01-23-17 PC Agenda AGENDA
Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Golden Valley City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road
Council Chambers
Monday, January 23, 2017
7 pm
1. Approval of Minutes
November 14, 2016, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
2. Discussion of 2016 Planning Commission Annual Report
3. Discussion of 2p16 Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
6. Adjournment
`: Tt�is document is available in alternate farmats upon a'72-hour request. Please eall
763-593-8D06(TTY: 7b3-59:3-3968)to make a request, Examples af alternate formats
may inclvde large print,electronic, Braille,audiocassette,etc.
Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
A regular meeting of the Planning Commission was held at the Golden Valley City Hall,
Council Chambers, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota, on Monday,
November 14, 2016. Chair Segelbaum called the meeting to order at 7 pm.
Those present were Planning Commissioners Baker, Blenker, Blum, Johnsvn, Kluchka,
� Segelbaum, and Waldhauser. Also present were Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman,
Associate Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner, and Administrative Assistant Lisa .
Wittman.
1. Approval of Minutes
October 24, 2016, Regular Planning Commission Meeting
MOVED by Waldhauser, seconded by Blenker ant� motion carried unanimously to
approve the October 24, 2016, minutes as submit#ed.
2. Informal Public Hearing — Conditional Use Permit'— 700 Colorado Avenue
South — Morrie's Automotive Group — CU-'154
Applicant: Morrie's Autamotive Group
Address: 700 Calorado Avenue South
Purpose: To allow for automobile rentals with accessory automotive detailing
and insta(lation in the I-394 Mixed Use zoning district.
Goellner explai'ned the applicant's request to convert the existing building to a multi-use
space for auto installation, a training center, office space, Morrie's Heritage Car
Connection gathering and rental space, and indoor and outdoor storage of automobiles.
The Conditional Use'Permit is required for the automobile rental and installation uses
which will occupy approximately 31,000 square feet of the 45,000 square foot building.
Goellner stated that the applicant will be relocating to this site from their current
Pennsyl�ania Avenue site and that they anticipate having up to 10 customers per day with
1 to 3 employees on site for the rental operations. She added that the use of the building
also includes a casual car club that will have up to 30 events per year with approximately
30 attendees.
Goellner discussed the proposed hours of operation for the various uses and showed the
Commissioners plans for the existing and proposed new vegetation. She explained that
the Code requires 8 feet of landscaped screening from public streets for parking areas
greater than 100 spaces and that staff is recommending additional screening along the
east edge of the parking area to be consistent with the development guidelines in the I-
394 Mixed Use district.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 2
Goellner referred to a site plan of the property and noted that 60 parking spaces are
required and 52 spaces are proposed. An additional 8 parking spaces will need to be
striped in the lot and these spaces will need to be clearly signed and left available for
employees and customers. She added that no inventory may be stored in the spaces
required by Code and that 4 bicycle parking spaces must also be added.
Goellner stated that based on the evaluation of the factors listed in the Zoning Code staff
is recommending approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit.
Johnson referred to the requirements regarding parking screening and asked for
clarification. Zimmerman stated that the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning Distriet has scr�ening
standards that require landscaped frontage strips between five and'eight feet in width
depending on the size of the parking area. He added that the City is req;uesting that the
applicant install additional landscaping and screening to the site.
Johnson asked if the impact to the sidewalk plan has been considered. Goellner stated
that sidewalk is not planned for the west side of Colorado A�enue so the City won't be
requiring the applicant to install any new sidewalks at th'is time.
Segelbaum asked if there are any limits on the type of trucks or the time of day that trucks
can pick up or drop off vehicles. Goellner stated that there won't be many deliveries per
day and that the amount of vehicles being picked up or dropped off isn't a cause of
concern on Colorado Avenue.
Segelbaum asked if there are any restrictions on sales at this location to protect it from
becoming a dealership. Goellner stated'that the Conditional Use Permit would have to be
amended to allow automobiie sales. S�gelbaum questioned when renting becomes
leasing. Goellner said she''doesnat think that would affect the Conditional Use Permit but
staff would want to do more analysis if that were the case.
Segelbaum noted that the prt�perty has been industrial looking up until now and
questioned if anything relative to the building facade will change with this more retail type
of use. Goellner stated that the applicant is not proposing any changes to the existing
building or parkir�g IQt, but that the Planning Commission could add a condition regarding
the facad'e if it is tied to impacts of the use.
Blenker questi4ned where the required additional parking would be located. Goellner said
the app{icant wil'I be designating eight additional parking spaces to accommodate
employee/customer parking, but not expanding the existing parking lot.
Blenker noted that the applicant's narrative stated that they only operate the Heritage Car
Connection for seven months out of the year and questioned if the site will shut down the
rest of the year of if it would be used for inventory storage. Goellner said she thinks
business is better for the rental use in the summer months, but that she doesn't think they
will shut down the rest of year. Waldhauser said she thinks the office and training uses
would be open year-round.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 3
Segelbaum asked how the proposed use compares to the permitted uses and if there are
any items such as the amount of imperious surFace that are grandfathered in. Goellner
stated that all of the proposed uses are permitted, or permitted with a Conditional Use
Permit. She added that if this were a new development more of the requirements in the I-
394 Mixed Use Zoning District would apply.
Baker said he is trying to understand the intention of the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District
and questioned if this proposed use is part of the vision for this area. Goellner said her
understanding is that when the I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District was adopted it was
thought that the market would change and that there would be more traffic and people in
the area. She stated that the proposed use of this property might not be �uite wh�t was
envisioned but that there has been a lot of re-investment in the I-394 corridor. She added
that the applicant will be using a site that has been on the market for quite a while which
is good for the City and good for Morrie's. Baker questioned why this property has been
hard to market. Goellner stated that preferences for industrial'space have changed a lot.
Segelbaum referred to the Conditional Use Permit granted for the applicant's property on
Pennsylvania Ave. and asked if that was approved for car rental space, but not for event
space. Zimmerman said the building on Pennsylvania Avenue does not allow for event
space but this building on Colorado Avenue does.
Baker said it would be interesting to knaw what issues fihe Planning Commission
discussed during their review of the applicant's proposal for their property on
Pennsylvania Avenue. Goellner stafed that fhey talked about parking, additional
landscaping, rental car storage, renting cars frt�m the building, and trucks delivering
inventory to the site.
Baker noted that the Plann'ing Commission has recently discussed dealership inventory
storage and that it m;ight be ok on property that is owned by a dealership. Blenker said
she thinks inventory storage is already occurring on this site. Blum asked if the Zoning
Code currently allows inventary storage on this site. Zimmerman stated that the applicant
did talk to the City about storing cars at this site. He added that there have been
complaints about cars being stored in other locations so allowing parking at this property
on Colorado wi(I help alleviate issues elsewhere.
Lyn;n Robson, CF0 Morrie's Automotive Group, Applicant, referred to condition #7 in the
staff report whieh states if at any time the parking lot is restriped and reconfigured,
updates shall �e subject to the parking regulations within the City Code, including larger
parking spaces and wider lanes. If at the time of reconfiguration, the Comprehensive
Plan or other City Plan proposes a sidewalk along Colorado Avenue adjacent to the
property, future reconfigurations of the parking lot must be consistent with the plans and
shall include a sidewalk along Colorado Avenue and a direct pedestrian connection to
Colorado Avenue. She said she is concerned about installing landscaping in an area
where it might have to be removed in the future. She also questioned if these
requirements apply if the parking lot is only restriped, and not reconstructed.
Zimmerman clarified that the parking spaces used for customer and employee parking
have to meet the code requirements when the lot is re-striped.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 4
Johnson questioned if the language regarding a "proposed" sidewalk along Colorado
Avenue is strict enough. Goellner stated that the word "adopts" is probably a better
word. She also suggested changing the language in condition #7 to state that if the
parking lot is reconfigured, not re-striped, the updates shall be subject to the parking
regulations in the City Code.
Baker asked about the definition of"auto installation." Robson stated that it refers to
pre-delivery inspection and work such as pulling plastic off, checking the oil, tires and
brakes, and detailing the cars to get them ready for the showroom or custc�mers.
Baker asked about the inside storage. Robson said they will store their luxury vehicles
indoors.
Baker asked if there are plans to make the building exterior mor� at#ractive. aabson
said there are no plans for the exterior at this time. She clarifi�d that this is not a retail
facility. It is more of a marketing idea and people pay to be in a club. She''explained that
it is not a typical vehicle rental facility either because people call to rent a car and staff
meets them at the site for the rental. There would not b� customers visiting the site
without an appointment.
Waldhauser noted that the applicant's narrative stafes there will be 15 to 30 employees
on site and questioned where those ernployees are currently located. Robson said the
narrative refers to the training facility and added that this location will be more centrally
located for their various locations. She added that they will be hiring people for detailing.
Blenker asked about the us� of the site in the winter months. Robson said the car
rentals won't occur in the winter but the other uses will occur year-round and there will
be events for the car club. '
Segelbaum asked if the property is in compliance with the screening requirements.
Zimmerman stated tha# the new uses will require screening which will bring it more into
conformance with the current regulations in the I-394 Mixed Use district. Robson added
that they will be installing vegetation on the east side of the property, but she is
concerned about police being able to see into the site.
Segelbaum reiterated his concerns about plans to make the exterior of the building look
nicer than it currently does. Robson said they don't have immediate plans to change the
look of the building but they will better define the Heritage Car Connection entrance and
may consider additional details in the future.
Segelbaum asked how often trucks will be dropping off cars. Robson stated that a
transport will unload approximately once a week.
Segelbaum asked if customers will be able to look at cars at this site. Robson said they
don't intend to have customers walking the site.
Segelbaum opened the public hearing.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 5
Amanda Heinrichs, law student attending for a class, asked how many cars there would
be on site at any given time.
Segelbaum stated there would be dealer inventory storage, the classic rental cars and
the higher end dealership cars. He added that his understanding is that this facility will
house 25 classic vehicles indoors and will be the pick-up and drop off center for renters.
Goellner said there are approximately 100 parking spaces in the parking lot and that 60
of those need to be used for employees and customers. Zimmerman clarified that there
are 30 to 40 indoor spaces for the heritage cars and 40 inventory spaces:
Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment. Segelbaum closed the public
hearing.
Blum questioned how they reconcile this with the conversation they hrad at their last
meeting regarding dealership inventory storage. He asked if this is a way ta shoehorn in
this kind of use regardless of their last conversation which was to be more'restrictive
with dealership inventory. He said that it seems that the �r�posed installation use has to
do with the direct sales that are occurring at a different pr4perty and is not directly
related to the rental of cars at this property.
Baker said his recollection of their last conversation was thaf he didn't see an easy way
to restrict a landowner's of the use of the�r land if they own the lot. He said he feels
differently about a dealership leasing property elsewhere just for their inventory storage,
but in this case the applicant will awn the property so he doesn't think they have any
basis to say they can't use their lot to store cars.
Blenker said it seemed like they settled,on allowing dealership inventory storage in the
Light Industrial and Industr�al Zoning Districts. She said that while this property is in the
I-394 Mixed Use Zoning District it acts like an industrial property and it has good
screening so she doesn't have any objections to the proposed use.
Waldhauser agreed that th'eir main concern was existing lots being rented to auto
dealers to be used as auxiliary parking and that they were less concerned about dealers
who own the lats they are storing cars on.
Segelbaum noted that the proposed Conditional Use Permit is focused on the rental and
installation uses. He said he thinks this is an appropriate location for a rental location
and encourag�d the applicant to improve the look of the building.
MOVED by Kluchka, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to
recommend approval of Conditional Use Permit#154 subject to the following findings
and conditions:
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 6
Findinqs:
1. Demonstrated Need for the Proposed Use: Moving the company's light vehicle
reconditioning and Heritage Car operations to this location would free up space at
their other facilities, reducing the impact on surrounding residential properties.
2. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: The automobile repair use and
Heritage Car Club, in conjunction with the other uses being proposed, is consistent
with the goal of locating redevelopment along major corridors and increasing the
job and tax base within the community. The property is designated fc�r Mixed Use
on the General Land Use Plan Map.
3. Effect on Property Values: Staff anticipates the new use would have no irnpact
on the surrounding property values and is isolated from any residential
neighborhoods.
4. Effect on Traffic: The number of trips associated with fhe proposed use is
expected to increase, as a portion of the site will act as a renfal business and car
club, which hosts events. Trips generated from the proposed us�s do not exceed
capacity of the roadways.
5. Effect of Increases in Population and Density: The propa�ed uses may
generate an increase in the number of employees and customers at the location
compared to the past uses, but is consistent with the industrial properties
surrounding the site and the Mixed Use district.
6. Increase in Noise Levels: The proposed use is nofi anticipated to cause a
significant increase in noise lev�ls. Light auto reconditioning will take place during
normal work hours. Events will end before 8 pm on weeknights and 5 pm on
weekends.
7. Impact of Dust, Odor, ar Vibration: The proposed use is not anticipated to cause
an increase in dust ar. odor: Minimal vibrations may be associated with the use but
should not impact any adjacent uses.
8. Impact of Pests: The propbsed use is not anticipated to attract pests.
9. Visual Impact: Th� applicant will mitigate the visual impacts of dealership
inventory stored in the parking lot and increased use through vegetative screening
of the parking,lot.
10. Other Impacts to the City and Residents: Staff does not anticipate any other
negative effects c�f the proposed use. The location is surrounded by industrial
properties, has an excellent vegetative buffer on the north side of the site, and has
adequate parking.
Conditions:
1. The pian� by submitted by the applicant on October 12, 2016, shall become a part of
this approval.
2. The recommendations and requirements outlined in the memo from the Fire
Department dated October 17, 2016, shall become part of this approval.
3. All vehicle deliveries and storage of inventory shall take place on-site and shall not
take place on the street.
4. The minimum number of parking spaces required by the City Code for customers
and employees must be clearly signed and striped. No inventory may be stored in
these spaces.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 7
5. No vehicle parking may take place on landscaping or in the fire lanes. Minimum aisle
widths must be maintained as defined by City Code.
6. Bicycle parking shall be constructed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the proposed uses, as defined by City Code.
7. If at any time the parking lot is reconfigured, updates shall be subject to the parking
regulations within the City Code, including larger parking spaces and wider lanes. If
at the time of reconfiguration, the Comprehensive Plan or other City Plan adopts a
sidewalk along Colorado Avenue adjacent to the property, future reconfigurations of
the parking lot must be consistent with the plans and shall include a sidewalk along
Colorado Avenue and a direct pedestrian connection to Colorado Auenue. '
8. Additional landscaping shall be installed consistent with the Development Standards
for pedestrian circulation and parking screening listed in the Zc�ning Code for the I-
394 Mixed Use District. Before the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the
applicant must submit a detailed landscaping plan (number of plantings, species of
plantings, etc.) to be reviewed and approved by the City Farester.
9. This approval is subject to all other state, federal, and local c�rdinanc�s, regulations,
or laws with authority over this development.
--Short Recess--
� 3. Discussion — Outdoor Storage -- Insfitutional and Residential Zoning Districts
Zimmerman reminded the Commissioners that this is a continuation of previous
conversations regarding outdoor storag� regulations in order to help address resident
complaints. He stated that the focus of this discussion is clarification of the regulations in
the Residential Zoning Distric#s focusing on screening of materials from the street and
from adjacent properties, fencing and opacity requirements, paved surface versus
driveway regulations, and f�V screening.
Zimmerman summarized staff's recommendations regarding front yard storage which
include: allowing one RV or item on a trailer to be stored on the driveway, allowing
temporary outdoor storage units for two weeks unless a Front Yard Storage Permit is
issued, not allowing other items to be stored in front yards, clarifying the definition of front
yard, and keepin� the maximum fence height at 4 feet. He added that staff is also
recommen�ing that the definition of a front yard be amended to state that a front yard is
the area between the street and the front plane of the principal structure instead of only
the`first 35 feet of a property.
Zimmerman summarized staff's recommendation regarding side and rear yard storage
which include: allowing a paved surface for storage, requiring a 5 foot setback from the
property lines, requiring screening at 90% opacity from adjacent properties and 50%
opacity from the street view, allowing temporary equipment and supplies up to 30 days,
and keeping the maximum fence height at 6 feet.
Baker questioned why the number of items such as boats and trailers allowed on a
driveway is limited, but the number of cars parked on a driveway is not.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 8
Kluchka asked how the proposed recommendations relate to the street parking
requirements. Zimmerman stated that cars are allowed to park on the street for 72 hours
and that items can't be stored on the street.
Blum asked about the requirements regarding piles of mulch or landscaping materials.
Zimmerman said staff is proposing that the storage of landscaping or construction
materials be allowed for 30 days.
Kluchka asked if there are rules regarding semi-trucks and food trucks. Zimmerman
stated that commercial vehicles are not allowed to park in Residential Zoning Districts.
Zimmerman referred to impervious surfaces located in side and r�ar yard''s and st�ted that
staff is recommending that paved surfaces (separate from the driveway) may be used to
store items in the side or rear yard as long as the property does not surpass the
maximum amount of impervious surface allowed and that the items being stored are
located 5 feet away from the property line, which is sam� setback requir�ment for
accessory structures. Baker asked if there is a definition of paved surface. Zimmerman
said the definition of paved surface includes biturninous, concrefi�;, or pavers, but not
gravel.
Segelbaum asked if staff is recommending that iterns stored `in a side yard be on a paved
surface. Zimmerman said the paved surface requirements only apply to the front yard. He
explained that staff is recommending items in a side t�r rear yard do not have to be on a
paved surface, just 5 feet away from the property lines and screened with a fence or
vegetation of not less than 90% opacity for the side and rear yard and 50% opacity from
the street.
Baker asked how opacity i� evaluated. Zimmerman said that staff has not had to evaluate
opacity in the past because most people have been ok with some screening of items in a
side or rear yard. Waldhauser said effective screening can be done with less than 90%
opacity.
Johnson questioned if there is a conflict between the front yard storage requirements and
the side and rear yard storage requirements because a front yard is the most public part
of the property and the proposed Code language is stricter for side and rear yard storage.
Zimmerman agreed that the screening requirements are stricter for side and rear yard
storage but there are more limits on what is allowed to be stored in a front yard.
Zimmerman showed the Commissioners several pictures of typical storage and screening
complaints and reiterated that clarification is needed regarding how much screening in a
front yard should be required.
Johnson asked if storage in a side yard has to follow the same side yard setback
requirement as a structure. Zimmerman said no and stated that the current code requires
a 3-foot setback for side and rear yard storage and that staff is proposing there be a 5-
foot setback which is the same requirement for a detached accessory structure.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 9
Waldhauser asked if garages have been allowed to be located 3 feet from a property line.
Goellner said no. Blum said a person could wedge a car between the side of a garage
and the property line without having to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals and asked
about the rules for building a shed or an additional garage stall in a side yard. Zimmerman
explained that a shed has to be behind the principal structure with 10 feet of separation
between the two structures and five feet away from the side and rear yard property lines.
Johnson asked why sheds have to be 10 feet away from the house. Zimmerman said he
thinks it has to do with fire access and that he would check with the Fire Gh;ief.
Waldhauser said she has an issue with not being able to store anything in a side or rear
yard for not more than 30 days if the items are inconspicuous, or n�t visible because they
are screened. Zimmerman suggested limiting storage to 30 days only in a front yard
instead. Segelbaum said that items stored in a rear yard might not be so bad, but he
thinks the side yard is different.
Blum said he is concerned about allowing storage in side yards so close to the property
line. He proposed a 10-foot setback requirement for side yard stc�rage in order to
encourage green space because side yards are just as sensitive, or more sensitive, than
front yards. He said a lot of people live in Golden Valley because they can't reach out and
touch their neighbor's house and he feels that is a competiti�re advantage he doesn't want
to lose.
Kluchka suggested using the existing buildal�le envelope requirements for storage issues
as well. Waldhauser said a shed wouldn't`be allowed in the back corner of a lot then
because it would be outside of the buifding envelope area.
Johnson questioned what is driving these changes and he wonders why the City would
treat a moveable object such as"an RV in a side yard any different than a shed in a side
yard and if a shed is more,apprc�priate 10 feet away from the house why it would be ok for
an RV to be 2 feet away from the house. He suggested the proposed new language start
with safety concerns. Zimmerman stated that some people will want to park their items in
the side yard because the driveway is there and that is where they've always parked their
items. Segelbaum agreed that a lot of people park cars, trailers, etc. alongside their
garage. °
Kluchka said he thinks there is a double standard occurring because the subdivision
requirements, including setbacks, were studied so much in the past but now they are
saying that it is ok to put an RV in the side yard. He questioned if he is the only one
thinking that there should be no storage allowed in a side yard. Blum said he thinks
storage should be allowed in a side yard just not that close because 5 feet of green space
is not enough and it makes the neighborhood feel tighter. He added that he agrees that
the proposed new requirements are not consistent with what the City has heard over the
last several years.
Minutes of the Golden Valley Planning Commission
November 14, 2016
Page 10
Segelbaum asked if any other cities prohibit side yard storage. Zimmerman said Edina
and St. Louis Park do. Goellner added that St. Louis Park says there has to be 100%
screening and there is a 6-foot height limit for fences which dictates what can be stored.
Segelbaum asked the Commissioners what sort of screening they'd like to see. Baker
said he thinks the concept of opacity makes sense. Waldhauser stated that if the space is
narrow no one will be able to get through if it is filled with shrubs. She said she would like
to see an opacity requirement of 60%. Kluchka said he would like the opacity to be 75%
on all sides. Zimmerman said he would show the Commissioners examples of different
opacity levels. Kluchka said he is driven by aesthetics and reiterated that he wauld like to
use the existing building envelope requirements for storage. Segelbaum said he would be
ok with using the building envelope requirements as long as a driveway leading tr� a
detached garage is ok.
Zimmerman said the next step is to take the information from fihe P'lanning Commission
discussions to a Council/Manager meeting to get feedback frorn the Council. Then staff
will start working on the new Code language and bring it back to the Planning
Commission for further discussion.
4. Reports on Meetings of the Housing and Redevetopment Authority, City
Council, Board of Zoning Appeals and other Meetings
No other meetings were discussed.
5. Other Business
• Council Liaison Report
No report was given.
Johnson asked if there is a timeline for the Comprehensive Plan Update process yet.
Zimmerman said staff is developing plan for the City Council to consider in December.
Blum asked hc�w long the Comprehensive Plan survey will be on the City's website.
Goellner said there is no end date scheduled and that it will be available throughout the
update process.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pm.
John Kluchka, Secretary Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
���� �
Phy�i��1 I?ev+e�.c�p►�nent De�►�rtrnen�t
?63-593�8i�9�I7�3-s9s-s1C9s{fax}
Date: January 23, 2017
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Subject: Presentation of the 2016 Planning Commission Annual Report
Summary
Staff has prepared a summary of the 2016 activity of the Planning Commission in advance of the
Commission's report to the City Council by the Planning Commission Chair. The presentation of
the Annual Report will provide an opportunity for discussion around any priorities or requests the
Commissioners might have for the City Council in 2017.
Attachments
2016 Planning Commission Annual Report (10 pages)
� ' • •
.
-
1 . � . ' - • •
�f' �
�t� i
� ', �� .
;� � � �� � . �.
� �i ��ii ��� � .x _
,,��: �� � �i�
��,•�, , � �� � � � :�
��� � �x�
�� ,i �� � � �i� w�� ��
; �� , �� �� �„ � ��� . � � iii ����� � � ,�
�; �� � � �� 1 �, : � ,�� , i����� �
� ,�I � � �� �� �� ��`����� � . � ■ �
� �
n
�, � �Cii Y r�� �=-. � . � ��I .
� °..' , �� �� � � i:��i #� a.
�rp ; � �� � � e� . � I
� A i■ � ,�:�N r
rl � IA � ���� i �' �•��� ' ����
}:��, � � ��� ���� � : �;� y�,
� � � �'i i�� ��li��� ����� 4 �f����
�f � �, � � � � .. � _ , �a��
. �� � �. �
� � � � � �i�i ��� �
.
��a� ► : �i ���� � '� ��� �'�� I� ilA �11 i�i � � fa� � � _
�� , _ _rt� �'
*
� ������� ��.�. ��� _ ��
� ' . . a
�j � , � � �� �� � � ��� w � w,��� !�� � � � � .si
' '� � � � �4.� �.
�" �� -� �
�� ,, � � � ��� � � r� � �
. ,
� .:, ; r � .,�. , :'�#:- � . . , -c. w'`, � ° +�r�,�... �
r. « _�
��[� 14 • _ � . � :. . .
a,, �
:
e ' ' � " - ` ' -.
�..
� "' .
-
t. .,�� � � ��
� + ��� .� .F. ,�� ,4+ .� ' �; ,..
_ .
, ..i" �.,,i., . ..
. � �` �I� I e ' �
. r� r�, ., ..� R` ` '�.,
.. :� .. -,: � ,,, _ ,�� ..
�""�"`� � ���� � �s �` � ..��'�`' � � �`�
� � � ,,
, • ` �t *" ,,. �,;, , : !� r ,,�
• . . , �.-
�_ , _
,,;, ':� '�- , -
, . . „ . , -
.
�� , . � ��_
. . �.. ��x v r,
h. '
. :.. . . {,.w..�r
4 L� �..�� �' _._ ....
� � `�' —.v f. P.e �e i� ++"r:�� '41 . . � ��� � ; �
� '� . , . � ?'� . . .. , �
. .a ' w�'. - ...t..-� [
, - ' ,. . !R�`e .. ;.
_ ,,.. . , ,..
,� > " ..iy . y�+ � �ws�.�
.. � , - . �;-..J!°` ...{�.
2016 Planning Commissioners
Chuck Segelbaum, Chair
Rich Baker, Vice Chair
lohn Kluchka, Secretary
Amy Blenker
Ronald Blum
David Cera
AndyJohnson
Cathy Waldhauser
City Staff
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Chloe McGuire Brigl, Community Development Intern
Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
2
Duties of the Planning Commission
The Planning Commission shall:
A. Review and make recommendations on specific development proposals made by private
developers and public agencies.
B. Review and make recommendations on proposed rezonings, subdivision plans,
amendments to the zoning text, platting regulations and variances and similar items
having to do with administration and regulatory measures.
C. Conduct special studies dealing with items such as renewal, civic design,
maintenance of a suitable living and working environment, economic conditions,
etc. These studies may be conducted at the initiative of the Planning Commission
and/or specific direction from the City Council.
D. Review major public capital improvement plans against the policy and goals stated
in the Comprehensive Plan for the area.
E. Advise and make recommendations relative to housing, new development, and
redevelopment projects proposed by the HRA prior to the final commitment of such
projects by the HRA. This charge shall also relate to such responsibilities as:
1. Make recommendations to the City Council and/or HRA on the use of
Federal and State Funds received for housing and community development.
2. Make recommendations to the City Council on the City's participation in
other Federal, State, Metropolitan Council, County and Multi-City Housing
and Community Development programs.
F. Advise and make recommendations in matters relating to and affecting the
environment such as:
1. Taking into account environmental concerns and the impact on the
environment of any Planning Commission recommended action.
2. To cooperate with and coordinate environmental proposals and programs
with other City groups and Federal, State, Metro, County and other
municipal groups.
3. To make such reviews of land reclamation, filling, excavation and grading
applications as are required by City ordinance or referred to the Commission
by the Council; provided that no review or recommendation shall remove or
limit the right of a property owner in accordance with City ordinances and
the statutes and constitution of the State of Minnesota.
3
'�: �'�-.� - F �'' �
Number of Planning Commission Meetings Held: 16
Meetings Cancelled: 8
Number of Joint Commission Meetings Held: 1
February 29—2040 Comprehensive Plan Overview
Joint Meeting with Environmental and Open Space and Recreation Commissions
Number of Planning Applications Considered: 21
Number of Zoning Text Amendments Considered: 5
Number of Staff Led Discussions/Presentations: 11
Total Planning Applications by Year
2016
2015 = � ��
2014
2013 �"
2012
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
2016 Planning Applications by Type
PUD
CUP
Subdivision -
Rezoning
Land Use Change
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4
Planning Applications by Type (5 years)
PUD :����� �,��.�� �w� �,..����.� ,�;�.,u
��� �,�
CUP
� � �
�
Subdivision � ._�, . _ � . .
Rezoning �����p������
_ '� ��"°' ��
Land Use Change ''' �*"�
Site Plan Review
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
■2016 2015 � 2014 �2013 ■2012
2016 Planning Applications Considered
5
16
■ Recommended Approval Recommended Denial
5
�
0
_ � �
� �. ^
'��'+ � ; � s,�
Cf t o^ � N �
�a U � � c c � �
o a
. .. . . Q' C � t�/1 O C C v) � W
. Q � � � .... @ > � N
`�� i, C .
. '_'_'-'_"___"'=��-__'_ '-_ C� f0 d C � N N Q � O
� *.
. f_. . �.__-,-.--- ,�- = p � �p � N �.
�
�� � � , � . � _. �/ �°�°°�-� •� J U J d d' f/� U� � ia
y
- �-- , , i �u
N`anS1,.41F�a2 ."-f � � d C-�'� -
� � � T � � { ���
�'a��. ! a o-
��� � � ��� ��>
i � y C
' �" � • �, = �.�� .._t � C m o
� , 3��0 0�� u� � I''-�, i' c�o �
, � p . _.-_- ._ �
.. ,j ,, '- m'm,C(v�
.
---i� "--'--"-'--'--'---'------ --- - o
-�--
..- .. j ? c ��
a- . � . . ' *' ; " I � �
• a , � I � , r° a U
.
, � � �
_-
,
�� i � �. _ ,� --�r �, ; I A��'t �vYarnt I� i i i o
__ ,� .�7 a� � ,�. �,.. � , h -� � I I ,. �� , i
'_"_..__.._.._____"�.,�,.,f_ "_' w ,�-�..d. ¢� � "� ���_ , _ � � I
� ,� i � � � .. 1
.
�
_. , _ , �k � � �� � ;
.
_ � � , ��� -, , �-�� _,, '
� �
,
- - -� � �-� r �
-�_� �� rt � __� � . , y�- 1 -
�
,
; ;
i � ��°14ON � �. �` ' • .. i �i s° �...,. .-- -�
�._ -- 1 l� � � �. `�. �� �� �
1 �-'� — ....._ .. � -
1 – — � �— � -- �� , I
� � � �
, s
F - _ - �_ 1 � �� � o �
, . ____ I
_;
,� � . � � . ,
� _� _� ;� , � ,� , �t� � ��� � '� -t-�
, ,
- ,
i i � �� -_ �' ��. � i ��� �
i , ! �4,_ '� ---- __ � 'I � � � ;�� _ !-�-J I■
�
- v .
,
, -
rh i -
. - " � _,
! _ � o .. � � ���-� �� _,. � � I
� � ---, / _ �/�
� ' w �', �8�c�' ��x P a a�Cro �, �- ., i �i/
� � " � � { - � �� � � �� � �
• I � .
I T
I . H � n � , �� gF � �
� i � � .L ■
�� � �, ;� � , I • a� } ' � � �q �
�„ '�� ,. .. j
�� _:.� � _ �� ,, �
�+
� � - � � b � _ � �-..- .��, i �
. � , .
. .� � r. �o. � �' `�� '�� �-pp.p4 _,_•'" , �
� � q � -
' � �, . 1 x sy aux2 ti �.� ♦�._. o �� �
� � � r �t �-w .�A � ; ���� �
., � � i � , , , __-� � - b � N
. -�
� . .i, .. • ' . y �. �I �M �
�
� . �'- ,� .____-_ O I
I /�
� � �73 a I uQ . � i� ' �. �� �� #�._' � �. _�% _.. � �
� �
� '� `•' '�� �� �'`� �' �9
. _, z sebn , ' � � xi se�bnoQ � i Hj �
< . � ...- ---` __ ' . �'
�' , I ' �
♦ � i 1 __�� ',_�, �, .. � ...__A� I-,� �I ap ��I� _ �
s �
— �
� �
�� � 1 I I � �, �■ , � =;u8d- C a
yI I I Y Qt
� �....�– � �� �, � F asy 6asaa[ ;r � � �
� I (I �
– _ � «� � ,p�; V I �i #! _ _ "._ � " �
i J � ��* __ . �, P; �, �� � � —L _. , � g �
jf- lp,l__ a�. .. ' .._. � p .n�:�..
I � ��� __ �� '�� �� �
1 ��/�:► ; �� a �� �
t�I a�H$Pg�?,M" -� t�d".. O � Q i� ,._ �I �1....�t ___ �
U
, .--� � . ..�.... ��,'�„"'s" ` 3; _ �_. I � . . �� I � Q� � S M� .
._-.._ � ^� A�6,...__. �
.. _ �} ... .`._.� .-._ � �
� ---_ , :.aP �[�I � y �p �
'--� ! N ae�b �'
, � `" � � �_� � ae sl ° � -._.._ � <:�
� i��.< � �� � P 1 : . � � ..R� �
— �>
� � �" . � �- � . O'� �
_ ., , � � �. � � � � .. . � N aey e�iaaa{p�' S aeg' 1 � ;��
...., �, ..... T'.. � t �$7au�TM ,�I
h]'��H �ulM i
� � �' � i � t � . ;
I �i i , z
" � , i
' I i i :
' i
...__ . N a� ' __. '
.a _ ., ,2 _ �
a' .. $ . r d Ih uS+iuo
d � > �M��� �
� r ��-' , z�E '� � ;
f �� , �� � �I i
, ^
� �,, � , ��
� . �..._ ___-'�``- �~ . ".. • . Pe[H sll!IN la:ava� �.� I
(-- ' - �- } -=� � �
�0 ... � -_ � � AI�eH��fl �I�' ..,�..:.. . ,. I
y l I
� ., I ' �C �� 4i � i
.__ _ �� �� y a g itµeaaQ � , �� . > I
' � I � ` . o a0 '
` I
`� I '�� .. i� ��.. � � ' M p �
� �
� � I �� �� � > *� =�a. I�r j
1 { i a s
z,. A! �� a�a..�- '--- �"----'--' �-...___.._.....��•-/-- \\--- �� I
� N�Y�14 rl 7� NI f?- m ���I
- - - � � �
� _J
?,,� '� i a'f€�^'
r �'"���� �. .
�
C N �O g
V o gLL
. . ' •a � �n c� � o co a� a��'.
...... ...._. . .-:. Q � � � � � m
._.. , .- � � � � � � � e�- �E d
..' -._._._-'-'-""-----"-_-" %='-- '--- "-"--'-- C O O O O O O O =
�' �• ..�_ ,_�,--�--'_.., '� J N N N N N � O
�
�
�
, �
�- � � -
L � O
Na^$�I7�iQaZ �q � � t� � �,;;s,::' � �;v��: ', .
_ 3, I a � � ��; -
�' 1
; a� , , �,��
�� � ..
� � �
`.>
, , � � , , ,.� o��
' � � 3� _ � (�� �i� �-�� � U�v �
-` "� ropoaKS _.... ; � �
; = '�
, , � -- _.�-' �?aQi�.., '
,,;, , ..__.._..-_-_ '-"--'- -*._-_, m o
� � . . ,W � I , � � i �� Q
a" i; • _ • �yQ�
i , � � ! yt �
i
• o
�_�, i - � _ �_ ..-.1r ���" � ��� � �op�6y� ' f- i i
�
�-
� . , � i
,
��_�� _ d „ "� � � �� i
_ �
,
. , �
�----•---- ---------- -�•._-----' I - 1 . �� I 1 I � i
� �
� ` ,��: �, ! . _. � � . i_ i i
� N �
� ' � ' �
.
��� � � � ,� �,��_ � � �,� � T �_ '�� ����� � �
_, i , —�
— _ { �
.
i
,'
I
_y - �� i l : ... 1 � i ._ � �a .,'. ,� I
- �H aIQoBI � 5 < ��. -- -
� � 1 1 � � '� �
_!
a �� - � - - �. �
� - � � � , �-� � . �.� � �
I � � � � �
, - ,
,
�- � � �-- � .
�
_ � -��_��--��--- ' � " � �- , � ���� � �
r
' ��, �
� y �� � __ � —
_
. � _. , � � ��.� `� �,� ; ' �—ld..�
; � � � . - �-- ,,�. - _
_ a
.
� _.r . � � , � l� �
�t - , � , — , � �
1 � r �-
, �
� 1 �_. -.� i �� � ---- � _� ' � - � +
� � �- .
I �� ` ��'
; _ o I: . � -__� _ ,
� � � ----- -_- _ =�.. ,� - � C
r r- �- ,. � r �/�
.. ; , ' • , - ..��H,t(�ae�rZ "NPxo:Fro�. • � �i/
i . � � . . ��� I lsaaupny �
; � �
_, ;� � � � � a �P e!� ' �
3 i � �� ��d + a� 4 '� I ;' � � ci ; � N
� ti ��� �
� �° � I
' ,� j ' qm �'� �l _ �' E oa�� ' ��� � —� — "� . i v
i 1___� , _ —
� ' ' l—; (� eg aue2 F !.-�r �4 0 �� �
�� � .�.r--,-" -� , r� �
_ `� : m b+ � �"�
r J i I 4 ; � , t �-w' �� � � ) � � �
� �, -
� . � : � � -� c •m :d
T �_ __ , a
, Y- • l �- I W� . � --� -� � . . ,. a �
� � t a 1
, / ;�,� i �o . ,.� _-- e� _. Q C
N iQ se�bnu@�' H z se bno i ro;
'/� , �, � � -..., . .� �.
._= �� � ; -- � ��-� 1 �, � � � .�'_S�� � �
�, , , i �.., � 1 .... . i Ep�:o�.,� y
` A i _�-_� ._`� � � ., '�' ...g4�y �_ �
� ... ��� '�; � q I[Lj4d �
�: ro( � � � � r � - - �
m �. ._ _..._...__ �� Q ' w,
7 ,
� i � ,, .� ''�
; =_ i�li � asy�6asaa[ �i
� � W
.. _ , i `
� � , � t A o� I /'
� ' I + �
� � � �� t 'b�� �, ��.� ' � , *s sa
I ��_ _J� ` y�, q I � , � � i e.,Fn_-:
� �a
;��'M. � E �'�, a i j ��
N any apenaAy% -- �0
� �'�� p � w U,,/� rC
� ' �� b :
� I .
.�� '�,� �. �r-- r-- �� .' I
-� .
,..__a_.� . , -�- i ._..__f g...,. �� � i , ..N g�p
-- -- -__ t.-__ r . �
, . . - t7 i ��r � e suv-
_-- o-1
,`a'�d� N aa�b�. _ . � _ ra ' �
. �� � - ._.: ; pva�sl aPa42[ � � A .
.:w
_ R. I
H i�FM ... } J� ._____ �
� ._� � " ��_ r � �N ae�e�laaalM 5 aeg��[la�upr� � ���
, . / , �
� � .., � . ....� �_ � % , � I
-- 'a..� + i( j
b f � ... r .� ; ZI x a � � .. _... '
CG , � 7_,� J �- . i w�uF�uo M � �
.� " % � _�-- �-, ' �� � ��J = �
� �T ll./ �� - { �1 a �� �
_ ;
� � I � � I ;:��'�' Pe[fl all!W le:ava� �-:� �
� _ / tx�asy�a�g _-:. ._ ... . .. �
_ -- I o I
t - --- � �� # qi � ,
b \l ,� i
��+ t y aAH:E�aQ � i �h p.. j
..__ __.� A' �.._., ' :,.� � W� I
� ro� �
� ' � � �t"j m I
� i �" � _ � �
� >` �a A�� !
� N dn�uyds�a�.. � , ..'� �y* �.. � I
/ F * .� 1
i r i
;
� va _ : w � � �i m I
` m ._...d___.._.:...�..�....��c "_' -_.. "_" .._.._"_.. � ' " ' '_" �y
_- �. �
� e P r�r
��v r:��{�r,
� i �
Staff Led Discussions/Presentations
Zoning Text Amendment (R-2 Zoning District, Outdoor Storage): 4
2040 Comprehensive Plan: 4
METRO Blue Line Extension (Municipal Consent): 1
Brookview Community Center: 1
Capital Improvement Plan: 1
Zoning Text Amendments Considered
Item Description
Accessory Retail Sales Requirements Allow accessory retail in Light Industrial and Industrial
properties based on building square footage rather
than building footprint
Modifying R-2 Zoning District Modify requirements for single family homes in the
R-2 district and include additional regulations found in
the R-1 district
Amending Temporary Uses and Remove redundant language regarding Temporary
Events Events
Prohibiting Temporary Family Prohibit temporary health care dwellings as defined in
Health Care Dwellings state statute
Updates to the Floodplain Update code to reflect changes to FEMA maps and
Management Zoning Overlay profiles
District
8
Major Projects Considered
Item/Location Type Description
Central Park West— Major PUD Approval of a 6-story, 126 room hotel, with fitness
Hotel Amendment center, conference rooms, breakfast area, bar and
lounge, and rooftop spa with outdoor seating
5075 Wayzata Blvd
lewish Family& CUP Approval of an accessory retail use in order to
Children's Service of operate the PRISM food shelf and thrift shop
Minneapolis/ PRISM within a newly renovated building
5905 Golden Valley Road
Mortenson Major PUD Approval of a reconstructed and expanded parking
Amendment ramp and preparation for a future new office
700 Meadow Lane N building
North Lilac Drive Major PUD Approval of the renovation and expansion of a
Amendment multi-tenant building
810 Lilac Drive N
Central Park West— Major PUD Approval of an 11-story office tower and 7-story
Office, Phase 1 Amendment parking ramp, connected via skyway
10 West End
Tralee at Paisley Lane Subdivision Approval of the demolition of an existing home
and subdivision of one lot into two
26 Paisley Lane
Morrie's Heritage Car CUP Approval of a classic car rental business and
Connection accessory automobile installation
700 Colorado Ave S
9
� �, ��j Central Park West - Hotel
� � ��" i u � �����,
� ` ��[ ! � rn�
�I�r���E��tl���, �; !���` j �i ll r � !I
, ;� �� � ��.,,,�C � �
��� ��t��4a�� � ri��� ra ��� ����� � � �
I� � ����.k�f��, '�,�� � � ������� � � �
���nie� � a����� 1I� i
fl�� �����������n�il�i ��� �.'����� �� i
,,,.� ��c�im � ��n� n�,
� �������{ ��Ii lI �
��,�:: . .
�� ��� pf � :�. ".'��.;
Mortenson Parking Ramp ~ ' � �' T �I �� fl a�
�°°'r�_" �. � � e �r�,
s
��'= ..y,;�. T3�y;�GB�.�+" .,M►� •}_.'�
�` - .'�" ��Z����.d'i►
-c.
-c
. �,
�_ _._ -.
ir+,.:,. �
{) �;1... . �
��h
...�..�__,.
. `�
�_
:.D. •, ��-`__ . _�.
Ea':r3t -'Mt� ! :...
f�
, �� �, North Lilac Drive Addition
'1 (� ;:�
� _
�
�
-��� �-�� � _ ���, � - - -
,
� : . ��
� - ,,� �:�',''���.�
�� � � i !�^ ..- - -�+�--a-� _
u - . - -
�__-- - . _
l
u > �_ ���'."
Central Park West- Office � �� `
"'',,,, , .w
, . '�''�-,-�,-,
!�
�,�,i ����� �
-
. 4
,� ��
E
����
�..
������ :
. � � � -
. � __ � �,...� .`��,�,
•.r� -;.�..;� �
io
���� ��
Ph�si��1 I�+evelap►m�nt Il�partrnen�
763-593-8t395/7fi�-593-81 t��(f�x)
Date: January 23, 2017
To: Golden Valley Planning Commission
From: Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Subject: Presentation of the 2016 Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report
Summary
Staff has prepared a summary of the 2016 activity of the Board of Zoning Appeals in advance of
the Commission's report to the City Council by the Board of Zoning Appeals Chair. The
presentation of the Annual Report will provide an opportunity for discussion between Board
Members and the City Council in 2017.
Attachments
2016 Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report (12 pages)
`�'�`'`'t Board of Zonin A eals
,���1���r� g p p
��1� 2016 Annual Re ort
p
�
I
S 89 S�'18" E
— --1 D0.1?-- —
— — — ra.,�a✓�dr ero as ___ � _ a
! ..°i�eir.. 1
I � i
�
�
��� �
�V � lr�
� ��
I (�V
V
� �
�
4' i �°c � 3
�;? K i i73!� ' �oy' �O
b y O e c k .�', '� $ a p
dI -----`-o�_____ � 4 7� � g
� � � � 'x f I / .ly � 2
i
ry b � i
'ing Owe//ing ry £x�slin9 Dwet/ing ^ \�^v Exisling Owe/ling
� corr�b�,s l.�JZ .SQ. Fr. �
i i
l/i//1/// -----?9.1----- ' I7 � 9.17 7.7 ' '
' � ----
� �y ; Ff' �
; � y a
h, �J m; � _;
^o� �\/ ''b')� V 4 �9� h�
� I » � ~�
i
� �
� � � �
� �
� 1 � I ?� I
_ � __.. _ L_ �. � _ . __i
-- �— --�oo.00-- — —
� N 89 50 SB` W
+ Conrrefe CoiO
•s.___ ----
__ __ ---_ � _ --—_
i
h+
I���oll .Street
— -i —-.._-- — -----— — ---
2016 Board Members
David Perich, Chair
George Maxwell, Vice Chair
Nancy Nelson
Richard Orenstein
Rotating Planning Commissioner
City Staff
Marc Nevinski, Physical Development Director
Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager
Emily Goellner, Associate Planner/Grant Writer
Chloe McGuire Brigl, Community Development Intern
Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant
2
Duties of the Board of Zoning Appeals
The Board of Zoning Appeals consists of five (5) members that meet once a month if there are
any petitions pending for action. All members of the Board of Zoning Appeals serve a one-(1)
year term. A Planning Commissioner serves as the fifth (5th) member of the Board of Zoning
Appeals.
The Board of Zoning Appeals shall have the following powers:
1. To decide appeals where it is alleged that an error has been made in any Order,
requirement, decision or determination and/or interpretation made by a City
administrative officer in enforcement and administration of this Chapter.
2. To hear requests for variances from the requirements of this Chapter, including
restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are
in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Chapter and when the
variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. A variance may be granted when
the petitioner for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in
complying with this Chapter "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the
granting of a variance, means:
a. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not
permitted by this Chapter;
b. The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property
not created by the property owner; and
c. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
3. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical
difficulties include but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar
energy systems. Notwithstanding the foregoing, variances shall be granted for earth
sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes section 216C.06, subdivision 14,
when in harmony with this Chapter.
4. The Board of Zoning Appeals may not grant a variance that would allow any use that is
not allowed for property in the Zoning District where the affected person's land is
located. The Board of Zoning Appeals may impose conditions in the granting of
variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality
to the impact created by the variance.
5. When either the City, Hennepin County or the State of Minnesota creates or worsens a
nonconforming setback or prevents or worsens compliance with the applicable parking
requirements by acquiring, a portion of a lot for a public improvement, the lot owner
shall be entitled as a matter of right to obtain a variance for the nonconforming setback
or parking condition so created or worsened.
3
Total Number of Variances Considered: 35
Located in R-1 Residential Zoning District: 34
Located in Industrial Zoning District: 1
BZA Requests by Type: 2016
', Accessory Structure Location
� ; � ,
Average Grade
Shoreland Setback
,
,
Articulation
', Building Envelope
Height
1
RearSetback '
' Side Setback
' Front Setback
,
; }
, _ ,
_ _ . . _._t_. . � _ - + ; ,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 �
I' r� Number of Requests
l ;
_
;
! BZA Decisions: 2016
; ;
�
3
9
23
��
�
i
�Approved Denied Tabled �
------ �
4
c
o �
�
� � U e LL
� r J
�. R O a� � �
.� N � N c'�i � �
�w.�F� L = 3 N O � � ,`°'c
� �
'� � � � , (n fi6 > � V� U o m
H � � .� � m o
�j � � y � .p � � � t0 N ^ v�i`O m
"rr., H � N � c� � N � a� � N �`�
��,1 � 3 U � � � c rn o a� � � y �
�� a � � � > � ° m t � � ��� s
� � Q Q Q 00 lL 2 ln !n F ��o
m y�n��
F � U G �O
• • 0 • • O • • a�,=a� o
� SI"IOdV3NNIW d0 AiIJ
SI'IOdV�NNIW d0 A.LIJ �i" r
,
—�----'—'-----"--'—'.�"_"_"_"_"_"�"�"�"�"�"�"�"� �"�"�"�"� �'. , ..�" "�"�i"�"�"�"�"_"_'i
� � �
I � �� � I
a •
. �
Q �1�I a�H u�n:a2 �� � ,� , ,` I
� � w' ,�,,,� ��Q� �� � � ,
C � ��� a y ' i ..
H �
<
^ ' M '
� i � 3 '`��� i
� � ��� p1topoa�i�L �" s��oae3NN�w ao ,ts,t�
�
'. ��r I
" i �-------•---•--•-------------------�---
, �: ,
, ,, �
� � '
I k� � �: , � � � � � �
����•asN�saoa ��o xn��� j ,� --"�1t �� � 11tu n�►opEay�j � �� � I c.
. � � , �
t �
'� �4 t
`-
. a
__;----•----=------------------------� i°'�.„� ,�v, / 1• �' ��, „ ,' i o
ro , H
I �.� � } i � � � �
%L I a�i � ` � O
� � 'd • + ? I H
a � , � o • ` � � �
� I � �
r j H ang atqoH ,I !� I
�. � +.,,, � �
� � �
� • � '�
i , _ ' ; �r{ � �
� ��;`
� � ` � _ � � ----------'
I � � � _ �-
I � w � i � �
: .:. ,
� ' I, � � ,
� = � �
, � �
� � f __._ _ � �,� I
. .. �
�-----------------------�-, � �, . , , -.,: �, _ u�.. . �,., ,. : >,� ,
'�� � � � � I�I zQ��ItZ !�I Peossso' �- �
szauzny etuaX 4 �
'°�`�,..I �' �. ,.�aag �.
m �
y • ro °�� .o �
•- ..- , A I �
�1 .F � �
_ �- �� � �s a �. �, a�•� N i �
s.� i � �° �o � a �, x �s ., �-,:-- � �
; �`,�' .q._�n.,...�,.� � � ,� f� - � ��«. `, � j .
� � H
I '¢ �ang auEZ o � ��. o � . � �
' ,___Y_____ � �� � d . ; c
ti
� _ __
J � " z ' ao
q y > O � r
� � �� _ � 4..' � f J
j � O ro1
r x�_,° . ..
� N aQ sQjbn �',,., �zQ setbnoQ l N �r
�E u� m.c
: I � � d� d S anH 3 QP
� � � � Q� � � Epi:ol3
O �,,�
V i � ` � ` � � San�
� � � � � a a:tqsdu��
r
I +� � � O � A �
� I
� � � � an�eiasxaj
� ; ^-� �
, ,� ,
---------------_____J �, b d+� �, , S a�H I
I •� , � � �.:� euetsinoZ �
, r q I
o �H ang EpEna�-' �� � P o �� > I
- � C) � '
,
3 �' �w�. � �', °,� � I
z � _ � �,� ro s aag I
^ 1 x ptuEnr�(suua�
., � � H an�. f �:
� I �, � aP°iI2I � w
, �_�
� . ,,�,� P��SS, b �
., I ro d I
� '
� u ang EK;auut� ���' � � p�H ang EK;auuiM S a� p 3 �
Z � � � ?I�auut,�,l I
I d �`
� y � � I
I � ° �
� � �%� I
� Ha"ang ;�
a� o d us�uoasi� � '" �'�� �
:x� y, � � j ;,�a �
�! a � �,, i i
; �
,�I � � p�i8 slii�iE:a a� � ,� ' Y
.�: H ang auoog ,� v ._ �� � �
� �� � � � � � � �
� �I � �� �.. H ang an;EaaQ a � ,�v�;A�.- ,� I o
x �
3 � �� � ,�+ V � � a
� �
u. � � .._' _ : � :C '
z � � .� �r ` _ .: � a,� � v[��
o i r ��_�� �r+ > � �� ; w
� i *� ' �� v � �� � i r
V '� � �
� H ang uuosstapuay� tj ' � � °
-----------------------1-------------------------------------------- - ----------------- -------------------'...�---7----------------------�
xino�x�a ao �1�� i�inow�a Ix�va sr�o��is
, ��� .d a�^�Ni» ; a o A i u
� r�.p u ki ..„�,,.w^"t..
�
,n � �� �
.-,µ:° ! �w._"_"L"—; �--,
. � � �"�'"„� _"—"
�,
i
�
Total Number of Proposed Projects Requesting
Variances, by Type of Project: 2016 ;
;
, Paved Area, 1 Shed, 1 !,
; � i
�
�
$ �
�
Garage, 5 i
�
,
� Home or
Building
Addition, 5
;
�
�
' :� ���;
�Deck, 5 I
;
'�, Front Porch, 1 �..�
s
&%.
New Home or
Building, 4
_ _ _
5
Number of Variances Considered: 161
Located in R-1 Residentia) Zoning District: 145
Located in Institutional Zoning District: 14
Located in Industrial Zoning District: 1
Located in Light Industrial Zoning District: 1
BZA Requests by Type: 2012-2016
;
Fence Height I �
' �
` Accessory Structure Height
�
i
�
Paved Area �
Parking �
�
1
;' Accessory Structure Size
Accessory Structure Location
r 1
' Average Grade �
Shoreland Setback �
i
�
Articulation
; Building Envelope
Height �
RearSetback
i
Side Setback
; i
�
FrontSetback
', I ; , ,: : ' ! � , ', i
' 0 S 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 j
I
�r Number of Requests �
6
♦y.+ � �LL
� � d � �
,
�"" p tp o � :
�,
L � �' ca o �
� "'� �, � O � � E �' o �
� N d � Q ° Q � e
�,,� O ,c ... � a� = a�i � � ��;
_ � � � E 3 > a� o "o�
� d 0 u`_ C7 = z a c�i� � `�>
�
*�ar....,. a .\.. �j e a �
� � .,c� o
� � � • Q � � O � �no
G �
a°ia� o
;�
SI'IOdt'HNNIIV i0 ,ll.I�)
SI"IOJd3NNIW d0 .C.1[J . .
�
__..__...,_."'—"_"—"_'__'_"_"_"_"_"_"_"�"�"�"�" �"�"�"_"_"�"_ '�"_"_"_"_"_"_
�' "
� _'"_ �r2 �
�
; � e � � � . �. �
,
A �AI a�H u3suaZ �. ��t Y I
? I '�� � � 3 � � � I
� i �
m � ��° �► � ,
m �
, ,• �.
� j �i � � � "�` j �
w �
F° I �' � I
� ���� .. �ipppa�Z � � S170dtl3NNti1� i0 x.LIJ �
� � " �
U �
' � '_" "_"_"_' _"_"_"_"_"
I — ---
, � �, � .
� ,,- �
a" � � .�
�
, �' � . � �, � • ! c
�,nt•asNiaaoa ao ,�r�� � � I , . ,� �•�--�qr ��� �� � Hu�nnopeay� � � � � �
�. ...- A+ �`,
�
� �
:
� ,� , ,
� ; � � � �
µ d 1 • � ��.4 � , �
�-----------------------• --------• -.
..
ro { �� �f � H
� � r � ' �� ,�"" �` �." I o
F i � �
�n , � � � � F
]� � • „ Q O ` , i V
c: � v � •
c � �aA�ajqoH � ��,r.�- � E� j
F � 0 `� � "' �: I
u � ; •
'r
� I
i �. • _j.- � � ------- �
i /� ` o I� ►� --�
i �► + �,, �-
I � � � � �
! �
j � � � �-;...
� ;.--� «� ��ri �, �
.
�---------------------- --�---i , � a}4 ., N xa aEit� � H Peozssos,,`? �.� 1
` y s�ausny � 4 �
j y � y, � ` � � g ang etuag � �.
..
_ �n `� �.
f � � � � ! =
, � b a A ; _
� . .----- _.._� y O
� '�� ti _ � b� '� ` � .
, �--� "qq � =
. - " •�
�7 ro x pC _ � I
__. _
� Q `"�.� H ang ausZ o � � . . o °�p- x : �
a :p I , �
� __' w � ,� q d ' o
� y._=-'+"_ Z � o y '�O I r
o H
I � �� O� � � ro' v
; "rE,,: " '~�
� :H xQ sEtbn ;� ` H xQ setbnoQ .� ^� �o
a N F.
: � '� �� �, �d g an� ro,��
v I a ; o,�� E s�� ppixoi3
b+ / `
�
� 1 � - � L v - � S aAf7�j
o � � � � axtusduxg�
i � „ a
F I � � � ry � � A I
� � � � � ang�asxaj ,� �
I � ' ,., �; r� � I
� � � U _ �� �
---------------LL--J > y' � , �, S H 1
� � EUEtstnoZ �
i �i •� N
� r � !
o i H ang epenaH � O 7 o D I
�. �� �, � .o I
3 �� :,,,,�, � � o ,
z � � � � '� = S an� I
u, � � �+ EIIIEA(�jSR1I...�
° x an'� �
� I � � puEtsl ap°uti ro
`' i ,� ��I
� H ang ex;auus� �„T"` �H ang ex�auut� S an3�eii�auutM 3 I
� � � � � x.
� y �, � ��t� �
I � �
� I y J x x`Jan�T �
G4 ' o y ut�uo�st�y "` �
,x � � it � `� ;,; ,.� "� I
� �� �
�i Pi � °'*`z.. �,,. ;� � i
.,;�
'�� � � �� P�►tH�iIFLH IEtaua� '
v I �; H ang auoog � � � �'; � � i
�, �; , , �, � � q,y �, I ,
z � ��� � ;� H ang xn;E�aQ a �a��'s�►,.--. `�1° ,,,'�yy � 5
3 I �� - a. o � � o
� ! o . ,
w � .,..' _ ._,- °..�' ++ � � F
z � �. (� �:
' N
c I � ; f ' �'+� � � � .T� j
� ^
} I ''�` � m � � � r
�- � .� rp, :
v � H ang uqossjapua� �j � �
_�___.--------------__..L.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..�..----�----•--•-------------..�
Hinow �ta Ixara s�no��is
x.�.noivx�a ao x.t.�� I� : 3o x�I�
� � I
, ,,�;�,,� � �
�. : . ,
"�, f s j �r------:.---,
��' � i i____�_���-�----
�
I BZA Decisions, 2012-2016
s
24
130
.���
� Approved Denied �. Tabled '
�
Total Number of Projects Requesting Variances, '
bY TYpe of Project: 2012-2016 '
Paved Area, Shed, 3 Parking, 1 !
6 � � �
Fence, 2
;
Garage, 23� ,y
; t
� �.
I �•
Home or _ . _. � : ,
! Building
j Addition, 30 Deck, 17
i
�
�
i
i New Home or ��
' Building, 19
Front Porch, 3�
�
�
C
.r O p ..
d � � � U N V � g LL
v y r = � c n �
J
� � � C N N � � y � �.
�, ■i � N c"_'�i � c"��i �'' n c�u " ;
� �. {0 C N � � � � a� o � o �
�„� > .� r b : b � -v � �. v �c � Y � o
y O fn f/� fn (n � � C � � � � � � � o
-,,�,� � F... Y� *+ N �' Z' �' Z+ O (� W y � N � C � Z.�"
"� � � y •• v°� c°n r°n o c�o � � _ � ... � Q � co a� o `�o�
�;���, y � y N rn N m � � � N �, s � � � N � � ��.�
�.. d � L U U V N V d � C Q .� Y > N O � ^ o d d s
,R, a {� U U U U � > > N � N f0 cC N � ��a
� � � Q Q Q Q Q Q m tL LL 2 d d �' (n (n :t c_'o
� � y'y�.C�
` � O � � Qo
r � • � • • � • O • O • O • � • a�?a� o
�
S170dVHNNIIN d0 .l].iJ
S110dtlHNNIW d0 .I,LIJ
.�__—.__'.---------------i"_"�"_"__'_"�'�"__'�"�"_"�"_' '_"� � .
� ' � � . . __� —��"_"_'�"�"_"_"�"_"_"�'i
o �!�I a�H u3suaZ °" I
z j $�,, � I
„ � ,' Q* t � ��
m �� �
c � � �'` � A ; I
� � � �. j
,. , , � ,,y 01topoa�i�L � :
� SI70dVHNNIW 30 ,I.LIJ �
� �^,, � �
V i � • '_"_"_"_"_"_"_"�"_ _"_"_,--_
�
� �`"
�
� 1 � . � � 4:. '� � � � _�, � 0 I �
a itasH�asou io x.c�1 x j � � ---.� ��. 0 � Hu�nnopea� ; ��� � �
�� � � S
� � � a, � t `� ,
. i
�. A
! ��. 1 �• � !, o
�------------_---- �
i ----•---------- ;�..��� � , � ¢ • �` '� �• �--- j w
F � • : �` � r ` �f � • • I o
� I o � ' ' . � � �
r
• � y
� � N a��a qoH �� � �} � I
r � i � �
� `3 • � \t� �. �..r � �
c, � • � � ` S � I
� � �a
� s � � � � k �1._ � � � ------- I
O "�
� y / � � j'
� W � „� • ' �• I
; � � ,� .
I _ � � �
� k• Q � I
I Z Q '�, �� �
�----------------•----- r-�—--, � ��� � �� �". ���E��� H o�ssa � � �
� N � �n � ��auxny etttaX 4 �
� �� .� y„ y �' • ro =� �a "�a Q I
� �►H
� �f � � �
v
� � ` �`"�` � b. � � �"�„ "�C P'' 7
r � i C � A' C � d � � � —"_'-,c vi � O
� � � si . -�,�,..., �,� a ro x a � . ,a _ � I
= N 4 O � an aus � � d . o ]C ' �
I � t *�_ � � ri H Z p y b, ' � ' q I �.
ti � � �,k, m a• a � � � • � ; d � c
_� � a �,.m o z � o � _ -° . �-
� o �, __ o
� Y � ` r�V N F� � V' i u
I � � 0 `w°�
H xQ sEjbn �, ,� H za setbnoQ 8 ��s„ N�
j � a
� � b � "'� �• � � '�:� S a�H�`° r�
F � � � p,N � �Pizol,3 �
v
r � H
� j � � � � N � ►�, g ang L�
a> � �
o � � � � � a axt�sdutE�
� � y ` O a�
� � � • � .v � A �
� � � ; �O � � � ang e(aszaj
� j �;; j
' x. c A . • S a�H I
- --__----------------� ..��. � �n
j ;% �, � � � 3 e H IEuetstnoZ '
0 0 � � � I
`o �H an e ena � ..,..<>C9 H � � � �
� � H P N p = �
` ' _ b I
Z � � . o � S ang I
� Etupn�dsuua �
4 ' � �Ir�
� �
H an�
� � �, � � pustsl ap°uZI ro
� I� � al
�
I � � � 3ro �1
� H ang e�;auuiM ,...>� � �,,,�H ang Ex;auut� S an3l p�i�auutM I
� z
v � • i
i ;; � � ,,,P � ;� • �
� I aci � � Z 1�`�aaH �
a ; V o a us�uoass� � �
�� � � � � '� � I
ro� J '" w ��,� � I
a; ,
y� c � "�''°°rv t ..
I
�I y • � � P�ig siIiL1I Iezaua� ; � � �
;d � .� H ang auoog � y ��, , x
d I �,� Q
� � U N r� � _ q� � � • �a b ! �
�
z � ` H ang xn;e�aQ a d��--. D � �
3 j �� _ � �o '. p^q � o
j � ' � '� :: � �
z _.�„ • �� , _ ro � �. N ,;
y I � / � _`� � 7� 7' j �
� A
F i �� �� ,� - ��, 3 i �
i, , �
� H an�qossjapua� � ----------�------------•----------�
--- ------------------.�.------------------------ ----.._. --------------------------------------------- ,
��.i.no��ti�a ivvva s�no��.cs
HI.(l0}V.l7d �10 .l.I IJ �w,;J„p��x�,LIJ ' d0,i.11�
� ��� � 1
. i�� ti n.,..,�+.,� � ,
x�'yb'� '` � � � �,..... ------
-----�---
' � I_.�-----
1
Types of Variances Considered
Item Description
Front Yard Setback Requests to build structures within 35 feet of the front yard property
line in R-1, R-2, and Institutional Districts. Institutional Districts also
require that at least 25 feet be landscaped and maintained as a buffer
zone.
Side Yard Setback Requests to build structures within the side yard setback area, which
ranges from 5 feet to 50 feet depending on the type of structure and
the Zoning District.
Rear Yard Setback Requests to build structures within the rear yard setback area, which
ranges from 5 feet to 50 feet depending on the type of structure and
the Zoning District.
Articulation Requests to waive articulation requirement, which requires inward or
outward articulation of 2 feet in depth and 8 feet in length for every 32
feet of side wall on homes in the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts.
Height Requests to build principal structures over the maximum height
requirement, which ranges from 25 to 28 feet depending on the type
of roof and the Zoning District.
Fence Height Requests to build fences over the maximum height requirements,
which ranges from 4 to 12 feet depending on the location on the
property (front yard or side/rear yard) and the Zoning District.
Building Envelope Requests to build a structure within the maximum building envelope,
which is defined for properties within the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts.
This includes the 2:1 or 4:1 slope requirement when the structure is
taller than 15 feet at the side yard setback line.
Accessory Structure Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structure in a
Location location that is not completely to the rear of the principal structure or
in a location that is not at least 10 feet from the principal structure.
Accessory Structure Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structures above
Size the allowable limit of 1,000 square feet in R-1, R-2, and Institutional
Zoning Districts.
Accessory Structure Requests to build a garage, shed, or other accessory structures above
Height the maximum height requirements, which is 10 feet in the R-1, R-2,
and Institutional Zoning Districts.
Average Grade Requests to change the average grade of a property by more than 1
foot.
Shoreland Setback Requests to build a structure within the minimum shoreland setbacks,
which are larger than standard front, side, and rear setbacks.
8