Loading...
03-22-16 BZA AgendaBoard of Zoning Appeals Regular Meeting Tuesday, March 22, 2016 7 pm 7800 Golden Valley Road Council Chambers Approval of Minutes — October 27, 2015 Regular Meeting II. The Petition(s) are: 1319 Tyrol Trail Dan & Sheila Broughton, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd- 11 (A)(3)(a) ubd.11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 3 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new house. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 3 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 12 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new house. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 5 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new house. 221 Sunnyridge Lane Sally Jacquemin, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3)(a) Side Yard Setback Requirements 7.7 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.3 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new deck. III. Other Business IV. Adjournment This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call 763-593-8006 {TTY: 763-593-3968} to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, October 27, 2015, at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Perich called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members Maxwell, Nelson, Orenstein, Perich and Planning Commission Representative Johnson. Also present were Associate Planr or/64, Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman.. I. Approval of Minutes — September 29, 2015 Regular Me0g G� MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried unously,to. approve the September 29, 2015, minutes as submitted.` ' 11. The Petition(s) are: 5605 Woodstock Avenue Nate & Dana Isder, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 12(E) Accessory Structurel,R • 339 sq. ft. more tha space for a total,,Q I Purpose: To allow f6(the,`eonstruction of new garage (975 sq. ft.) and an existing shed (464 sq. ft f, Goellner referred ,to a site,,plarr=of;the property and explained that the applicants received approval Q, co," 4ruct a new 975 square foot garage. During an inspection of the found( jt atc z, ered that the applicants also had an existing 364 square foot shed grrtsr� roperty that was not shown on their survey. Therefore, the applicant Ire riasking for a variance in order to keep the granary and allow them to have more tion t =allowed 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space. Goelln&at11fhat the applicants have said that their unique circumstances are that the existiri 14nary was placed on the property by previous property owners and that the existing granary has been there so long that it will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. She stated that staff is recommending denial of the requested variance. Perich asked if the property used to be a farm. Goellner said yes. Perich asked how old the house is. Goellner said she didn't know. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 2 Johnson asked who provided the survey. Goellner said she thinks the City probably had a copy of the survey on file that the applicant used. She added that the granary should have been drawn on it when the survey was originally done, but it was not. Maxwell asked if the new garage is already built. Goellner said the new garage is mostly built. Maxwell asked Goellner if she suspects that the granary just wasn't counted in the total square footage at the beginning of the project. Goellner said yes, and reiterated that the overage in the amount of square footage would have been caught at the time of building permit review if staff had an accurate survey lik�ii�a Nate Isder, Applicant, said the survey the City had on file is what he upedtlip build tt new garage and he wasn't trying to hide anything. He stated that'grana was dig) moved onto the site many years ago. He explained that he met h City staff `trt AU'6ust to discuss his plans and he started demolition and pouring a new qi�,n aktion inyMid- September before a City inspector asked if the square footage of tha ranary!Was included in the total square footage allowed. He said thatiras the first tie heard about having to include the granary and he never had,an o, Oortur>?ity to decide whether to save the granary or to build the new garage. He said' he..would have chosen to save the granary because he believes it is historic to Go den Valli Y. He added that he has obviously violated the Zoning Code, but it wa 't hI' intentionihe was unaware that the granary was supposed to be included in th��49 1§cjd*e footage. Nelson asked the applicant how Ion he has owned the house. Isder said four years. Perich asked how old the house is�1(9iersaihe house was moved to the site in 1952 and he thinks it was built in 1944. Maxwell asked the applicant if he had t ,,,make a choice if he would choose to remove the granary. Isder said he�would rather not_see the granary go, but it would not be economical for him to remove the new garage. Nelson asked the applicant if he had known that the granary was suolppsed to be included in the total square footage amount if he would have built 4, smaller garage. Isder said he wouldn't have even built a new garage becauseite size jt�is'no-is just big enough to store his work trucks in. Perich openei 1the p6b., ing, rig; N, Joan Peters 407jurners Crossroad, said this property used to be a farm before it was divided into single family lots in the 1950s. She gave a history of the area and the houses�and sail this granary is one of the last pieces of a farm left in Golden Valley. She stated that, the granary was probably built in the 1920s and she considers this farm building an important piece of history and she would hate to see something happen to it if it isn't bothering anybody. Tim Parsons, 5550 Woodstock Avenue, said the granary is a cool building and the City would be really losing something to tear it down. He said he doesn't know what would be gained by tearing it down and when the size and scale of the lot and structures are considered it's not any different than other properties with a smaller shed. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 3 Jim Murphy, 5610 Woodstock Avenue, said he is friends with a person who grew up in this house and he was a kid when the granary was moved in. He stated that the granary is built like a grain elevator and he is in favor of letting the applicant keep it. Evan Reminick, 5536 Loring Lane, said he supports the applicant's proposal. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Perich closed the public hearing. Nelson explained that the Board tries to be consistent when granting varianc.i§She said she thinks the unique circumstance in this case is that the granaryi$ kind of historic building and it was not built by the landowner. Perich said the use is reasonable and he agrees the granary is unique jt hey t doles with the criteria that it was not caused by the landowner._ Maxwell said he thinks there was an innocent mistake and, the aplicartadjust the size of the new garage to meet what he thought we r e r*!reriients and the granary is historical. Johnson said he agrees that a mistake was rgede'a 50 year old survey and there was a miss on the City's art and on the b�� ty p Grp �i£He sa0 the granary could be moved, but there are a lot of sheds in the back yards o the properties around this one so he doesn't think the granary is ca jng p, abttthe area. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded f rens4inaA4,,motion carried unanimously to k approve the variance request, ali. pq sq ft `"more than the allowed 1,000 square feet of accessory structures ac r�119tal of 1,339 square feet of accessory structure space. ` i, 1,7 4301 WoodstckAvenuo. Remie, t: Werlom Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 1:1(A) Fron ar iSetback Requirements •0¢ft. off, of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.1 ft. at its closest point to € the'front }yard (east) property line. z : To allow for the construction of a new home. Goellner referred to a survey of the property and explained that the applicant is proposing to tear down the existing home and construct a new home on the lot. She noted that the proposed new home would be located 30.1 feet at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line rather than the required 35 feet. The existing home is 30.5 feet at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 4 She stated that the applicant has said the unique circumstances in this case are that this is a corner lot requiring two front yard setbacks and that there is a large front yard and a small back yard. She said staff is recommending approval of the requested variance. Perich asked if the proposed new home meets the setback requirements on the west side of the property. Goellner said yes. Maxwell asked about the distance from the property line to the street along the east side of the property. Goellner said there is approximately 20 feet between the property line and the street. A110111ii1� Johnson questioned why the house couldn't be built within the builda. Bill Coffman, Gonyea Companies, representing the applicant, expained:that the main reason in moving the house forward (north) on the lot is to save; the trees in the back yard and to not have such a small back yard. He stated that the proppsed new h©tise could have been flipped the other direction on the lot but that would have beeral"bre impactful to the neighboring property. i 41F I Johnson asked why the width of the house couldn`be red% d. Co�man said it is not a large house and they are proposing an end loadin' arage t� elp with the width issue. 19 `' Perich asked about the size of the proposed hone CeYhai' said it will be a two story home with a finished basement and vyj beI p g 6irk )y 4,200 square feet in size. Perich opened the public hearings eein pnd Pring no one wishing to comment, Perich closed the public hearing. Nelson said she is sympathetic to1ornerxtpts. She stated that the proposed house is not impacting the Ardmore sideproperty and that turning it would have more impact on the neighboring propi'6 ty She's id it is in harmony with the intent and purposes of the ordinances, it's consistent Wth the: Comprehensive Plan, it's a reasonable use of the property, and it w�I. imprq the dharacter of the neighborhood, so she is supportive of the requested variance�t'en @h agreed. Johnson stated that�f-h4tipplicants are starting with a blank slate and that the Board hasn't been presented any other options or good reasons why a house can't be built within the con, ines of thearufes:. Maxwell said they are trying to preserve trees and the back yard spac 1i Nelson *iterated that putting the house in a different direction would have more of an imps jj pn; a neighboring property. Johnson said he thinks the new house could be narrower. G man stated that the standard size of three -stall garage is 33 ft. x 24 ft. in size so they can't make the house narrower. Goellner added that the proposed garage will be 23.5 ft. deep. Johnson agreed that if the Board didn't grant the requested variance the garage would be substandard. MOVED by Nelson, seconded Maxwell and motion carried unanimously to approve the variance request for 4.9 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 30.1 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a new home. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 5 2601 Noble Avenue North Independent School District #281, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 11.46, Institutional Zoning District, Subd. 7 Yard Requirements • 20 ft. off of the required 50 ft. to a distance of 30 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of an addition on the sout�"end of thT1 existing building. E Goellner referred to a site plan of the property and explained theppligt's p16 t dal to construct an addition on the south end of the existing building: Thepposed addition would be located 30 ft. from the south property line rather than th reWj,,req-.j0 i ft. She stated that the applicant has said that the unique circum ,pces i� this caseFare that they would like to retain the rectangular shape of the bui l g� anc ib "this to the west would impede on the existing play area.Ai r�iz,' Goellner stated that staff is recommending al he variance request and would like the applicant to further explore options o ` t of �6' building in order to reduce the impact on the single family homes t��, a sou. Maxwell asked about the possibilities! 'an addition on the north side of the building. Goellner said there is a drivewayand parking onvthe north side and that staff would rather see an addition on the west idsffbuilding. Perich asked if the south sie of existing building is located right at the 50 ft. setback line. Goellner said there is app . imately 5 to 7 feet between the building and the setback line along the south. &1i"', , Maxwell asked if a ap giant would have to pay another application fee to apply for a different va nce ,ellr� r stated that if the Board denies this variance request, rather than tabling ltt I a twould have to re -apply and pay the application fee again. s Paul Aplikowki Wold Architects, representing the applicant, stated that there have been mai'y.optionsti�ssed and considered. He stated that they have considered building an additica r.Out to `the front, but they would have to demolish two big bathrooms at significant expense:tiuj1tng an addition on the back of the building would impede on the existing playground and it would be impractical to construct on the north side because they would need to construct a retaining wall. Perich asked the applicant if they had considered building a second story. Aplikowski said they would then need to add elevators. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 6 Nelson asked the applicant if they had considered building an addition on the west side of the property. Aplikowski said the new addition would have to be entered through the cafeteria if they built on the west side of the building. Orenstein said he would like to see plans for an addition that meets the setback requirements. Maxwell and Perich agreed. Aplikowski said he believes he could create a plan that meets the setback requirements, however the plans submitted are the School District's first choice and what they feel is the highest and best use of the property. Johnson said he would like to know the existing configuration of the insid�=llh building as well. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Orenstein and motion carried a imously to tao this 71 variance request to the November 24, 2015, Board of Zoning Ap ' alsr etrn Am,,&- er to review other options for this property. 1319 Tyrol Trail Dan & Sheila Broughton, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(1) Front Yard Setback Requiren • 12.1 ft. off of the required 35 t4o' a di$tance 6f22'.9 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (west) property ,Ina q l jl,a £i9a Purpose: To allow for the pstr F on ofi ,porch addition. Request: Waiverrim Se tioiii'1.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3) Side Yar;"i etbap Requirements • 1 ft. off of�quiredt,5 ft. to a distance of 14 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (sth %r line. Purpose ToIelJOWI for the construction of a porch addition. a EE x Goellner >t erred to a §Duey of the property and explained the applicant's request to construct a'1 ft"�r-,12 ft. porch addition on the southwest side of their home. She explained tha(is property received variances in 2012 to allow for a bedroom and porch addition 4n the west side of the property which was never built. In 2015, variance{`granted to allow for a garage addition on the east side of the property and a porch addition on the south. Neither one of these additions have been built yet, but the variances don't expire until May 2016. She stated that the applicant has said the unique circumstances with this property are that it is a triangular shaped, corner lot, the topography of the lot reduces the buildable area, and a variance would be required for nearly any addition built on this property. She stated that staff agrees with the applicants stated unique circumstances and is recommending approval of the requested variances. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 7 Jennifer Christiaansen, U+B Architects, representing the applicant, stated that this site is very challenging and the owner wants a small outdoor space. She said they feel that 120 square feet is a reasonably sized porch. She stated that the pie shaped lot and buildable area are unique circumstances. She said they are trying to maintain the character of the area and that the circumstances in this case are not caused by the landowner. She added that the variance they are asking for at this time will be smaller than the variance granted in 2012. Perich opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to Perich closed the public hearing. Nelson said she thinks this a uniquely shaped lot with a lot of unigU61 circumstances Perich agreed and said he thinks they have fully vetted all of them°options. a; MOVED by Nelson, seconded by Perich and motion carried un6fnim60sly to.approve the following variances to allow for the construction of a porch .additi h ,o • 12.1 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 'ft.° at it's dio�est point to the front yard (west) property line. • 1 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distanced 1#. at its cloo sest point to the side yard (south) property line. 3107 Lee Avenue North Joshua A. Counihan, ApO icant Request: Waiver from Sectiohl,1.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(2) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 1.33 ft. off' Ithhe,required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.67 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (66st) p 6ppo'line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new garage. R61ueitt Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. Side Yard Setback Requirements A kj . 7.74 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 7.26 ft. at its closest point to the Sjddlyard (south) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new garage. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(D) Side Wall Articulation Requirements • City Code requires any wall longer than 32 feet in length to be articulated. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 8 The applicant is asking that the proposed new south wall of the garage be 36 feet in length without articulation. Goellner referred to a survey of the property and explained the applicant's request to construct a new 26 ft. x 36 ft. garage on the south side of the existing home. She stated that the applicant has said the unique circumstance in this case is the limited buildable area to the south. She stated that staff acknowledges that the buildable area for a second stall is limited, however staff is recommending denial of the requested variances and would like to recommend that the garage be 24 ft. x 24 ft. in size rather thamtheroposed 26 ft. x 36 ft, r a Maxwell noted that the proposed garage could be moved further b�6 on th ilot so,a"front yard variance wouldn't be needed. Goellner stated that the appl nts ar,propos r the location of the front of garage where they have because they would.) ko'it to line 'Up with a future front porch addition. Johnson stated that the proposed garageaeould piebuilt closer to the front yard property line without requiring a variance: Nelson asked the applicants if a 24 ft. x 32 ft. gars ' w6d1d, work f i'',them, Joshua Counihan, Applicant, stated that they are trying to !avoid building a shed which would cause them to have to remove trees. Nelson noted that a 32 ft. deep garage is still larger than a standard two -stall garage. Perich agreed toat'the proposed garage size is very large. Maxwell said he would like to applicant to,fib able,toi66ild a two -stall garage without such large variances. Johnson added that, the.a,oplioantcouId still build a 36 ft. deep garage, he would just have to articuiateIhe II after 32 ft. in length. Goellner stated that if a 24 ft x 4 ft,,ga 'gge is allowed the variance for the side yard would be amended to 5.74;,'o°6f therequired 15 ft. to a distance of 9.26 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property lire. . Perich opened the public, hearing, Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Perich closed the public hearing: , ;r }£f.4 MOVED by Maxwell,,sedbnded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve a variance for 5.74 ft., off, .,of 'the required 15 ft. to a distance of 9.26 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line to allow for the construction of a new garage. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Perich and motion carried unanimously to deny the following variance requests: • 1.33 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 33.67 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (east) property line. • The proposed new south wall of the garage would be 36 ft. in length, (rather than the allowed 32 ft.) without articulation. III. Other Business Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 27, 2015 Page 9 No other business was discussed. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:36 pm. David Perich, Chair MEMORANDUM Physical Development Department 763-593-8095 / 763-593-8109 (fax) Date: March 22, 2016 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Subject: 1319 Tyrol Trail Dan and Sheila Broughton, Applicants Dan and Sheila Broughton, owners of the property at 1319 Tyrol Trail, are seeking three variances from the City Code to construct a new home. The applicants are seeking a variance of 5 feet off of the required 35 feet to a distance of 30 feet at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. The applicants are also seeking two variances of 3 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 12 feet at its closest point to both the side yard (south) property line and the side yard (east) property line. Since staff is not able to determine a "true" front yard (the shorter of the two front lot lines), there is no rear yard on this property. The new home would have a similar design and size as the existing home. The current owners as well as previous owners have received several variances on this property for additions that were never built. In September 2012, the previous owners were granted setback variances from the south and west sides of the property to build a bedroom addition. That addition was not constructed and the house was sold to Dan and Sheila Broughton. In May 2015, the Broughton's received approval for setback variances for projects on the east and south sides of the home for a second garage stall, additional living space, and a deck. In October 2015, the Broughton's also received approval for variances for projects on the east, south, and north sides of the property for a three -season porch. The applicant notes that the lot is triangular and located on a corner lot, which significantly reduces the buildable area. Aside from the size and shape of the lot, grading is also a limiting factor for constructability of a new home. The applicant hopes to utilize existing retaining walls on the property. The applicant has attempted to place the proposed home in a position on the property that reduces the amount and size of the variances requested. Construction of a new home is limited by a relatively small buildable area in comparison to other residential properties located in Golden Valley. The proposal requires variances from the following sections of City Code: Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(2) Front Yard Setback Requirements: The minimum front yard (west) setback requirement is 35 feet. The applicant is requesting a variance of 5 feet off of the required 35 feet to a distance of 30 feet at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3) Side Yard Setback Requirements: The minimum side yard (south and east) setback requirement is 15 feet. The Applicant is requesting a variance of 3 feet off of the required 15 feet to a distance of 12 feet at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line and the side yard (east) property line. Staff Recommendation: In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, requiring that a property exhibit "practical difficulties" in order for a variance to be granted. To constitute practical difficulties, the property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner, the landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner, and that the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality. The topography of the site as well as the shape and size in which the property was platted cause a set of practical difficulties that are unique to this property and not caused by the landowner. City staff recognizes that this property is unique in that the buildable area is very limited due to its location on the corner, its triangular shape, and the existence of slopes and retaining walls. A variance is required for nearly any size addition to the existing home or for the construction of a new home. Staff finds that this new home would not compromise the essential character of the locality since many homes in this area have varying setbacks, lot sizes, lot shapes, and challenging topography. Staff finds that the proposed home is a reasonable size that is comparable to the existing home as well as to other homes in the neighborhood. Staff recommends approval of the request for a front yard variance of 5 feet off of the required 35 feet to a distance of 30 feet at its closest point to the front yard (northwest) property line. Staff recommends approval of the request for a side yard variance of 3 feet off of the required 15 feet to a distance of 12 feet at its closest point to the side yard (south) property line. Staff recommends approval of the request for a side yard variance of 3 feet off of the required 15 feet to a distance of 12 feet at its closest point to the side yard (east) property line. 1370' Subject Property 1400 4 1319 Tyrol Trail Tyrol Ti 1404 - - 1406 1408 1410 • 1410 << .,. 1 521 • 1415 1416 1515`:: N N R c 1425 1509 1420 1 1312,E , 1309 ^` 1311 1315 1317 1319 .1419 1435 142 9 � % 1411 � ;, Planning 1 7300 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-5y3-8095 1 TTY: 763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goldenvalleymn.gov l/Ae n . nnu+ City of golden�� PLANNING APPLICATION '''"" °' `°'° Zoning Code Variance Street address of property in this application: 1319 Tyrol Trail, Minneapolis, MN 55408 APPLICANT INFOPMATION Name (individual, or corporate entitiy): Daniel and Sheila Broughton (owner) Address: Phone Number: Email Address: Authorized Representative (if other than applicant): Name: Jennifer Christiaansen, AIA, LEED AP Address: U+B architecture & design / 2609 Aldrich Ave S / Suite 100 / Minneapolis, MN 55408 Phone Number: Email Address: 612.870.2538 jennifer.christiaansen@uplusb.com Property Owner (if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone Number: Email Address: SITE INFOPMATION Provide a detailed description of the variance(s) being requested: The variance(s) requested in this application is for new construction on the site at 1319 Tyrol Trail. At the East side yard setback we are asking for a variance from 15' to 12'. At the South side yard setback we are asking for a variance from 15' to 12'. This variance will thus require two (2) waivers from section 11.21 Single Family Zoning District, Subdivision 11(A)3 related to the side yard setbacks. At both side yards we are asking for an additional 3'. At the North/West front yard setback we are asking for a variance from 35' to 30'. There is a 5' cantilevered bay window on the west facade but it does not extend over the requested 30' setback. This variance will thus require one (1) waiver from section 11.21 Single Family Zoning District, Subdivision 11(A)1 related to the front yard setback, At the East side yard we are asking for one (1) height variance. At the South side yard we are asking for one (1) height variance. This would require two (2) waivers from the side yard height diagrammed in section 11.21 Single Family Zoning District, Subdivision 11(A)3a for the roof line. See attached sheet A200 for the requested increases in height above that diagrammed in said section. The heights shown are above the average grade of each particular facade. Provide a detailed description of need for a variance from the Zoning Code, including description of building(s), description of proposed addition(s), and description of proposed alteration(s) to property: This variance is related to a new home to be constructed on the site of an existing home which will be demolished at 1319 Tyrol Trail. The new home is 2 stories in height and has a smaller total Gross Square Feet than the existing home on site plus the two 2015 approved variances. Also of note, the mass of the East facade (facing the adjacent neighbor) is minimized in this new construction scheme versus the prior variances which involved remodels to the existing home. The new home will be similar in scale, height, footprint and location to the existing home on site. The height of the new home is approximately 22'-5", which is well below the maximum 28' per section 11.21 Single Family Zoning District, Subdivision 1 1(B). See attached A200 Sheet for the calculations. Please see attached photographs of existing home compared to rendering of proposed home, Planning 1 7.800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8095 1 TTY: 763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goldenvalleymn.gov Cit of golden�V, valley Minnesota State Statue 462.357 requires that a property exhibit "practical difficulties" in order for a variance to be considered. Practical difficulties: • result in a use that is reasonable • are based on a problem that is unique to the property • are not caused by the landowner • do not alter the essential character of the locality To demonstrate how your request will comply with Minnesota State Statute 462.357, please respond to the following questions. Explain the need for your variance request and how it will result in a reasonable use of the property. We have been working with this client for a year on this site and have already requested two variances related to an addition/renovation on site. Both these previous variances were granted. In addition a previous variance was requested for this site in 2012. This variance was also granted. The variance we are requesting for the new construction on site is more respectful of the setbacks compared to the 3 previous variances which were dictated by the location of the existing home. It is clear that as we have gone through the design process it is understood by both us as the Architects, the GV Planning Department and the GV ZBA that this site has a very limited build -able area due to its shape and extensive front yard setback. In addition, the encroachment into the setbacks is related to the difficult siting of a home on this steep site. With the new construction we have worked very hard to minimize the footprint, maximize the efficiency of the home, respect the views of the adjacent neighbors as well as the height of the other homes in the area in order to develop a reasonable use for this property in the desirable Tyrol Hills neighborhood. What is unique about your property and how do you feel that it necessitates a variance? This property is a corner lot. It has one long front yard setback of 35' along both the West and North sides of the site. The site has two side yard set backs of 15' along the entire East and South sides. Due to the wedge shape of this site and the extensive front yard setback, the buildable area is extremely limited. The existing curb cuts (which we plan to maintain) at the front of the site also drive the siting of the home. Lastly, both the topography and vegetation on the site drive the siting of this home. There are numerous mature trees on site that we would like to maintain. In order to avoid compromising their root structure we are limited in how far into the front yard we can push the home. Moving it too close to these trees may help with the side yard concerns but it could result in eliminating very important vegetation on site. We have thought very carefully about all these issues. Explain how the need for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. The fact that this site has a large curved front yard setback on two sides of the house, significant vegetation and a very small build -able area is not related to landowner action. Explain how, if granted, the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. The owners of 1319 Tyrol Trail have invested a significant amount of time and resources into studying this site to determine what would be the most appropriate solution. Their commitment to Tyrol Hills is evident even before they take residence in their home. Originally they were committed to renovating the existing home in order to preserve building stock. However, after reviewing the state of the existing home and the cost, time and effort required to bring this structure up to a livable condition, it was determined that the best solution for the owners and the community would be to build new while respecting the scale, style and height of the adjacent structures.This new home will add to and compliment the existing neighborhood and not alter the essential character of Tyrol Hills or Golden Valley as a whole. Planning i 7,900 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8095 1 TI Y: 763-593-3968 1 www.goidenvalleymn.gov i planning(cogoldenvalleymn.gov city of gvlder1 valley Zoning Code Variance The City requests that you consider all available project options permitted by the Zoning Code before requesting a variance. The Board of Zoning Appeals will discuss alternative options to seeking variance with you at the public hearing. Please describe alternate ways to do your project that do not require variances from the Zoning Code. Our process involved numerous new construction options for the Broughtons. After reviewing these options we narrowed down our direction to focus on two proposed strategies. One option is what we present today, the other option had a smaller footprint that would not encroach on setbacks as significantly but extended up another story, significantly violating Section 11(B) height restrictions. Due to the already steeply sloped site and prominent location in Tyrol Hills, the scale of the existing home and the desire to respect the adjacent neighbors views, our entire team felt that the smaller footprint but taller scheme was not appropriate for this site. We have essentially squeezed down this footprint to be as efficient as possible, allow for comfortable living space, appropriately scaled rooms while siting as much within the required setbacks as possible to maintaining elements on the property such as the mature trees (in particular on the northwest side), the existing curb cuts and adjacent neighbor views. PEQUIRIED ATTACHMFNTS XCurrent survey of your property, including proposed addition and new proposed building and structure setbacks (a copy of Golden Valley's survey requirements is available upon request; application considered incomplete without a current property survey) j( One current color photograph of the area affected by the proposed variance (attach a printed photograph to this application or y� email a digital image to planning@agoldenvalleymn.gov; submit additional photographs as needed) Fee: $20o application fee for Single -Family Residential, $300 application fee for all other Zoning Districts Legal Description: Exact legal description of the land involved in this application (attach a separate sheet if necessary): SIGNATUPES To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted, is not taken within one year, the variance expires. I have considered all options afforded to me through the City's Zoning Code and feel there is no alternate way to achieve my objective except to seek a variance to zoning rules and regulations. I give permission for Golden Valley staff, as well as members of the Board of Zoning Appeals, to enter my property before the public hearing to inspect the area affected by this request. Please include printed name, signature, and date for ap- plicant, authorized representative (if other than applicant), or property ower (if other than applicant). Name of applicant (please print): Signature of applicant: Date: Authorized Representative (if other than applicant) Name (please pri Or: Jennifer Christiaansen Signature: Date: 3; 1 /2016 Property Owner (if other than applicant) Name (please print): Signature: Date: Please note: The City of Golden Valley will send notice of your variance request to all adjoining property owners as well as owners of properties directly across streets or alleys. Your neighbors have the right to address the Board of Zoning Appeals at your public hearing. You are advised to personally contact your neighbors and explain your project to them before the public hearing. This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call 763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. Planning ) 7b00Gatcten Vailey Road, GoldenValley, MN 5S427-4586 rtt r*f 763-593 8095 ! T t Y: 763-593.3958 j va wv: raoldenvatleymin.9ov I planninq��Agoldmvalleymn gov V, f'v !The City requests that you consider all available protect options permitted by the Zoning Code before reuuesting a -.a!tanCe The Eaard j of Zoning Appeals will discuss alternative options to seeking variance .with you at the public hearing Please describe alternate ways to do your project that do not require variances from the Zoning Code. Our process involved numerous new construction options for the Broughlons After reviewing these options we narrowed down I our direction to focus on two proposed strategies. One option is what we present today. the other option had a smatter 100tprrt that would not encroach on setbacks as significantly but extended up another story, significantly violating section t t IBi height restrictions Due to the already steeply sloped site and prominent location in Tyrol Hills, the scale of the existing home and the desire to respect the adjacent neighbors views, our entire team telt that the smaller footprint but tatter scheme was not appropriate for this site We nave essentially squeezed down this footprint to be as efficient as possible, allow tot comfortable living spaceappropriately' scaled rooms while siting as much within the required setbacks as possible to maintaining elements on the property such as the mature trees tin particular on the northwest side), the existing curb cuts and adjacent neighbor views. i Current survey of your property, including proposed addition and new proposed building and structure setbacks (a copy of Golden Valley's survey requirements is available upon request; application considered incomplete without a current property survey) j�ICC One current color photograph of the area affected by the proposed variance (attach a printed photograph to this applicaticn or email a digital image to planning@goldenvalleymn.gov; submit additional photographs as needed) iR! Fee: $200 application fee for Single -Family Residential, $300 application fee for all other Zoning Districts Legal Description: Exact legal description of the land involved in this application (attach a separate sheet if necessary): To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted, is not taken within one year, the variance expires. I have considered all options afforded to me through the City's Zoning Code and feel there is no alternate way to achieve my objective except to seek a variance to zoning rules and regulations. I give permission for Golden Valley staff, as well as members of the Board of Zoning Appeals, to enter my property before the public hearing to inspect the area affected by this request. Please include printed name. signature, and date for ap- plicant, authorized representative (if other than applicant), or property ower (if other than applicant). Name of applicant (please print): Signature of applicant: Data: Authorized Representative (if other than applicant) I Name (please pript): Jennifer Christiaansen Signature: Property Owner (if other than applicant) Name (please print): Daniel Broughton, M.D. Signature: Date: 3 ` 1,12016 Date: 3/1/2016 Please note: The City of Golden Valley 441 send notice of your variance request to all adjoining property owners as well as owners of crooerttes directly across streets or alleys your neighbors have the right to address the Board of Zoning Appeals of your public hear,rq Yc:, a -e advised to personally contact your neighbors and explain your project to them before the public hearing This docu:rent is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call 763.593.6006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a rec lest Examples ct alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette etc tit, � ► EanA�df� nYyP���,� �+��': Rglv�'�"i�� �►F, r �Ii- A 17 R sGr. I oil The Gregory Group d.b.a. LOT SURVEYS COMPANY, INC. Established in 1962 LAND SURVEYORS REGISTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF STATE OF MINNESOTA 7601 73rd Avenue North (763) 560-3093 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55428 Fax No. 560-3522 UrU-r rs T rrttfirat-P ij Basis for bearings is 51TE PLAN 5URVEY FOR: assumed U + B ARCHITECTS Property located in Section 30, Township 29, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Property Address: 1319 Tyrol Trail, Golden Valley, MN Benchmark: Top nut of hydrant located opposite of House No. 1429 Tyrol Trail. Elevation = 861.38 feet (City of Golden Valley records) Property is in Flood Zone "X" an area of minimal flooding per FEMA map no. 27053C0354E, dated Sept. 2, 2004. Property is Zoned R-1, Residential. t11 86/.6/ t- 1561.19 66/.3 \ 1 tcc I 86/.13 -73 \ O tone WaII 16 66/ tcc iVY Lot 5, Block 2, TYROL HILLS Hennepin County, Minnesota The only easements shown are from plats of record or information provided by client. I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Surveyed this 29th day of February 2016. INVOICE NO F.B.NO. SCALE: 1" _ 84865 1054-61,62 30' • Denotes Found Iron Monument O Denotes Iron Monument X000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation — _ Denotes Existing Contour / '- ` / Denotes Proposed Contour --dilt — Denotes Surface Drainage 978.56 Proposed First Floor 967.75 Proposed Garage Floor 968.56 Proposed Basement Floor \\/r1l cont ed068 565.44�, _z 1 -3 -Fr No. 1317 B)) \ a D x6 9\ 477.3 , s � 74 Y � Woy�Pence V meagtl/eA �t / �l'south oflme �c - era 569.3 Existino Hardcover Calculations House - 1429 sq.ft Driveway - 665 sq.ft Concrete - 96 sq.ft Total Hardcover = 2190 sq.ft Area of Parcel = 9842 sq.ft Percentage of Hardcover = 22.3% oye/nead O'C9 PROPOSED HARDCOVER Residence = 1905 sq.ft Walks, Drive & Terrace = 1081 sq.ft Walls = 145 sq.ft Total Hardcover = 3131 sq.ft Area of Parcel = 9842 sq.ft Percentage of Hardcover = 31.8% Signed Gregor(R) Pra h, Minn. Reg. No. 24992 — — PROPERTY LINE 1 I I I \ 1 1 11 \ I 1 i m Fr E F c Q U .erq,4'6 V qG y wY yi "l E E —' ? Z O 9 L y �� U U a �y z 0 O F� S� Q a O n J J N m ayyM�yy �✓ A Q ISI'. O O E ~ _ E Q V �� '� �i ��j N N G -6- =_20 QO r 6.6 C 07 0.9 (D - 9 gW�.1 tj E- — N N E c Q G% m l @Co or —� o 2U E ¢a a. m m �oL � — — PROPERTY LINE 1 I I I \ 1 1 11 \ I 1 i m Fr d ¢ E gy o c_ 5 � C 0a .�E E N n &'g s 0 v < J (p Z - a- � b O ^� o m a a c @1 i ^w,t aE¢ VI O J J N � O L W Z m ? J w ui E Q c_ 01 ," 5 g z O O V Q N U D fb y G O C L d C c V O �\ F W O 5 n t-2 E C ; N aon� o 2z 21 om$ Vo.W� l �.�/� ojY =.SEN ? Z o W W Q �Oo Na N'OQ N'� CL _ C J Q N C f0 J Y f0 Y E fpC O fp '� •L Q Y/ F Q. $.r _ o—'a v—v �w—m (C Q- a 0 m o o �a-a c W U) .w a �U E as m tea._ g m t g� Q m �c4 M2 �T f T fl !ET T 03 pal ��o-5� O3 03 g i 9 I < i n i NObHl3S Z� O3SOd0tld � I I I I I — I' I l I I I i I I I I I I I IE I - Hill I I I �■ o r I I I I �l I I I I g I I � A-3 I IEp 1H913H) - — — — — — — — — — — — — s t5y� 8 q' o 03 03 q� M (311HO13H) I D �T omw� �I - � I p3 l 03 , I °b I FOMI I , I I I I I � II I e I I I I I � I I I I I I I I I I I 03 03 II I I pv3i3s z( p3sodoea I �i ME] Nil I I vl ((#1H013b 0 z� 03 Z I O � Date: March 22, 2016 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer Subject: 221 Sunnyridge Lane Sally Jaquemin, Applicant Sally Jaquemin, owner of the property at 221 Sunnyridge Lane, is seeking a variance from the City Code to build a deck on her single-family home. The applicant is seeking a variance of 7.7 feet off the required side yard setback of 15 feet to a distance of 7.3 feet from the side yard (north) property line. The proposed deck would be between 12 and 17 feet long extending from the home and it would be approximately 32 feet wide. It would total approximately 450 square feet. The property was subdivided in 2014 and one key condition of approval was that the deck on this home be reduced in size prior to approval of the subdivision in order to meet the new side yard setback requirement. The previous owner removed half of the deck and the lot was split into two lots. A house was constructed on the other lot (227 Sunnyridge Lane) in 2015. The owner of the property at 227 Sunnyridge Lane was the applicant for the subdivision and previous owner of the home at 221 Sunnyridge Lane. The applicant states that the previous owner did not disclose the setback restrictions and the fact that the deck was modified in order to split the lot into two lots. The applicant also states that this owner is supportive of the variance request. The applicant states that the property is unique because of the way the lot was subdivided. The angle of the property line is not parallel to the home, causing the need for a variance in order to build a reasonably sized deck. The property currently has a small deck that was not removed as well as a patio. The applicant does not prefer to utilize the existing patio due to the presence of a staircase, which causes accessibility challenges for those with limited mobility. The applicant would prefer to maintain the existing retaining walls in the rear yard instead of building the deck in this area of the property. Staff has identified significant buildable area for a deck if it is shifted to the south, but it is staff's understanding that this is not a preferable location for the applicant. The proposal requires variances from the following sections of City Code: Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. 11(A)(3) Side Yard Setback Requirements: The minimum side yard (south) setback requirement is 15 feet. The Applicant is requesting a variance of 7.7 feet off of the required 15 feet to a distance of 7.3 feet at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line. Staff Recommendation: In reviewing this application, staff has maintained the points of examination to the considerations outlined in Minnesota State Statute 462.357, requiring that a property exhibit "practical difficulties" in order for a variance to be granted. To constitute practical difficulties, the property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner, the landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property not caused by the landowner, and that the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality. Staff does not find it reasonable that a deck.be removed in order to subdivide a lot, and once approved, the next immediate homeowner requests a variance to build a similar sized deck in essentially the same location. While the applicant maintains that she was not informed, all landowners must take responsibility in understanding municipal restrictions on buildable area. Nearly all properties in this neighborhood require a 15 foot side yard setback and the deck was modified for compliance prior to the purchase of this home by the current landowner. Building a deck in this location would alter the essential character of the locality. The lot was subdivided so that both homes are located 15 feet from the side yard property line. Several homes in this area exceed this minimum requirement of 15 feet, so a deck in this location would not be characteristic of the neighborhood. Staff has identified another option for the landowner that does not require a variance. There is significant buildable area for a deck if it is shifted to the south. Staff recommends denial of the request for a variance of 7.7 feet off the required side yard setback of 15 feet to a distance of 7.3 feet from the side yard (north) property line. 4TL0 LT9 EHL A -A %M 909 EHG yyy��� Mel v� °'Y -77z iY""+°0 - -- -- - ZZ,99W-19µ'ft d. .JfV yy �����,�3�d(/Mna.g,_pYT+ NW A3TWA NMIW .r ,.. ----v H --m T009 4.w+,. w How v +rus d +' " _ -ry5 SQaiM s'3'f'V)I nwwe+� we wVl ICM «n M WI sa +wgp�iy ~ 9 .• . ,�,. $ 9MN+��OwO w. IV -Id AWNIffnSUd �N g 8 R ai I m N 3 4 ge' o 4 N _ gg IN Red Line - Prop" Lina Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8095 1 TTY:763-593-3968 I www.goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goidenvaIleymn.gov • • •III F Effiff. , Cit y of 0 - alley e. Zoning Code Variance Street address of property in this application: 221 Sunnyridge Lane, Golden Valley 55422 APPLICANT•. • Name (individual, or corporate entitiy): Sally A. Jacquemin Address: 221 Sunn rid a Lane, Golden Valley 55422 Phone Number: Email Address: 734-678-0589 Sall .Jac uemin mail.com Authorized Representative (if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone Number: Email Address: Property Owner (if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone Number: Email Address: SITE INFORMATION Provide a detailed description of the variance(s) being requested: Variance requested is for building a deck within 15ft of the property line. Due to the way the property was split and angle, this variance is required to build any useful sized deck. Without the variance, the space available will not even support a small table/chair set. Please see attached drawings & pictures. I purchased this home in fall 2015 with plans to remove the existing rotting deck and build a new, expanded deck. The property limitations were not disclosed to me by the seller. I have reviewed the deck plans with my neighbor and they have given me full support for the variance. The proposed deck is on a side of their house with no windows or area that would be disrupted. Provide a detailed description of need for a variance from the Zoning Code, including description of building(s), description of proposed addition(s), and description of proposed alteration(s) to property: The proposed deck would be -450 sq ft, with an entrance from the existing kitchen door and two staircase (one existing). This deck would be located -3ft off the ground on the back of the garage/kitchen of the hou The proposed deck is shaped to reflect the property line, keep existing tree cover surrounding it, and avoid line -of -sight from any of the neighbors. In order to accomplish this, a variance is requested to allow for 147' from the property line at one deck corner and 7'4" at the other deck corner. (see attached drawing) e. Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8095 1 T1 Y:763-593-3968 1 www.goidenvalleymn.gov I planning@goldenvalleymn.gov city of goldvalley "Imr Zoning Code Variance (continued) Minnesota State Statue 462.357 requires that a property exhibit "practical difficulties" in order for a variance to be considered. Practical difficulties: result in a use that is reasonable are based on a problem that is unique to the property are not caused by the landowner do not alter the essential character of the locality To demonstrate how your request will comply with Minnesota State Statute 462.357, please respond to the following questions. Explain the need for your variance request and how it will result in a reasonable use of the property. 1) The upper-level of my home is on a small hill -top with an established retaining wall and stone steps. The deck space is limited by the retaining wall, existing stone steps, and current door height. 2) Due to the placement of the existing stairs to the lower yard, and the door/stairs of the home, only about 1 00s ft of useful space is available if the deck was to be constructed without the variance. 3) With a large family, this is not enough space to enjoy the outdoors and it would be a hardship for my elderly parents to walk over 15ft in stairs to have an outdoor dining space in the lower yard. 4) The proposed deck will add value to the property and will not be in the way of the neighbors or city. What is unique about your property and how do you feel that it necessitates a variance? Due to the limited hill -top space off of the house bounded by a retaining wall, steps to the lower yard, and existing door height to the house, as well as the recently re -drawn property line, the only way to make this space on my property useful for daily enjoyment of meals, etc. is to expand the deck as proposed. This area is completely secluded and separated from my neighbors by a 15ft retaining wall and existing line of evergreen trees, therefore, it is a welcome addition to my home by all in the neighborhood and will improv the quality of life for anyone who purchases this home in the future. Explain how the need for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. The limited space available for the deck was created by the previous owner who split the lot. The deck si and limitations were not disclosed at the time of purchase (October 2015), despite the existing deck bein rotted and needing replacement. Explain how, if granted, the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. The proposed deck will embody the values of Golden Valley by transforming under-utilized outdoor space a well-designed, tasteful area that integrates seamlessly into the current landscape and architecture of th surrounding homes. It will add value to the home and reflect positively on a progressive and outdoor-lovin community. This deck will only be visible to one neighbor who is knowledgeable of the proposed design a completely supportive. It will be completely hidden by trees year-round so it will not disturb any of the gre community. re nto ter Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN 55427-4588 763-593-8095 1 TTY: 763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goldenvaIleymn.gov Cit' of golden�%� valley Zoning • • • -. The City requests that you consider all available project options permitted by the Zoning Code before requesting a variance. The Board of Zoning Appeals will discuss alternative options to seeking variance with you at the public hearing. Please describe alternate ways to do your project that do not require variances from the Zoning Code. Three other options were evaluated and discarded due to infeasibility given the existing conditions (i.e. 15ft high retaining wall, stone stairs to lower yard, kitchen door height, etc.) 1) A fully compliant deck would only only 1 00s ft of useful space between two stairways - not enough for a table, chairs, & grill for my family to enjoy. 2) A deck that expanded across the back of the house would have to go over the existing retaining wall and stairs, creating a 15ft+ drop and large break in the middle of the deck for the existing stairs - not practical and prohibitively expensive. 3) A patio on the hill -side would require a 5ft+ staircase from the existing kitchen door which breaks up the useful space to less than 1 00s ft and would prohibit my elderly REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS ® Current survey of your property, including proposed addition and new proposed building and structure setbacks (a copy of Golden Valley's survey requirements is available upon request; application considered incomplete without a current property survey) ® One current color photograph of the area affected by the proposed variance (attach a printed photograph to this application or email a digital image to planning@a goldenvalleymn.gov; submit additional photographs as needed) lA Fee: $200 application fee for Single -Family Residential, $300 application fee for all other Zoning Districts M Legal Description: Exact legal description of the land involved in this application (attach a separate sheet if necessary): SIGNATURES To the best of my knowledge the statements found in this application are true and correct. I also understand that unless construction of the action applicable to this variance request, if granted, is not taken within one year, the variance expires. I have considered all options afforded to me through the City's Zoning Code and feel there is no alternate way to achieve my objective except to seek a variance to zoning rules and regulations. I give permission for Golden Valley staff, as well as members of the Board of Zoning Appeals, to enter my property before the public hearing to inspect the area affected by this request. Please include printed name, signature, and date for ap- plicant, authorized representative (if other than applicant), or property ower (if other than applicant). Name of applicant (please print): Sally A. Jacquemin Signature of applicant: saG V A. 7aCgW/' i4 Date: 3/1/2016 Authorized Representative (if other than applicant) Name (please print): Signature: Date: Property Owner (if other than applicant) Name (please print): Signature: Date: Please note: The City of Golden Valley will send notice of your variance request to all adjoining property owners as well as owners of properties directly across streets or alleys. Your neighbors have the right to address the Board of Zoning Appeals at your public hearing. You are advised to personally contact your neighbors and explain your project to them before the public hearing. This document is available in alternate formats upon a 72 -hour request. Please call 763-593-8006 (TTY: 763-593-3968) to make a request. Examples of alternate formats may include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. ?2...��\j ....�.. ....3... ( « � � d� . . � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � . . 2 ` �� �©� z\� ' . ; \ © � �� �� /� \ � � ��` »: �i/\\2 . <� � . . : : .. ::ri\\ , , «, �t.w±JC<«,« a� d. � C .� ». : «\ « ( ���\. [ ���\ � ,l � <� : �� \��� � 1 . . 2 ` �� �©� z\� ' . ; \ © � �� �� /� \ � � ��` »: �i/\\2 . <� � . . : : .. ::ri\\ , , «, �t.w±JC<«,« a� d. � C .� ». : f$I! y f� �" a �� f• z• FA t1 rt x t 60, pry; NEW all i3 1� hYk'+ .q��►\•iF � 1 :.eiY fir. i. l", a y ti; _ ��� \ _ _ / 1 J Ili / :41x...4 �- _ '. • � " � a,.� 4 i �$r�.,�{+c � `. * .c�•: lt _ y a ` ( e Jr �y-ov,r ` r ��'�. - � ,rr � s s. T� � �. � S'4" � t �� .R � _� Yi t. t�•. �t ,'`r 4 '�'-� �x�i� y ��%r- -a '7 w ='t�. ® � ,� ,. ex' ' , .e _ `, •x•, �. �' c``�� is aat, '•�tl� } r `��•'�' z � , •)xxr ` 4.. x • y\ 2 l sp'} „\Ci \ } Awr I i