09-14-82 BZA Minutes �i�`c�°
� ;�`��
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
G OLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
SEPTEMBER 14, 1982
The regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held
T uesday, September 14, 1982 at 8;00 P.M. in the Valley Room at the Civic
Center, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota.
The f ollowing Board members were present:
Chairman, Mike Sell
M ahlon Swedberg
Art Flannagan
Donald Hughes (alternate)
Absent by prior arrangement, Glen Christiansen and Herb Polacheck.
The first order of business was approval of the minutes of a regular meeting
h eld August 10, 1982, copies of which had been previously distributed to the
Board. Mahlon Swedberg moved to approve the minutes as written and pre-
s ented, second by Art Flannagan, and upon vote carried.
82-9-28 (Map 9) Commercial
1201 Turners Crossroad
Affiliated Emergency Veterinary Service
C harles Gehrman, D.V.M.
The Petition is for waiver of setback and yard areas for the e�.sting
building to allow remodeling and addition to an existing non-conforming
s tructure, for waiver of Section:
5 .06 2(a) & (c) sideyard setbacks for 38.6 feet off the
required 50 feet setback from the north
lot line to a distance of 11.4 feet as it
n ow exists at its closest point. For 4
f eet off the required 20 feet setback from
t he east lot line to a distance of 16 f eet
from the east lot line to the existing
s tructure at its closest point and for
S ect ion
5 .06 (1) front yaXd requirements for 35 feet off
the required 35 feet of green area from
T urners Crossroad to provide for blacktop
p arking area as it now exists and for 10
f eet off the required 10 feet of green
a rea on the northeast and south lot lines
as it now exi.sts.
( ��.�
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 2
September 14, 1982
The Petition was in order, no adjacent property owners were present.
Dr. Charles Gehrman, D.V.M., the Director of Affiliated Emergency Veterinary
Service, was present to explain the proposed and was accompanied by an
associate.
The present structure, as it is now located on the property, is non-conforming
i n almost all areas f or setback and landscape.
The waivers on the agenda are those required to address the non-conforming
a reas and would, if approved, provide legal permanence for the structure and
secure the investment as it now exists for the proposed remodeling.
The proposed remodeling includes a new exterior, a handicap ramp on the
e ntrance to comply with state requirements and a new interior.
There is a wing wall in conjunction with the ramp for esthetic purposes
a nd some extension of the exterior walls in some areas to the edge of
the existing eaves.
As the structure now stands, if it should ever be destroyed by fire or some other
e vent to an amount determined at 50 percent or �re, it could not be reconstructed
u nless in a conforming manner.
Dr. Gehrman said this location was ideal, access was good and funds were now
a vailable to improve the appearance of the structure and address by interior
upgrading, the energy efficiency of the building.
He acknowledged that there is possibility of construction or renewal of the
a rea and also the effects of the Highway 394. However, he said if the City
required the building to be removed because of circumstances noted, that
t hey could have it moved off the property and the investment in the remodeling
would enhance its appearance whereever it may be placed.
M ahlon Swedberg noted the similarity of this building and some of the area
t o the Highway �f55 and France Avenues where, if waivers had been granted
t o the gun shop and liquor store when they existed, in all probability the
City wouldn't have the Mortenson P.U.D. now or in the forceable future.
M ahlon stated the building doesn't belong where it is.
D r. Gehrman stated they could do nothing and still utilize the structure for
w hat could be a long time and during that time it could continue to deteriorate
a nd become a further eyesore to the city in a very visible location. He noted
t he remodeling done to the present shopping center. The doctor said he didn't
f ores,�e a significant increase in animal patients by the fact the lyuilding had
a better appearance, but he did see a more professional appearance as he felt
it should have.
�-r>-��.
� Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 3
September 14, 1982
The proponents agreed that they fully recognized and would accept the condition
that if they were denied the waivers for the non-conforming structure but
a llowed to upgrade the appearance and interior as proposed that any investment
t hey made was at the risk if destroyed to 50 percent in any manner the pro-
p erty could be required to be reconstructed in only a conforming manner.
Art Flannagan noted there is no possibility of tradeoffs in parking to pro-
v ide more green areas and said that it is in the best interests at this time
t o allow the structure to be upgraded and the appearance improved as it is going
t o be there anyway unless condemned or sold or moved as a result of renewal
p roposals or highway construction.
Art Flannagan moved that waivers be granted to allow the construction to
t ake place. Mike Sell seconded f or discussion purposes only.
Donald Hughes expressed his concern for a motion that would grant the waivers and
p rovide permanence to the structure and questioned whether it was necessary and
p rudent to grant the waivers, but rather allow for approval of the upgrading
o nly. During considerable further discussion, Mahlon Swedberg said these
situations occur when buildings are set out of place and the building does
n ot belong there. If allowed to deteriorate further, in time it will go by
i tself.
Art Flannagan withdrew his previous motion and Mike Sell his second. Art
F lannagan moved to deny the waivers as requested as they would perpetuate
t he non-conforming conditions. Second by Donald Hughes and upon vote
c arried.
Art Flannagan moved to approve the remodeling of the exterior and interior as
p roposed and detailed in the plans as presented to the Board, noting the
h ardship that exists f or the building f or any alternatives and the location
as it now exists on the property. Motion was seconded by Donald Hughes.
Discussion was called on the motion and during this time it was agreed to
declare the plans as exhibit "A" and they were signed and dated as such by
the proponent, Dr. Gehrman, and Mike Sell for the Board of Zoning Appeals.
E ach sheet of the three was so designated and initialed. The doctor also
confirmed that he realized that the building continues as non-conforming and
may be addressed at anytime in the future as such.
The vote was called on the motion and it was three ayes for approval and
o ne nay (Swedberg). The Board noted that the remodeling did not in effect
really expand the non-conforming portions in any significant ma.nner.
F--��-;,-�
E J''�,l
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 4
September 14, 1982
82-9-29 (Map 18) Residential
105 Florida Court
D r. and Mrs. Leonard Mastbaum
The Petition is for waiver of Section
3A.06(1) front setback for 2.7 feet off the
required 35 feet front setback to a
distance of 32.3 feet from the front
lot line to the proposed new front facade
as part of the remodeling at this site.
All other setbacks comply. (The area of
the proposed construction is requiring
a waiver the depth of the e�sting over-
hang of the roof.)
D r. and Mrs. Mastbaum were present. No adjacent property owners were in
attendance, all had signed in approval.
The architect was present from Studio International and explained the proposed
r emodeling. A complete model had been prepare�l and the Board had the oppor-
t unity to question in detail.
The architect e�lained that the entire structure does and would continue to
c onform except for the f ront where the new facade must be supported by posts
t o the ground and this extension was basically the extent of the e�sting
o verhang and gutter. It is in this area that beam supports new facia and a
I arger gutter must be addressed.
D uring discussion, the architect noted that in his drawings it detailed that
a 2 foot 7 inch waiver would be required, but after further review of the
s tructural requirements and rain gutter, it is necessary to request a variance
of 3 f eet 3 inches to get the required support.
M ahlon Swedberg described this as an isolated parcel and neighborhood noting
t he cul-de-sac and no imp act on adjacent setbacks. He also noted the ma.g-
nitude of improvement to the property and to provide for the architectural
design as proposed, proper structural support was necessary.
M ahlon Swedberg moved to approve the waiver of 3 feet 3 inches as requested.
Art Flannagan seconded and upon vote carried unanimously.
��' ��_��
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 5
September 14, 1982
82-9-30 (Map 19) Residential
9 000 Elgin Place
Thomas and Rita Welch
The Petition is for waiver of Section
3A.06(2) rear setback for 15.9 feet off the
required 21.4 f eet rear setback to a
proposed distance of 5.5 feet from the
rear lot line to the deck at its closest
p oint.
Mr. and Mrs. Welch were present. Consent had been obtained from all adjacent
p roperties. None were present.
Mr. Welch described their proposed deck and while doing so noted that it is
approximately two steps up from ground level and adjusted to the topography.
He described their lot as being low and receives the drainage from the area.
T hey could put the patio at ground level if the soils were stable and no
w aiver would be required. Mr• Welch further described the subsoil water
conditions around his house which require alu�st continuous operation during
wet periods of a sump pump.
Donald Hughes asked what the distance is to the adjacent neighbor and Mr.
W elch estimated this at 27 f eet plus the remainder of his yard area.
The deck is located wholly to the rear of the house. The house sets on an
a ngle on the lot lines and the lot lines are not square• Their lot is also
a t the corner of Elgin Place and Ensign Avenue and requires 35 f eet setback
o n two sides so any other practical location of the deck is limited.
Noting the setback requirements on two sides and the topography and water
p roblems as described, Mahlon Swedberg moved to approve the waivers as
requested. Second by Donald Hughes and upon vote carried unanimously.
82-9-31 (Map 18) Residential
1 10 Jersey Avenue South
D ouglas and Nancy Plank
The Petition is for waiver of Section
3A.06 (3) side setback for 1.6 feet off the
required 15.0 f eet side setback to a
distance of 13.4 f eet from the north
lot line to the proposed garage addition.
� ,- �
6 �i�:'
Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 6
September 14, 1982
Mr. and Mrs. Plank were present. The Petition was in order. Consent had been
o btained f rom all adjacent neighbors. None were present.
Mr. Plank described the proposed addition noting that the garage width is the
minimum possible for a two-car garage. (20 feet wide) .
The Board noted that the waiver requested is minimal and questioned if any
f urther adjustmen� in width could be ma.de and eliminate the necessity altogether
of the 1.6 feet request. Mr. Plank described the framing and support required
is now at the minimum to support a 16 foot door opening and that structurally
it would require major and e�ensive changes to the existing structure to do
s o. Mr. Plank noted that they do not have final cost estimates at this time
a nd it could be possible that they may be prohibitive to where the proposed
construction could not be done.
The house as now located is set to the south lot line side and at present there
is a distance of 33.9 f eet f rom the north lot line. This is the area where the
garage is proposed.
Donald Hughes moved to approve the waiver as requested. Second by Art
F lannagan and upon vote carried unanimously.
82-9-32 (Map 18) Residential
7 700 La.urel Avenue
Norton and Susan Gray
The Petition is for waiver of Section
3A.06 (1) front setback for 8.6 feet off the
required 35 feet front setback to a
p roposed distance of 26.4 feet from the
f ront lot line to the addition.
M r. and Mrs. Gray were present. Consent had been obtained f rom all adjacent pro-
p erties. No others were in attendance on this petition.
Mr. Gray described the house as the only one along that area that faces Laurel
Avenue so the question of setback alignment did not appear to him to have an
effect on any other property.
M ahlon Swedberg questioned the location and distance of a solid wood fence
a djacent to the Gray residence. Mr. Gray said that f ence surrounds a swiffiing
p ool and is set at about the same distance as his addition is proposed.
Mrs. Gray said the addition would provide additional toilet f acilities and an
e�anded bedroom and to do so this is the only place it could be done
considering existing plumbing and location of rooms.
�-,'`� ^� �
E �r� .�_
Board of Zoning Appeals
P age 7
September 14, 1982
The Board noted this is a corner lot with a setback requirement of 35 f eet on
two sides. To the south along Rhode Island are industrial properties.
Following further discussion on the possibility of other feasible alternatives,
Art Flannagan moved to approve the waiver as requested, noting it has no
impact on alignment to adjacent structures and also noting the limitations of
- this corner lot because of setback requirements of 35 feet on two sides.
Second by Donald Hughes and upon vote carried unanimously.
The Board discussed several admi nistrative items, including the new proposed
Board of Zoning Appeal's fee schedules and also the appeals section of the
Board of Zoning Appeals ordinance.
There being no further business to come before the Board, it was moved,
seconded and carried to adjourn at 9:55 P.M.
.� �L�
i
M ike Sell, Chairman Lloy G. Becker, Secretary