and to be located 8.2 feet from the south side property line. Also, a variance was approved for the garage addition to be located 4.5 feet to the east side yard property line. The City's file on this property reveals that a permit was pulled in January of 1957 for the construction of the existing house. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . Subject Property: 8641 Winsdale Street N Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, Applicants . ,04 -1>-1" 1<10 140 ~f."; ~ .- I _-- ,-. .#.... i- _!2'J __ ;3 -'a .1;'- 2 ~ ~---MI1_~__ , I:; I~ ~ 0( .. " ~ ;. ~ o I,. I I I I I~ '" " . ~ . HI 8330 \J Ave. . ._- ~56i. Z8 Res. ..-. . . . (Revised 1/99) Petition Number 0;. - I -,3 Date Received IJ-II '1 /0 i Industrial . Other Amount Received 50 . () () ($50 residential - $150 other) PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: (J)/ t" 5dq {., 5t- ~ 27_ 2CV1- , PetRioner: Nf~;'-- 4' (~~~ ~ (~<i'l '0 loLfj lA-7('i-1S~ \ * ~.\- f'J Address ~. City/Stat~/Zip /&:? "5 .5 '1 (~J 3Lt 2-7 Home Phone 8A~41 2. ...--,- , ~ q t'\.....~r.., BZA Petition Date 3. Business Phone 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: 5. Le9al Description og'roperty involved in this petRion (found on surv~y): /-0 f 2 'IS/ex/("1 &1<21/) turv:l t1t-e.J I-f{! h "-<-fl'l-., Co. .. M,' h"-<-80 i",- 6. Type of property involved in this petition: Residential: :X Single Family _ Double Dwelling _ Multiple Dwelling Commercial Institutional Bus. & Prof. Office . . . 7. 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 issued. llcll~ A IO~ AJJ~\-J~-~ Pr>M; ~. 20" , 8. (Staff will complete this item) Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief statement of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. 10. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepared by a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. . The distance from the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed. if in question. Also. the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven additional copies of the survey for use by the Board. , 11. To the Applicant: To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this ap Iic~~n are true and correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount of $ .. representing the Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. ~~~.~ Signature of Applicant UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ACTION APPLICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. . The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent 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. NOTE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: This petition is application for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of any possible effect the granting of this waiver could have on your property. All property owners adjacent to the subject proper'o/ will receive a notice of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. . (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the projector other statements regarding the project) Print Name CP,/I/VS ~ /J IV {/ /l-- , -- I / Comment 1l16-,A/ 6- I 't Signature /~~' Address ! if:2_~ flr;-a '(,9 Q..u~ IV ~l"'/ . drlD Print Name /~ ~.~ $R- ye Comment ~ ~ ch /~{J L3C)Orr~ , Signature Address I Print Name ,---5//lex/4 .~~7G~vJ Comment .. A)otJe Signatur~;'~ L;l/4/ Address g;; 4 M~5 At! AJ. Print Name Comment Signature Address . . ~ December 15, 2001 Golden Valley Zoning Commission: The purpose of this letter is to request the approval of a variance for an addition we would like to add to our home. Our intention is to add a 10' X 20' room on the west side of the existing structure. This would require going 2' into the easement. About sixteen years ago we built a deck in the same location that measured 10' x 20' with city approval. To our knowledge there has never been opposition to its dimensions. We are presently interested in building an enclosed room where the deck existed. This will allow us to enjoy the space year round. ~ We are 25 year residents of Golden Valley and have been extremely happy with our location. We like our neighborhood and the convenience of our location. We have always supported improvements to our area, as well as the expansion of General Mills John Ford Bell Center. Our home is located directly across the street from the new addition to the JFB complex. When we built our deck about sixteen years ago the new building did not exist. When it was communicated to our neighborhood that there were plans to expand, we were supportive of the idea. General Mills continues to give back to the community and has provided our area with a wonderful nature preserve that we have enjoyed over the years. However, a problem we have been experiencing is the noise pollution from the new addition. As stated previously, our deck was located directly across the street from the building. We frequently had to listen to loud sounds from the air conditioning plant when we sat outside. It would simply be quieter to have an enclosed space with the option to sit indoors, especially when we are entertaining. We hope that our request for an additional 2 feet isn't unrealistic. If you approve the 10' x 20' dimensions, we will be able to enjoy a more practical space than an 8' x 20' room would provide. We would much rather stay in our existing home than chose other options such as moving. We understand the need for rules and regulations but don't feel that this is an unreasonable request. It is our hope that the City of Golden Valley would support improvements to its neighborhoods. ~ Thank you for your consideration. ~-ry.'~~ ,i//J/J);/A /It- 7 ~/~ K:;i~vlnd Wendy McKenzie 8641 Winsdale Street Golden Valley, MN 55427 (763) 546~3427 N ENGINEERING CO. SURVEY FOR: KEVIN McKENZIE 5300 S. Hwy. No. 101 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Phone (612) 4747964 Fax (612) 4748267 SUR VEYED: December, 2001 DRAFTED: December 11,2001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 2, Block 4, Glenwood View, 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. 3. Setting new monuments or verifying old monuments to mark the comers of the property. 4. While we show proposed improvements to your property, we are not as familiar with your plans as you are nor are we as familiar with the requirements of governmental agencies as their employees are. We suggest that you review the survey to confirm that the proposals are what you intend and submit the survey to such governmental agencies as may have jurisdiction over your project to gain their approvals if you can. STANDARD SYMBOLS & CONVENTIONS: " . " Denotes \12" ID pipe with plastic plug bearing State License Number 9235, set, unless otherwise noted. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C C ~ :;: . I NI III 00 . 00 Ill' p~ 0, 0, Ul I ~____3_0____ 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. ~..O^ 1:l Q,ae,o" am s H. Parker P.E. & P.S. No. 9235 ~~- I I I FOUND PtNCH TOP LoT PROPOSED ADDITION FOUND 1/2' .......- , , , , :;:, I I , , 32.6 WINSDALE STREET S 89'58'10" E --128.76-- CANTILEVER -66.0 1 1/2 STORY FRAME / / . DWG. NO. 011636 . . . Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 May 13, 1986 nagan noted that this was house was orne 30 years ago dation as correct w ired at more of an administrative 1 existing home into a con obviously a small and no "as built" that time. Mah V10US error error that occurred wh survey to oun- g described this as and bring the us. er discussion by the Board, Art Flannagan approve requested. Second by Margaret Leppik and upon vote 86-5-7 (Map 20) Residential 8641 Winsdale Kevin M. & Wendy McKenzie The Petition is for waiver of Section 3A.06( 1) front setback for 11.6 feet off the required 35 feet from Winsdale to the house as it now exists and for waiver of Section 3A.06(c) for 1.8 feet off the required 10 foot setback from the south lot line to the house as it now exists and for waiver of Section 3A.06(2) for 21.5 feet off the required 24 feet from the east lot line to the proposed garage addition at its closest point. Mr. and Mrs. McKenzie were present. Consent had been obtained from all adjacent properties. No others were present. Mr. McKenzie explained that his home is on a corner lot (Boone Avenue and Winsdale). The house fronts on Winsdale. The lot is 50 feet wide on Boone and 128 feet long. The setback from Winsdale is 21.35 feet at the closest point to the house. No record exists to show a waiver from the 35 feet was granted. However, the home is typical of most others for setback along Winsdale. The present home'with a single car attached garage is 54 feet wide and 20 feet deep. When built the rear of the house abuts what was treated as a side setback so there is only an 8 foot backyard and Mr. McKenzie said for all practical pur- poses they have only the front entry that is usable. The east end of the lot is on an angle and the proposed garage addition would be about 2.5 feet from the lot line at its closest point and 9.25 feet at the greatest distance. Mr. McKenzie described his present home as having only a basement adjacent to - the present garage and the rest is about a four foot crawl space. Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 May 13, 1986 ~ They would include a mudroom and steps to the lower level and then access to the upper level similar toa split level from the proposed new garage. Margaret Leppik asked if the mudroom was necessary and Mr. McKenzie went into further detail about the mudroom entry from the garage. The existing garage would be torn off and a complete new addition would start from the living area. The Board discussed the adjacent home to the east and the distance from the McKenzie's east lot line to that home at the closest point is about 20 feet. That home has their garage at the opposite end. Mahlon Swedberg said he had no trouble in approving the waivers to make the existing hQuse conforming. Based on the construction of the existing home, there appeared to be no other alternative to provide entry into the house from the proposed garage addition and no other area on the lot that could be used for expansion. During further discussion, it was agreed that the proposed addition could be reduced in width by approximately two feet. As a result, Mahlon Swedberg moved to approve an amended waiver request to read 19.5 feet off the required 24 foot side setback from the east lot line to a distance of 4.5 feet to the garage addition at its closest point. Margaret Leppik seconded the motion and upon vote carried. The petition was in order Ego was present. No 0 The is for waiver of Section ~ front setback for 2.9 feet off the required 35 feet from the front t line to a distance of 32.1 fe to the proposed addition and Section 3A.06(c) ~ had consent from all adj s were in attendance. Barbara Ms. Ego explained at the Survey showed the house to have been cated approxi- mately threef closer to the front lot line than the ordinance uired when it was built 3 ears ago. It is also placed 7.7 feet from the east lot ne and 10 feet i equired. The proposed construction is primarily a "facelift s it provi for extending the existing roof line out over the front setps and the wes dge of the house and for extending the east side of the roof out over t . e entry. ~ . . . . . . . . W~.ci.goUm_wlt~ Y 1-3-02 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 8641 Winsdale Street North Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, Applicants Kevin and Wendy McKenzie, with property located at 8641 Winsdale Street North, have petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for variances from the Residential zoning district. The applicant is proposing to construct an addition onto the existing home. This addition requires a variance from building setback requirements. Also, as a result of this construction, it was discovered that the existing home and shed do not meet current setback requirements. This construction project requires variances from the following sections of City Code. · Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) Front Yard Setback. City Code states that the front yard setback shall be 35 feet from the front yard property line. The variance request for the addition is for 2.2 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 32.8 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Boone Avenue and for 13.4 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 21.6 feet at its closest point to the front property line along Winsdale Street North for the existing home. . Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width of 70 feet or less, the south side yard setback shall be 20% of the lot width. The requested variance is for 4.3 feet off the required 10.4 feet to a distance of 6.1 feet at it closest point to the south side yard property line for the existing home. . Section 11.21, Subd. 12 (A) Accessory Buildings. City Code states that any sheds be located at least 10 feet from the home and be located completely to the rear of the home. The property owner is requesting a variance for the shed to be located .3 feet from the existing home and be located to the side of the home. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, January 22,2002, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. . . . 1324 Tyrol Trail South 02-1-4 Aaron Lerner See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in Planning Department . . . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 1324 Tyrol Trail South (Map 10) (02-1-4) Aaron Lerner, Applicant Date: January 16, 2002 Aaron Lerner, with property located at 1324 Tyrol Trail South, is requesting variances from the Residential zoning code (Section 11.21). The applicant has approached the City to build a room and garage addition onto the existing home. These proposed additions require variances from building setback requirements. The following are the variances requested: · The requested variances are from Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width between 70 and 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15% of the lot width. The requested variance is for .7 feet off the required 11.7 feet to a distance of 11 feet at it closest point to the west side yard property line for the proposed room addition and for 4.9 feet off the required 12.3 feet to a distance of 7.4 feet at it closest point to the east side yard property line for the proposed garage addition. Previously, this property received several variances: · In October of 1979, variances were denied for this property for a proposed garage addition on the east side of the home. The minutes from that meeting are attached for your review. At that time, the applicant had applied for variances for the proposed garage to be located 20.4 feet to the front yard property line along Tyrol Trail South and to be located 8 feet from the east side property line. The applicant originally appealed this decision to the City Council, but at the February 19, 1980 meeting, the applicant withdrew this appeal. · In October.of 1982, one variance was approved and one was denied for this property for another proposed garage addition on the east side of the home. The minutes from that meeting are attached for your review. At that time, the applicant received a variance for the proposed garage to be located 25 feet to the front yard property line along Tyrol Trail South. A variance was denied for the proposed garage addition to be located 14 feet from the east side property line. This garage addition was never constructed. . . . . In November of 1990, a variance was approved for this property to build an 8 foot high privacy fence on the west side of the property. The minutes from that meeting are attached for your review. The City's file on this property reveals that a permit was pulled in July of 1966 for the construction of the existing house. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . Subject Property: 1324 Tyrol Trail South Aaron Lerner, Applicant . LOT PI " 30<< OOUGLAS Valley I \ I Y (5525) c/ewish Comm. Cenfer. St Louis Parle (5515) 's porK st. Loul ci/r of I -----1 . ~ " j iii .. rot .... ,... .0 '" .... ... ! . . . (Revised 1/9~) Petition Number 0 J - I - If Date Received 1;./ JJj 0 I Amount Received f,- 0, CD. ($50 residential - $150 other) PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: 2. ! .5':J..'f Ii rot T ra, '/ Jov.+4 I/O ?-I 0)- , L~RN~IZ N~~d-'-\ ~"",lh ~<..> l ~~~. \ '=v I"'S 6':5'1/<-0 Acfpress . .. City/State/Zip '16;L~ <5'-1' / - / 'r62J '7 L,. ~ ~. 5,'1- ,,)9 <-d.- Business Phone Home Phone '\ 3. BZA Petition Date Petitioner: l\. 0" f-O~ 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: 5. Legal Description of property involved in this petition (found on survey): 6. Type of property involved in this petition: Residential: ~ingle Family _ Double Dwelling _ Multiple Dwelling Industrial Commercial Institutional Bus. & Prof. Office Other . . . 7. 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 issued. . !f'(7c..Jfsr fOIL ,- hf.! 61= ~~~.{I/6~<{A6~.SP~c~ fiNd. IlL ~~ (.7F-f/ ~fK.;If. ~"8 8. (Staff will complete this item) Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief statement of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. 10. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepared by a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. The distance frpm the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed, if in question. Also. the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. . If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven additional copies of the survey for use by the Board. 11. To the Applicant: To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount 0 Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. . . UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ACTION APPLICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. . The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent 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. NOTE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS: This petition is application for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of any possible effect the granting of this waiver could have on your property. All property owners adjacent to the subject .property will receive a notice of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and' gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, objecting to the project or other statements regarding the project) Print Nam~"'~ L",~ l.J I '~ ~~G~",l \ Comment , Signature 1\ L<\,,-""/'~ :\.\.... Address i ~-; ll~,H- <2.Jl,\ \ \ . ~A~ ' ~::;:: AJ 0<J elr ' . . J Q c fI(j JJ I"e' .-:;; SignatUre ~~~ ~~- l~1'vUt~Address ~ . i'~~Q A\'P.t.J4 ~~ \ '-", Print Name Comment 0,., A> '-' tf ~ ....( Signature Address \ '-{o () A \~ i J0 CL ~{'S. Print Name Comment , .G { , 1-............. f')/., I fJ v.... · '-. JI-4~~-:;' .. ~."I c-c 'I I . t-. ! (-0 _ ~ '- '''- ./ ; ) Signature ,/ t) (L1LyQ,' J jr~-. Address .... '-I . / /~ c', . ....."./. ;' / I f., ~J 21 ,: -::, " / f,f " /' /. -.//' ....../.,.. '~. ,'"--' . December 30, 2001 City of Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals To Whom It May Concern: . 1324 South Tyrol Trail was built in 1966 with a 1-1/2 car garage. It would take an additional 6 feet of space to park 2 vehicles inside and allow for entering and exiting the vehicles. With Minnesota's winter climate I fmd it necessary to park indoors. This addition would also increase the likelihood of continued appreciation of the home's value and keep it consistent with the additions and new development in the Tyrol neighborhood. Aaron Lerner Homeowner Thank you r your consi . GERALD T. COYNE 300 BRUNSWICK AVE. S. GOLDEN VAllEY, MINN. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY LAND SURVEYORS RAYMOND A. PRASCH 6917 IDAHO AVE. N. BROOKLYN PARK, MINN. . REGISTERED UNDER LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 . 73rd Avenue North 56()..3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 INVOICE NO. $692 F. B. NO. 187-$0 SCALE I" ZO' 0- DENOTES IRON &ururgor.u <lttrtifuatr NICK LOSCH 1::1 DER 1\',-M.'. ~...I-hw..si~"'fr ... '. ,,/ L..i 7 . , DESCRIPTION: Lot 7. Blod }. "Tyrol Hills. liclIuepin I \ COUIity, MiJluesota", except that part thereof described...rr/' -'or- as fOllows; Begillning at the Northeasterly corner .v of said Lot; thence Northwest~erly t.o the ";ic.;terly line of said lot to a POiul 40 feet.. :iout.hwe,;t.edy ~ from t.h~ North'Nesterl)' con,cr of' said lot.; ~1".." .~ thence Northca;;terly to the Northwesterly C,c:..::>}"', corner of .3aid lot; thence Southeasterly /0-,,/ \ along the Northerly line of said lot. to the Northeasterly comer. (!.d;-~I!'''' . '-A/;.....IAuFLerfy, C'...../1lf'r .,; L6,{ 7 .>... "L ~o <' ...::~s~ .4' s.l;'6>.....'c /' '"'~C'c:) ""C /.3<"0 .>... ~ ""'51'_ ~ . We hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey 01 the boundaries of the above described land and' the location of all build. ings and visible encroachments, if any. from or on said land. Surveyed by us thi~day of Oct.obe,. 1979 ~ ~lj ) fi)/.A.4.t; / (!P'1.)~ LOT SURVE S COMPANY , Signed . . . . . . Board of Zoning Appeals October 9, 1979 Page 6 . not all used at anyone time. The rd made several comparisons of other uses possible on the site, for example, a real estate office, veterinary clinic, business office, etc. Mr. Trach s ed as an example, he had several proposals such as fast change service tations, and an automobile accessory installation a type business. Lloyd Becker reviewe he staff report prepared for th.is pr rty, which out- lined the substantial .vers required for parking and la cape, and also noting the potential for 'milar proposals at each othe service station site at the intersection (two).' in the community were cedent such substantial waivers e community. The efforts of other Class I I noted for landscape, parking, etc. and the would incur for any subsequent propo Mr. LeMieux repeatedly noted to work out such problems as the staff to try . Lloyd Becker stated the staff posal and would continue to adjustment or variation t cooperated fu so, however, the s is now proposed. with Mr. LeMieux in his pro- did not provide for much Mahlon Swedberg agai his concern for the this type of business would generate. A Flanagan referred again to the staff port. Mike Sell, in comparison to pr 10US use on the site and other alternative referred to, felt this proposed e at this time was as good as any. . . Mike Sell oved to defer this proposal to a future r. LeMieux th taff to further review and adjust plans for the site and to ther r information from other Winchell1s sites on the traffic generate Art agan seconded the motion, and upon vote, motion to defer carried. 79:10-39 (Map 10) Residential 1324 South Tyrol Trail Charles M. Wally (Nick Loscheider Const.) The petition is for 3.07 (1) & (3) waiver of Section of the Zoning Code for front and sideyard setbacks, for 14.61 off the required 35 front setback to a distance of 20.4' to the proposed garage at its closest point, and for 7' off the required 151 sideyard setback to a distance of 81 from the east lot line to the proposed garage and for 1.6' of IS' sedeyard setback along the east lot line to the existing house (verified less than 15-' for existing by new survey dated 10-3-79). . Mr. and Mrs. Wally and their contractor, Mr. Nick Loscheider, were present. Also present were Mr. and Mrs. Wynn Noren, adjacent neighbors to the east. . . . Board of Zoning Appeals October 9, 1979 Page 7 Mr. Noren presented a letter to the secretary from Mr. and Mrs. Oppegard, adja- cent neighbors to the rear on Wayzata Boulevard. Mr. and.Mrs. Oppegard had withdrawn their previous approval given on the petition form by ,Mrs. Oppegard. The Wally proposal is to construct a garage to the front of the existing home. The house is on a lot that is sloping with a substantial grade up to the rear. The present single garage is under the lower level of the house. The proposed garage for the most part, would be set into the bank in front, would present a relatively low profile, and would have a deck on top. Mr. Noren asked to speak and expressed his objection to any variance of the front or side setbacks, stating it would detract from the value of his home, would project to proposed garage and deck directly in his view from an upper bedroom of his home, and if constructed, would provide a potential for other problems. Mr. Wally, Mr. Loscheider, and Mr. Noren reviewed alternatives with the Board for adjusting the garage and deck location, for reducing its size, and landscape considerations, none of which appeared satisfactory or agreeable to either party. Mahlon Swedberg discussed "the merits of a double garage over a single garage, noting that it is desireable to get cars off the street in neighborhoods and it is desireable to have sufficient garaging because of climate in this area. Today's market requires upgrading of existing homes. Art Flanagan saAd he can't agree to putting a garage or structure into the front and side setbacks to the degree proposed and especially so over any objections of the adjacent property owners. Mike Sell reviewed again any alternatives. It was noted that while it is desirable to have cars garaged or parked off the street, Mr. Wally has 4 cars and two would sti 11 remain for outside parking. Art Flanagan moved to deny the proposal. Mike Sell seconded the motion, noting he did so to get the motion for consideration. . After further discussion on the motion, Mahlon Swedberg called the vote. Upon vote it was Flanagan and Sell aye and Swedberg nay. Motion to deny carried. Mahlon Swedberg called Mr. Wally's attention to the appeal procedures if he so des ired. There being no further business to corne before the Board, it was upon motion, duly seconded and vote to adjourn the meeting at 12:10 P.M. Mahlon Swedberg, Chair Pro Tern Lloyd Becker, Recording Secretary . ~egular Meeting of the City Council - February 19, 1980 Backhoe Rental Quotations (continued) Backhoe & Operator @ $75.00 per hour Move equipment in and out @ $60.00 per hour, approximate moving time 4 hours. Matts to be furnished by City. Authorization for Improvements to Fire Department Offices MOVED by Mitchell, seconded by Johnson and carried to authorize the transfer of $850.00 from the Building Fund to Building Operations to make improvements to the office of the Fire Chief~ Emergency Hoist Repairs MOVED by Stockman, seconded by Johnson and carried to authorize payment in the amount of $1,952.61 to Northwest Serivce Station Equipment Company for emergency repair to hoist in maintenance shop. Request Deferral of Action on Tax Forfeiture Property List MOVED by Anderson, seconded by Johnson and carried to defer action on tax forfeiture property to Council/Manager meeting on February 26,1980. Mayor Thorsen called for a 90-second recess. . Denial - 1324 S. Tyrol Trail - Charles M. Wally Proponent requested his request for appeal of BZA Denial be withdrawn. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Mitchell and carried to strike the appeal of BZA Denial _ 1324 S. Tyrol Trail, from the agenda. Public Item - Waiver of Platting Ordinance - 4322 Wayzata Boulevard Bill Forster, Planning Commission - presented Planning Commission's recommendations MOVED by Anderson, seconded by Mitchell. and carried to approve waiver of platting ordinance for division of lot at 4322 Wayzata Bouleva.rd. PARCEL A: That part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 14, "KENNEDY.S WEST TYROL HILLS ADDITION" lying Northeasterly of a line 85 feet Southwesternly of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the Northeaterly line of said Lot 1 and from its Northwesterly extension, and lying west of a line para~lel with and 185.0 feet West of the East line of said Lot 1 and the same extended. Area is l6,200~ square feet. PARCEL B: That part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 14, "KENNEDY'S WEST TYROL HILLS ADDITION" lying Southwerterly of a line 85 feet Southwerterly of, measured at a right angle to and parallel '\.1i th the Northeasterly oine of said Lot 1 . and its Northwesterly extention, and lying West ofa line parallel with and 185.0 feet West of the East line of said Lot 1 and the same extended. Area is 18,000~ square feet. . . . MImTES OF A RmlJI.AR fwEEI'IOO OF '!HE GClDEN VALLEY WARD OF ZONIOO APPFALS ocroBER 12, 1982 regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 12, 1982, at 7:30 P.M. in the Cooncil Chanber Golden. Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota Chai.rna.n, Mike Se 11 Mahlon Swedberg Hem Polachek Glen Christiansen Art Flannagan The first order of meeting held Se tributed to 5S was approval of the tes of a regular r 14, 1982, ~ies of which had viOlsly teen dis- ard. gan noved to aFProvethe rni.rutes as written and pres en d ~ Glen Christiansen am upon vote carried. 82-10-33 (Map 10) !eside.lltial 1324 South Tyrol Trail Charles M. Wally The Petition is for waiver of Section 3A.06 (1) fi:'a1.t setbacK for 10 feet off the required 35 feet fnnt setbacK to a setmck of 25 feet fran the fnnt lot line to the p~ pa;ed garage addition at its closest point (frcnt lot line angles) and for waiver of Section 3A.06 (3)b. for 0.5 feet off the required 14.5 feet s ideyard setbacK iran the east side lot line to a distance of 14 feet fran the east lot. line to the prcpased garage a Ckii. tion. Mr. Charles Wally was present. Also present was Mr. Claude lDwenthal, attorney, representing Mr. Wally and Mr. Smckler, of the cx:>nstructioo catpany, Who prcpose to do the \\OIX if approved. Mr. I.owenthal nade the presentation and began ~ stating that the architect. will adjust the garage so not even the .5 feet of a foot is needed on the east s ide of the garage and they r8:juest no waiver for that side and woold mill- tain a 15 foot setback. . . . Board of Zoning Appeals Page 2 October 12, 1982 Mr. lDNenthal said he did not have all the adjacent prc:perty cwner's signatures on the petition fonn. lbwever, he stated he had tried to obtain them several times am f~ no one hare. He. .did ta~ to Mr. cppegaard, the prq>erty cwner, to the rear, anqwh::> face Wayza.1:a.BlVd. '!he Oppegaard's d::>ject to the prcpcsal and had previoosly rrailed a letter to' .the Zoning & Inspect.icn Depa.rtnent which stated so, mting the aesthetics as. the primaIy reascn. A similar letter of objecticn was also received f:ran Mr. Terry Rath, an adjacent nei911.::or of the Oppegaards. Mr. Rath resides at 4lll Wayzata Blvd. and a letter was received fran Mr. Wynn Noren, the adjacent neightor on the east side of Mr. Willy. The architect. had a a::rtplete scale IIDdel of the entire dolelling including the proposed garage am also it included to scale Mr. N:>ren' s b:rre en the east side. '!his nodel was ccnplete including the steep hill and surra.mding property to the rear. It was explained that the prcpcsed two-car garage was dug into the hillside and was no higher at the tcp than the present blad<.- tcp driv&1ay. The architect explained .the shape of the lot DJting the frcnt lot line angles and that the waiver requested is to the closest point along this line. The measurement is also to a wing wall that protrudes approxinately 30 i.nd1es and at the east end of the garage, it alnost ccnplies with the required 35 feet. The Board noted that directly across the pend Dr. Sweet had coostructed a reN hare last year arrlhe }lad originally requested a waiver of frcnt setmd<. l:ecause of the extremely steep hillside. '!his had been denied and Dr. Sweet constructed in oonfoInEl.~. Mr. lDNenthal said he would like the Board to understand that Dr. SWeet' s hcrce was n&1 and CQ.1ld be adjusted to the lot althoogh at CX)n- siderable expense, hcwever, Mr. W3.lly's h::Ile exists , also against a steep hill- side and there is no physical or financially reasonable way to nove the ha.1se back. Mr. lDNenthal also noted that Dr. SWeet approves of Mr. Willy's plan and has signed the petition in favor, recognizing Mr. W3.lly has no other alternatives. Mahlen SWedberg noted that the garage as prcposed is flat-roofed, set into the groond, is at the rnin:i.mJrn size for a two-car garage, 21 feet ~ 22 feet, and SVJedberg also said he was in favor of this prcposal the last t.:i.ne it had been before the Board and he was still in favor of it. (The Board of Zoning AFPE*lls denied a previoos waiver request in October of 1979 that was similar, except the waiver requests were larger am included the east side) (denied on a 2 to 1 vote.) After coosiderable nore disOlssion, Art Flannagan stated that this present prcposal is a vast inproverrent. to the previOls proposal and based on the scale nodel, he CXXlld not see that it had any effect of significance to ~ prcperties inc1udingMr. N:>ren. He also stated it is an overall' inprovernent to the prcperty. Mahloo Swedberg said if there ever was a case of hardship that was so clearly defined~. tcpography, this was it and he noved to approve the waiver of . frcnt setback as requested only. Motion seoonded ~ Hert> polacbed<. and upon vote carried with foor ayes and one nay (Christiansen). . . . , Board of Zoning Appeals Page 3 November 13, 1990 90-11-28 (Map 10) Residential t324 South Tyrol Trail /John C. Wally The Petition is for waiver of Section: 11.21 Subd. 7 (C)2 Art Flannagan moved to approve the waiver as requested, noting the topography of the area, the effects of 1-394 and the conditions that will exist upon completion of 1-394. Second by Herb Polachek and upon vote carried. There being no further business to come before the Board, it was upon motion, second, and vote to adjourn at 8:40 P.M. Mike Sell. Chairman ~~~ www.d.~Mm~vlt~ Y 1-3-02 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 1324 Tyrol Trail South Aaron Lerner. Applicant Aaron Lerner, with property located at 1324 Tyrol Trail South, has petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for variances from the Residential zoning district. The applicant is proposing to construct an addition onto the north and south sides of the existing home. These additions require variances from the following building setback requirements: . Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) Side Yard Setbacks. City Code states that the distance between any part of a dwelling or structure and the side lot lines shall be governed by the following requirements: In the case of lots having a width between 70 and 100 feet, the side yard setback shall be 15% of the lot width. The requested variance is for 7.15 feet off the required 14.55 feet to a distance of 7.4 feet at it closest point to the south side yard property line for the proposed garage addition and for 3.55 feet off the required 14.55 feet to a distance of 11 feet at it closest point to the north side yard property line for the proposed home addition. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, January 22,2002, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. .' . . 6~20 WayzataBoulevard 02-1-5 The Restaurant Company " See Large Size Plans and/or Survey in Planning Department " . Hey Memorandum Planning 763-593-8095/763-593-8109 (fax) To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Dan Olson, City Planner Subject: 6920 Wayzata Boulevard (Map 18) (02-1-5) The Restaurant Company, Applicant Date: January 16, 2002 The Restaurant Company, with property located at 6920 Wayzata Boulevard, is requesting variances from the Industrial zoning code (Section 11.36). Last May, the applicant had proposed to demolish the existing restaurant building and build a new building on the site. Now, because of cost concerns, .the applicant is proposing to remodel the existing building and add some additional parking. For this ~nstruction the applicant is requesting variances from the following parking lot setback requirements: · The first requested variances are from Zoning Code Section 11.36, Subd. 6 (C)(4), which relates to parking lot requirements. The applicant would like to reduce the parking lot setback for the east side from 35 feet to 6 feet; on the south side from 35 feet to 10 feet, and on the west side from 1 0 feet to 0 feet. · The second requested variance is from Zoning Code Section 11.36, Subd. 7 (F), which requires that in the Industrial zoning district for restaurants of this type, one parking space is required for every forty (40) square feet of public area including eating area and one (1) parking space for every eighty (80) square feet of nonpublic area. Based on these requirements, staff estimates that the required number of parking spaces is 108. The variance requested is to reduce the number of required parking spaces to 96. This property had previously received several variances: In September, 1977, the property owner received variances for the existing building and site so that exterior improvements could be made to the building. Since the existing building is being demolished, these variances would be considered null and void. The variances that were received at that time were as follows. A copy of the meeting minutes are attached for your review. . · Reduce the required 35 foot building setback along Wayzata Boulevard to 25 feet. · Reduce the 10 foot green space requirement along the east side to 4 feet. · Reduce the 10 foot green space requirement along the west side to 3.5 feet. · Reduce the 20 foot building setback requirement along the west side to 18.4 feet. .. In May, 2001 the property owner received variances for a proposed building and site so that a new .estaurant building and parking lot could be built. A copy of the meeting minutes are attached for our review. Since the construction of this proposed building and site plan has been shelved, these variances are no longer valid. In speaking with the City Engineer, Jeff Oliver, staff would like to request that the applicant install concrete curb and gutter for the parking lot. This is in accordance with Zoning Code regulations in Section 11.70, Subd. 7(C). Therefore, the variance is contingent on the following condition: 1. The applicant will install concrete curb and gutter for the parking lot. The City's file on this property reveals that a permit was pulled in Novemberof 1962 for the construction of the building. No other pertinent information was found in the file. . . . Subject Property: 6920 Wayzata Boulevard The Restaurant Company, Applicant - ~ '~:3" s ,~;:~~... (t.tS' I I ~ I '~t~ '- - ,I r=-- -~ . ~ I ~I ~I .... ""'....-....- '''~z JId- I ..! .. ~ .. !o ... ... ~ "9.0 <::> . :;,; ~ ~ ~ 2 .. .. 1, LV' './.' ~ ~ ~_...-:: I ~o ..l~ ." "-S9'/4"E3".38 -:..... lq a :t . :;,AVE.:i!!l 29/.34 ~ .. -----= .. 1('7-q'ltJ "'I' $3'.860 sl1r:Jg',,-r 1.l08.3Z ,52.S:4-4. SB,'<\4"5'E .. 60. :~ I J ~~ l ' ~ '" I.~ ~ -f~r- . . ~ -.-J1o ~ ~ .~ t:: ~ --- --- - - - - - -,~.,,- (Fi",II,z/'5'1 ~40 Q:' ~~ '" gal .lD 2 ~ · ~u~'t\ Sfl' 3 ; di -../ " (1) '" ..!-'10~2.1V_~ __ s .291.06 ~. a t ~ ~ ..;j mOG MARKET.. '""'ii; ... .ef" I I , ...c-:: , t::: : I !.!J I f- ~~.- - ~ I ~:.r I f 't1'~' '66, 1 -~ I'''': .. I I ,.:~?:.__l ," . I , ~\ I ",,- 7000 4.1'14'43'/ "r'31'22" 140 ~ ! 110.43 ....~ '';0.. J .NI,i)'wif. 4; ;o50"'OS:r- I :<" .1',5654.58 I~ r L- is ~)~ t1 ./ ----.i-.. l/~'.- - "\~"I' I - .,....\ ".("':8 \1,_ .~::f3l38 . .,.. 7'. " ~~ 4'-4~ .,~S ... ~ ,".OftI ~ oj ;; ~~~. I . . .. .. -4~.cq ... .. 801 LOUIS. '. ~ ~ .. 4'q ;C)~.. . .~.cq NO. 648 . ~ '" E' - ---~ '>$ ,... C'I) " .. .. ~ __ l'n~1 ~e'.-' I I I I I 1 CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK _dU.\ ""In- -. "'1'.... . (Revised 1/99) 4 Petition Number 0). -I - s- . Date Received / ~ /.71/ of Amount Received /5 () ,DC) ($50 residenti.al - $150 other) . PETITION FOR ORDINANCE WAIVER CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 1. Street address of property involved in this petition: (P9.Jo WilY 2.4,.4. 8 LVD. 2. BZA Petition Date FO~ :So. '^v...o.l ~, 8.;J \ Boo ~ Petitioner: Thp ~ \L~\o. u.r-G~-T LC~p().."" \..J Name. 1\. \ toc?5" OOf\o.r Ave... cS>oo M~~\~ 0t~. ~~1\9 Address City/State/Zip .3QJ - 7 (pc:, - ~ </00 Business Phone Home Phone 3. . 4. If petitioner is not owner of all property involved in this petition, please name property owner and describe petitioner's interest (legal and other) in this property: SEE A(!x)u6 5. Legal Description of property involved in this petition (found on survey): SlAtv~'1 ~-\tcelecl 6. Type of property involved in this petition: Residential: _ Single Family _ Double Dwelling _ Multiple Dwelling Industrial 1:. Commercial _ Institutional _ Bus. & Prof. Office_ . Other 1:.. CJa.s.s :r {l.e~-ku-{b,,",+ \'" =l="'-Olu~'\-rl~l z...o",-e. . . . 7. 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 issued. E:"-H S'\,t-\..~ 'PEr2.KI~~ ~AOQ.A~ ~ 'C>E R-eV"-bcleld ~ aJ..J I\~v.j \~loL~a..UI~lch~ (t<<o s.t) ~ r.ev.J rree~~ ~~,t'd~ (/~<c.S J w; H. ~d;l?d... <1+-11 P611c..h.'j .spc;o..-es' 0\11. .s n-e... sfC 1't'7TA<-IfFD 'p<.I4A/. s. . 8. (Staff will complete this item) Waiver of Section Subd(s). Subd(s). Subd(s). Waiver of Section Waiver of Section 9. Please attach a brief statement of the reasons. necessity. or hardship which provide grounds for the granting of this waiver. Attach letter, photographs, or other evidence, if appropriate. 10. A current or usable survey of the property must be attached. Proposed surveys are not acceptable. The survey must be prepared by a regis- tered land surveyor licensed in the State of Minnesota. The survey must show all property lines. buildings. and streets. The distance from the house and all other buildings to the front and side property lines shall be shown. The rear distance of any buildings from the property line will be needed. if in question. Also. the survey should show an approximate location of any buildings on adjacent properties relative to the side(s) where the construction will take place. If the survey is larger than 11" x 17". the applicant will supply seven additional copies of the survey for use by the Board. 11. To the Applicant: ro the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. Attached herewith is my check in the amount of $ /~(J # ~epresenting the Board of Zoning Appeals Application Fee. ~4' - ~~ Signa ure of Applicant - UNLESS CONSTRUCTION OR THE ACTION APPLICABLE TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST, IF GRANTED, IS NOT TAKEN WITHIN ONE YEAR, THE WAIVER EXPIRES. Dee 20 01 11:45a Robert Vanne~,. Architect APR-3e-2001 11:57 CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY . . . 651 222 3034 p.4 5938109 P.07/08 The applicant will need to obtain the signatures of all adjacent property owners. This' includes all properties abutting the applicant's property and directly across the street. If on a comer, this means across both streets. NOTE TO ADJAC:E~T PROPERTY OWNERS: This petition is application for waiver of Ordinance(s) of the City Zoning Code. Please be aware of any possible effect the .granting of this waiver could have on your property. All property owners adjacent to the subject property will receive a notice of the Boai'd of Zoning Appeals hearing, at which they may present their views. Your signature is required only to verify that you have been told about the request and gives the adjacent property owner opportunity to comment. (Comments can contain language of agreeing with the project, Objecting to the project or other .tatemen. regarding the project) . .t.t~'7~..".j-A....__,. ..,,' ._..... "_'. _..._..___..''...____ .... . _.. ....... ... Print Name?h:r L0J.,ovz,e. Comment i",f'<Z"'" A-e>co.. /--J . Si~naturet~ ..; ',-" Address. 6~S5 /t.f1rk~f 5f. 6. v. PrintName p~~' ~_ ..e-:::....lc. d' ... ., Comment GfJ It::. ~ . ...... Signature ~.'.~-^ PrintName ~~1'\ (u:{(4-t\~."i..i- .... '.' "',. Comment 75.. ~ . L", I~- . .. .::..:::'-._0' . Slg;"'ture O~I .iJ:.., Ad.ir;s.' (",1 z.,. ;111" , Iv ~ 11: G ~ ~1V~...... . - Ac;tdress. ~ c=, 'I' Y Lu~ /c..~ lJ~ Print Name Comment ..5"~-v~ c::85s 6;,z):;r-;c""'" /J;rMmos '.' .. :r; s, )i'/ifj;If~~' 'Iif~~' ~=-/ Address (,i&; turyUl-7" /,2 bad> Signature . The Restaurant Company 6075 Poplar Avenue, Suite 800 · Memphis, TN 38119-4709 · (901) 766-6400 December 28,2001 Dan Olson City Planner City of Golden Valley 7800 Golden Valley Road Golden Valley, MN 55427 RE: Perkins Restaurant and Bakery 6920 Wayzata Blvd. Golden Valley, MN 55426 . Dear Dan Olson: The Restaurant Company has determined that it would be to costly to demolish the existing building and build a new facility. The Restaurant Company now plans to remodel and add onto the existing building. These improvements include an 86 square foot lobby addition, 186 square foot freezer addition, new kitchen equipment, new seating package and improvements to the restrooms to meet the latest standards for accessibility. This proposed expansion of our existing building will effect the site in several ways. The existing building will be increased in area from 5590.62 square feet to 5843.33 square feet with the new 252.71 square foot lobby and freezer additions. This new 252.71 square foot addition would require 2 new parking spaces for public area requirements and 2 new parking spaces for non public area requirements for a total of 4 new parking spaces required. The Restaurant Company is proposing to add 14 new parking spaces, which would increase the existing parking from 78 spaces to 92 parking spaces with 4 handicap spaces. In order to add the new 14 parking spaces The Restaurant Company is requesting a variance from the Industrial Zoning Code, which relates to parking lot requirements. The Restaurant Company would like to reduce the parking lot setback for the South side from 35 feet to 10 feet. If you have any questions please call 1-800-877-7375. . S~~~L Glynn Kirby V Design Project Manager . . . . . . . . . Board of Zoning Appeals September 13, 1977 page 6 Mlnnegasco, fel t the Church has been a good neighbor in the area and fel Mr. 'chter had made every effort to cooperate ,.lith adjacent property O\'! s. ~1rs. Hilson asked what assurances the proposal for the benn and ascap;ng would hay . The Board Secretary noted that, if approved, this pr :al must go to the Buil Board of Review next, at which time all neighb will again be notified, inc1u' Mrs. Becker, and it is at this Board th andscaping, etc. is approved. Robert Wagman asked Mr. ny additiona 1 comments. f1rs. Becker uilding but ~~nts the 75' of green area. Mike Sell moved to grant the ~~iv Gl en Christiansen seconded the . Robert Hagman stated tha ased on past actions the Boat'd and as alter-natives do exist, he felt the ople's \'Jishes should be ackl Jedged and could not support the motion. f1ike stated he favored the proposal, ting the proponent's efforts and th e area had been platted for many years. this use and rezoned from Open D. opment approximately 6 years ago, Mahlon Swe 9 noted the only reason f his "taiver is for more parking in front to suit the nant. Ch man Kost called the vote 011 the motion. Upon vote it \'{c\$ 4 aye es to prove the request on the amended agenda and 1 nay vote (Hagman oppose. ZZ-9~(~'ap 18) Industria 1 6920 Hayzata Soul evard Perkins Cake & Stca k Inc. ( The petition is for the waiver of Sections 5.05 & 5.06 of the Zoning Code as the building now exists. for 25 I off the required 35' green area along the fl~ont 1 at line, and for 6' off the required la' green area ,dong the East lot line, and for 7.5' off the required 10' green area along the toJest lot line, and for 1.61 off the required 20' building side yard setback along the West lot line to a distance of 18.4' as the building now exists. The Chairman reviewed the petition and found it in order, noting no response from adjacent property owners. The requests are for the building as it nO\<l exists to allm'l for exterior remodel ing and upgrading of the site and .parking. The Secretary noted that Perkins Cake ;~ Steak staff had met "lith the City staff several times to upgrade the existing buildin!] and area as much as possible. A green area has been established in the rear and. further efforts along the side lot lines and front are proposed. . Mr. John Redman was present for Perkins Cake & Steak Inc. and reviewed the plans with the Board. 61 en Chri stiansen moved to approve the wa ivers as requested. Mahlon Swedber'g seconded the motion. Upon vote it was unanimous to approve. I Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals May 22, 2001 Page 5 . 6920 Wayzata Boulevard (Map 18) (01-5-11) Perkins Familv Restaurants. Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 6 (C) (4) Yard Requirements . To reduce the parking lot setback requirements for the proposed restaurant for the east side from 35 feet to 6 feet, on the south side from 35 feet to 0 feet, and on the north and west sides from 10 feet to 0 feet. Request: Waiver from Section 11.36, Subd. 7 (N) Parking Requirements · To reduce the size of parking spaces to 9 feet x 18 feet for all spaces around the perimeter on all four sides. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new restaurant building. Olson stated the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing restaurant building and build a new building on the site and is requesting variances from the parking lot setback requirements. He stated that if the variances requested are granted they would be meeting . the number of spaces that are required by the Zoning Code. McCracken-Hunt asked if there was discussion about not meeting the number of spaces but having the space dedicated in the future if needed and otherwise turning the spaces into green space. Olson stated they would need all the parking spaces. Cera asked if they are reducing the setbacks down to zero, but they are not reducing the green space to zero where the green space is going to be. Olson stated the green space would be located on the east side and that there is additional green space outside their property lines. Grimes stated there would also be green space in the corners. Bob Vanney, Vanney Associates Architects, referred to a site map and showed where the green space was proposed to be. He stated the restaurant they are proposing is just slightly larger than the existing footprint by 213 square feet. He stated that there are 82 existing parking spaces, but the new restaurant would require 115 spaces. Shaffer asked the applicant if they've talked to MnDOT regarding their easements along the Perkins property. Vanney stated that their surveyor indicated that the easement doesn't come onto their property. Shaffer stated concerns about MnDOT possibly wanting to build a retainingwall at some point in the future and that they would then require an easement for maintenance of the wall. Grimes stated that this property isn't along a wall so MnDOT probably wouldn't require an easement. . Shaffer stated he would like to see the perimeter parking spaces be 18-foot spaces instead of 20 feet. He stated 20-foot spaces are what the code requires but that by making the spaces 18 feet there would be more green space. . . . Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals May 22, 2001 Page 6 Shaffer referred to the property directly to west of Perkins and stated that it sits a little lower than the Perkins property and asked the applicant if they intend to put a retaining wall in. Vanney stated that the southwest corner of their property is now on the property line. Grimes stated that as part of the plan the City would need to see a grading and erosion plan. Shaffer asked if the applicant has looked at how many spaces are left over when there are two buildings on the lot during construction and if they've looked at where they are going to have the staging for their debris and materials. Vanney stated that at this point, they haven't done that plan. Grimes stated that the City Code requires them to have 82 parking spaces during construction. McCracken-Hunt asked if they could possible make an arrangement with Menards. Grimes stated it wouldn't be safe to have people crossing the street and that Menards doesn't have enough parking either. Shaffer stated he's concerned that the site is not big enough for two buildings plus construction. Cera asked the applicant if they've considered closing down during construction. Vanney stated they would prefer not to. Grimes reiterated that they would need to have 82 parking spaces during construction to keep the existing building open. Shaffer asked if the dumpster could be moved to an enclosed space on the southwest corner of the site. Vanney stated that they placed it where they did because it would be back-to-back with the Car-X dumpster but they would be willing to move it. Grimes stated he was concerned about the two driveway cuts within 30 feet of each other. He asked the applicant if he's talked to the City Engineer about having two driveway cuts. Vanney stated that the Engineer does have a copy of the plans. Grimes stated that if the applicant wants to apply for a variance for the 18-foot parking spaces, they could amend the variance requests. Vanney stated he would like to amend his request. McCracken-Hunt suggested that they explore the idea of a sidewalk between the neighboring businesses. Grimes stated he would like to talk to the City Attorney about how to handle the request for having two buildings on the same property during construction and stated that Perkins is going to have to show the City a plan for how that would work. MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Cera and unanimously approved to allow the requested variances. It was also discussed that the dumpster be moved to the southwest corner of the site and subject to review of City Engineer and Public Safety Director, there be only one entrance to the site. It was recommended that there be sidewalk connections to the adjacent properties if the adjacent property owners agree. wwmci.goUm-vll~ Y 1-3-02 HEARING NOTICE Board of Zonina Appeals 6920 Wayzata Boulevard Perkins Familv Restaurants. Applicant Perkins Family Restaurants, with property located at 6920 Wayzata Boulevard, has petitioned the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals for variances from the Industrial zoning district. The applicant is proposing to remodel the existing restaurant building and add some additional parking spaces. During the construction planning process, it was discovered that the existing building does not meet building setback requirements. Also, the applicant is requesting variances to reduce the parking lot setback requirements for the property, as well as the number of required parking spaces. This construction project requires variances from the following section of City Code. · The first requested variance is from Zoning Code Section 11.36, Subd. (C) (3), which requires a building setback of 20 feet from Industrially zoned property. The requested variance is for 1.4 feet off of the required 20 feet to a distance of 18.6 feet for the existing building at it closest point to the west side property line. · The second requested variances are from Zoning Code Section 11.36, Subd. 6 (C)(4), which relates to parking lot requirements. The applicant would like to reduce the parking lot setback for the east side from 35 feet to 6 feet; on the south side from 35 feet to 10 feet, and on the west side from 10 feet to 0 feet. · The third requested variance is from Zoning Code Section 11.36, Subd. 7 (F), which requires that in the Industrial zoning district for restaurants of this type, one parking space is required for every forty (40) square feet of public area including eating area and one (1) parking space for every eighty (80) square feet of nonpublic area. Based on these requirements, staff estimates that the required number of parking spaces is 108. The variance <' . requested is to reduce the number of required parking spaces to 96. This petition will be heard at a regular meeting to be held Tuesday, January 22, 2002, beginning at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. If you have any questions or comments about this variance request, you.may contact the Planning Department at 763/593-3992. Adjacent properties require notification. . .