Loading...
06-25-19 BZA Agenda 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 city ) 763-593-3992 1 TTY 763-593-3968 763-593-8109(fax)I www.goldenvalleymn.gov Olden pp va.11e Board of ZoningAppeals June 25, 2019—7 pm Council Chambers REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road 1. Call To Order 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of Minutes May 28, 2019, Regular Meeting 4. 7713 Knoll Street Andrey Lisoff, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (n)(2) Paved Area Setback Requirements • 1.5 ft. off of the required 3 ft. to a distance of 1.5 ft. at the driveways closest point to the side yard (west) property line. Purpose: To allow for the existing newly paved driveway. Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (n)(3) Paved Area Coverage Requirements • 4.6% more than the allowed 40% of front yard bituminous pavement coverage Purpose: To allow for the existing newly paved driveway. S. 1025 Ravine Trail Robbie Hyland, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(2)(3) Height Restrictions • 2.5 ft. over the allowed one foot increase in average grade to an increase of 3.5 feet at the front building line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new home. 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. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting June 25, 2019—7 pm 6. 4240 Bassett Creek Drive Paul and Dawn Speltz, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard Setback Requirements • 5.85 ft. off of the required 35 ft. to a distance of 29.15 ft. at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a new garage addition on the west side of the home. 7. Adjournment 7800 Golden Valley Road I Golden Valley,MN 55427 CI tJ 4 763-593-3992 TTY 763-593-3968 763-593-8109(fax) www.goldenvalleymn.gov Olden Board of Zoning Appeals NTq l 1e y May 28,2019—7 pm Council Chambers REGULAR MEETING MINUTES Golden Valley City Hall 7800 Golden Valley Road Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Chair Nelson. Roll Call Board Members present: Nancy Nelson, Richard Orenstein, David Perich, Andy Snope and Planning Commissioner Andy Johnson Board Members absent: None Staff present: Senior Planner/Grant Writer Emily Goellner and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman Approval of Agenda MOTION made by Snope, seconded by Perich to approve the agenda of May 27, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. Approval of Minutes MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Snope to approve the minutes of April 23, 2019, as submitted and the motion carried unanimously. Agenda Items 832 Utah Avenue South Jerry Bonner, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(c)(1) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 9.8 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5.2 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition on the north side of the home. Goellner referred to a location map of the property and explained the applicant's request to construct a new 20.5 ft. x 27.9 ft. two-stall garage on the north side of the home. Goellner referred to a survey of the property and stated that the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the new garage to be located 5.2 ft. from the side yard property line rather than the required 15 ft. Goellner stated that a second garage stall is a reasonable use of the property and noted that the home was built in 1950 with a one-stall garage and that the placement of the home limits the ability to expand the garage to a two-stall garage. She added that the proposed two-stall garage fits with the character of the area, but that the depth of the proposed garage could be reduced to 24 ft. rather than the proposed depth of 27.9 ft. C ARIM L763-593-8006 document is available in alternate formats upon a 72-hour request. Please call (TTY: 763-593-3968)to make a request. Examples of alternate formats include large print, electronic, Braille, audiocassette, etc. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting May 28, 2019—7 pm Goellner stated that the property owner to the north has expressed concern about their ability to build a garage addition on their property which is similar and about the applicant's proposed new garage blocking sunlight and possibly damaging bushes that are currently located between the two properties. Goellner stated that staff is recommending approval of the variance with a condition that the depth of the garage not exceed 24 ft. Snope asked why the proposed garage should be limited to 24 ft. in depth. Goellner said staff likes to see only the smallest possible variances granted. Snope asked if the proposed garage meets the articulation requirements. Goellner said yes and added that the square footage of the proposed garage and a typical 24 ft. x 24 ft. garage are approximately the same. Nelson asked if the applicant would be able to park two cars in the proposed new garage. Goellner said the proposed garage is narrower than a standard two-stall garage but if the proposed garage were built closer to the north property line than what is being proposed it would be more expensive to build because there would be different building code requirements. Johnson asked about the setback requirement for walkways. Goellner said the setback requirement for paved areas is 3 ft. and that the applicant has said they will keep the proposed concrete pad 3 ft. away from the north property line. Nelson asked the applicants if they have considered any other options. Jerry Bonner, Applicant, said they did consider a detached garage in the rear yard but it was not financially feasible. He added that the extra depth in the proposed new garage would help with storage. Katrina Busick, Applicant, added that they need the extra depth in the proposed garage for motorcycle parking and to have any storage space. Mr. Bonner stated that of the 22 houses on their street five of them have single stall garages. He said that other neighbors are supportive of their proposal and that they understand the neighbor to north's concerns so they have talked to their contractor who is confident there will be no damage to the shrubs in between their houses. Ms. Busick stated that they would need a variance to build a detached garage as well so this was the most economical proposal. Snope asked if a driveway would be on the Wayzata Blvd. side of the property if the applicants were to build a detached garage. Ms. Busick said yes, it was advised to have the driveway on Wayzata Blvd. but that it would be much more environmentally impactful and they would have still needed a variance. Nelson opened the public hearing. Scott Thuleen, 855 Hanley Road, said he received a variance for his property in order to make his house accessible. He said when people invest in their homes they tend to stay. He questioned the standards today and asked when they were revised because cars are getting bigger. He said it is concerning as a resident when people do things the right way and then hit a roadblock for something very insignificant. He said the City is not looking at the bigger picture and that their neighborhood is a transition City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting May 28, 2019 —7 pm neighborhood and if people aren't encouraged to invest in their properties something is wrong. He suggested the focus be put on all of the do-it-yourself fences in the City and pleaded with the Board to encourage people to put money into their properties. Rondi Shenehon, 814 Utah Avenue South, said she is concerned about her property value and if they will also be able to add a second garage stall in the future. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to speak, Nelson closed the public hearing. Nelson said the proposal seems reasonable and that in her experience the Board has really tried to accommodate second garage stalls whenever possible. Johnson said he understands what staff is trying to do by requiring that the depth of the garage be reduced but the square footage will be the same as a standard 24 ft. x 24 ft. garage and the applicants are entitled to a 32 ft. long wall so this proposal seems reasonable. He said the applicants considered other alternatives and added that they could put a fence and concrete closer to the property line which would harm the bushes between the two houses but they are not. Perich agreed that the proposal is reasonable and that the applicants are trying to request the smallest variance possible and added that they are not asking for a larger than standard garage. MOTION made by Perich, seconded by Snope to approve a variance for 9.8 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 5.2 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition on the north side of the home and the motion carried unanimously. 45 Rhode Island Avenue South Kevin Larson, Applicant Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(c)(1) Side Yard Setback Requirements • 6.76 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 8.24 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line to allow for the construction of a garage addition on the north side of the home. Request: Waiver from Section 113-88, Single Family Zoning District, Subd. (g)(3) Accessory Structure Area Limitations • 125 sq. ft. more than the allowed 1,000 sq. ft. total of accessory structure space. Goellner referred to a location map and survey of the property and explained the applicant's request to build a 22 ft. x 26 ft. garage addition which would result in a four-stall garage totaling 1,125 square feet. Goellner stated that the proposed garage addition would be located 8.24 ft. from the north property line City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting May 28, 2019— 7 pm rather than the required is 15 ft. and that the proposed garage would be 125 sq. ft. more than the allowed 1,000 sq. ft. of total accessory structure space. Goellner stated that the applicant has said the unique circumstances in this case include the growing trend of four-stall garages, the home was built with a two-stall garage, and there are examples of nearby homes with three and four-stall garages. Goellner stated that staff is recommending denial of both variance requests. Nelson asked if the applicant could build a three-stall garage without any variances. Goellner said yes. Johnson asked about the height regulations. Goellner said a house can be 28 ft. tall. Johnson asked if granting the requested variances could then allow the applicant to build over the proposed new garage space. Goellner said no because the variances requested are only for the plans shown with this request. Amy Larson, Applicant, said she wanted to clarify their intent. She stated that when they moved into this neighborhood they knew they wanted to add on to the garage and that they want all their vehicles stored inside. She referred to the four-stall garage house behind theirs and said that is the only house that doesn't have stuff stored outside. She said they are not being greedy, they are thinking long term and want to keep as much contained as possible. She said she wants the Board to start to consider these types of requests and that what they are proposing is the best visual option. Kevin Larson, Applicant, said they talked to all of their neighbors and that they have a petition with 16 signatures showing their support of the proposed project. He said in terms of other options without variances they could build a single stall addition, expand the driveway, or have two single stall garages on each side of the house but he doesn't think they would be desirable. Ms. Larson said they intend to be here a long time and want to add to the visual appeal. Perich noted that a single stall garage could be added and the existing garage could be extended back. Mr. Larson agreed. Ms. Larson reiterated that they want to keep everything contained. Orenstein asked about the width of the house and the width of the proposed garage. Goellner said the garage would be 46 ft. wide and the house is 37 ft. wide. Nelson opened the public hearing. James Norkosky, 50 Rhode Island Avenue South, said the applicant came to his house to discuss the variance and his wife's response was why build a four-stall garage when they can build a three-stall garage without a variance. He said the character of the neighborhood is two-stall garages, with some three-stall garages not four. He said if the applicants want to store stuff inside they could build a deeper garage. He referred to the variance application where it says "today's standards" and said he is not sure what that means but he's not sure if having a garage that is wider than the house is the standards. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting 5 May 28, 2019 —7 pm James Metchnek, 15 Rhode Island Avenue South, said that neighbors have said they signed the applicant's petition because their properties wouldn't be affected. He said the neighbor at 20 Quebec Avenue told the applicants that they should build a four-stall garage and that seems to be the impetus. He said it was also that neighbor who suggested the applicant go around and get signatures. He said he doesn't see any demonstrated necessity or justification for a four-stall garage and that the other homes mentioned by the applicant with four-stall garages didn't need variances. He said the empty space between his house and the applicants house is really nice and it seems that an additional two-stall garage will give him a crowded feeling and affect property values because there will be less curb appeal and will be crowded in and not spread out like the houses in the area. Seeing and hearing no one else wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. Ms. Larson said she respects her neighbors' opinions and all they've tried to do is improve the value of their property and the neighborhood. She said she hopes that people didn't feel forced to sign their petition and that they will not go forward with this project and it was not their intention to do any ill will. Snope asked about regulations regarding garage space versus house space. Goellner said there are no rules about garage width in the Single Family (R-1) Zoning District, but there is a rule that the square footage of a garage can't be more than the square footage of a house. Orenstein said he doesn't think this proposal is a reasonable use of the property, he doesn't think there are any unique circumstances and that the proposed garage would alter the character of the neighborhood. Johnson congratulated the applicants for talking to all of the neighbors. He explained that want versus need doesn't factor into the Board's decision but there are options in this case that don't require variances so he is inclined to vote to deny the requested variances. Snope said he agrees there are other more appealing options and added that there is 30 ft. in the side yard and room in back of the existing garage as well. MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Johnson to deny the variance request for 6.76 ft. off of the required 15 ft. to a distance of 8.24 ft. at its closest point to the side yard (north) property line and the motion carried unanimously. MOTION made by Snope, seconded by Orenstein to deny the variance request for 125 sq. ft. more than the allowed 1,000 sq. ft. total of accessory structure space. Annual Board Training Goellner gave the Commission the annual orientation presentation. She discussed the City's organizational chart, board and commission structure, the City's current boards and commissions, roles and responsibilities, and the Board's bylaws, expectations, guiding principles, and core values. City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting May 28, 2019—7 pm Election of Officers Orenstein nominated Nelson for Chair, Perich seconded the nomination. Nelson accepted the nomination and the Board voted unanimously to keep Nelson as Chair. Perich nominated Orenstein for Vice Chair, Snope seconded the nomination. Orenstein accepted the nomination and the Board voted unanimously to keep Orenstein as Vice Chair. Adjournment MOTION made by Orenstein, seconded by Snope and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 pm. Nancy Nelson, Chair Lisa Wittman, Administrative Assistant w Cl, " C golden MEMORANDUM valley Physical Development Department 763-593-8095/763-593-8109(fax) Date: June 25, 2019 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Emily Anderson, Planning Intern Subject: 7713 Knoll Street North Andrey Lisoff, Property Owner IW.. .." Introduction Andrey Lisoff, owner of the property at 7713 Knoll Street North, is seeking two variances from the City Code to amend a recently paved driveway completed by a contractor without a permit. The applicant is seeking the following variances from City Code: Variance Request City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of § 113-88, Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning 1.5 feet off the required 3 feet to a District, Subd. (n)(2) Paved Area Setbacks: Paved distance of 1.5 feet at its closest point to areas shall be set back 3 feet from a lot line, except the side yard (west) property line. E for shared driveways used by multiple property . owners pursuant to a private easement. .........�........ _.._.._ The applicant is requesting a variance of E § 113-88, Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning 4.6% more than the allowed 40% of front District, Subd. (n)(3) Paved Area Coverage: No more yard paved area coverage to a total of than 40% of the front yard may be covered with 44.6%. concrete, bituminous pavement, or pavers. Background Paved Area Setback Variance • The lot is approximately 10,400 square feet and zoned for Single-Family Residential use. • Before paving, the existing driveway was gravel tire tracks. • The paved driveway is currently 13.1 feet wide. • The standard width of a single car driveway is approximately 12 feet wide. • The existing paved driveway touches the existing side yard (west) property line with no set- back between 7713 Knoll Street North and the neighboring property, 7721 Knoll Street 1 North. The lack of original setback or variance is due to the paving company used by the applicant not seeking a right-of-way permit from the City of Golden Valley. • The owner of 7721 Knoll Street North is concerned about water drainage based on the existing elevation and nature of the landscape from the newly paved driveway onto their own driveway given their close proximity. • The applicant has discussed the issue with the owner of the neighboring property (7721 Knoll Street North) and made an informal agreement on a 4-foot buffer between each property's driveway, which would require the applicant to, at minimum, cut back the paved driveway 1.5 feet to appease the neighboring property owner. • The resulting driveway would be 11.6 feet wide if the applicant is granted the 1.5 foot variance. • The neighboring property owner's driveway is currently 2.5 feet away from the property line. The principal structure on that lot is 13.6 feet away from the property line. The estimated driveway width for 7721 Knoll Street North is 11.1 feet wide. Impervious Surface Variance • The front yard of the lot is measured from the front lot line to the front wall of the principal structure, as exemplified in the image below. §ate tiwd - t f' S &+^ s • The total area of the front yard is 2,658 square feet. • In the northeastern corner of the lot, there is an old 1-car driveway with no garage. • The area of the retaining walls surrounding the old driveway is 85 square feet. The area of the concrete surface of the old drive is 591 square feet. The area of the new driveway is 510 square feet. The total area of impervious surface in the front yard is 1,186 square feet. • The retaining walls are 3 percent of the front yard. The concrete surface of the old drive is 22 percent of the front yard. The new driveway is 19 percent of the front yard. • The total percentage of impervious surface for the front yard is 44.6%. No more than 40% of the front yard may be covered with concrete, bituminous pavement or pavers (Section 113- 88, Subd. (n)(3)). 2 ^RCNT YARD *1a?s..XVER situmineum orivauay 510 Sq, Ft. Concroto Curfacoa 591 Sq. Ft. Rat. Walla 85 aq. Ft. TCT&. FnFo.,Er, HARocevE9 1,iaa Cq,. Ft. AFEA OF iOT (F? T;4 2,EW Sq. Ft. FEFC.E TAG.E OF KARCKO'ER 70 LO' 44 51. • The existing garage is a 2-car garage in the rear yard of the lot. It is 24 feet by 24 feet. It was constructed in 1981 and expanded in 1985. The old driveway remained as part of the lot despite the new garage and driveway on the west side of the house. • The total impervious surface for the entire lot is 47.5%, which conforms to City Code requiring that the total amount of impervious surfaces on any lot shall not exceed 50% of the area (Section 113-88, Subd. (m)). EXISTING RMCCOVER ua962 Sq. Ft. gxia=.irs Oack 264 Sig. Ft. EdtLmir�rusz Drivoway 2,071 Sq. Ft. Gara3a W9 "q. Ft. veno®#:a Zurfacar, 313 Sq. Ft. Rat. Walla 140 Sq. Ft. '0-01 EXTS7114G HARDCOVER 4,9:9 Sq. -Ft. ABEA CF OOT 10,354 aa. Ft. PERCENTAGE OF -A^XOVER TO LSAT 47 ° • Staff does not know if there ever was an attached tuck-under garage at the end of the old driveway. There is no permit evidence of an earlier garage being removed. This lack of evidence could be due to lack of city retention or a previous owner not getting the proper permits. Code states that a lot cannot have two street curb cut accesses unless the lot has two legally constructed garages. This code may not have been in writing when the new garage was built in 1981, wasn't enforced by past city staff, or there never was a garage at the end of the old driveway to begin with. Analysis 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. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. The property already had an existing gravel driveway so the use of the newly paved area has not changed. A single car driveway is a reasonable use of property for a home with a 2-car garage. The presence of two driveways without the presence of two garages, combined with the amount of impervious surface on the lot, is a not a reasonable use of land. 3 2. The landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. The current landowner is not responsible for the smaller size of the lot and the location of the principal structure. The house was built in 1939 and was not constructed with a garage in mind. Other lots in the vicinity of 7713 Knoll Street North have the same design for vehicle storage. The current property owner purchased the house with the old driveway present. It is unknown if the presence of the old driveway is due to city staff not enforcing City Code when the new garage was built in 1981, the absence of current code standards for driveways in single-family zoning districts, or failure by a previous owner to comply with City Code. However, it should be noted that the paving was completed without a right-of-way permit. In the process of obtaining a right-of-way permit, staff would have been able to better facilitate a discussion about pavement setback and the issue of excessive impervious surface would have also have been addressed. Solutions besides variances could have been proposed and implemented. Additionally, the adjacent property owner's concerns about drainage based on the existing elevation and nature of the landscape could have been addressed before the paving of the driveway. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality The proposed driveway setback does not alter the essential character of the locality. Other homes in the neighborhood have garages that are separate from the principal structure that require single car driveways that slightly curve around the building envelope and are very close or almost on property lines. The neighboring property of 7721 Knoll Street North has a nonconforming driveway, as it is only 2.5 feet from its lot line. As for the area of impervious surface in the front yard, the proposal to keep the old driveway does not fit with the essential character of the locality. Houses in the local vicinity typically have one curb cut and one driveway wide enough for one car, with the rest of the front yard being pervious surface. The amount of impervious surface in the front yard for the property in question is abnormal for this neighborhood. If surrounding properties had a second driveway, they have since been removed. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant's needs without requiring a variance. The applicant could cut out the full 3 feet needed to meet the driveway setback requirement. While the full 3 feet could be cut off the paved driveway, it would leave the owner with a 10.1-foot wide driveway. It is staff's assessment that 10.1 feet is not wide enough to be useful to the owner and could not provide enough space to open car doors or avoid hitting protruding utility boxes on the side of the house closest to the driveway. A variance seems necessary in the case of the driveway setback to ensure reasonable use of the property. As for the area of impervious surface in the front yard, a variance could be avoided if even a portion of the old driveway was removed. 4 Lastly, staff assesses whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant's needs. The driveway could be cut more than 1.5 feet and is not the smallest amount that the pavement could be cut back. However, staff is comfortable with the 1.5 foot cutback given the character of the neighborhood. Additionally, removing the retaining walls could bring the amount of impervious surface in the front yard to 41%, resulting in a smaller variance. However, this option would need to be explored further and it may not be an ideal solution. Also, while staff does not have the dimensions of the sidewalk leading up to the principal structure, the removal of the front sidewalk could be another solution, though it is unknown how much impervious surface would be removed. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request for a variance of 1.5 feet off the required 3 feet to a distance of 1.5 feet at its closest point to the side yard (west) property line. Staff recommends denial of the request for a variance of 4.6% more than the allowed 40% of front yard paved area coverage to a total of 44.6%. 5 1425 1424 1425 1420 '1424 1416 1417 1409 Subject Property: 1408 1d09 7800 7713 Knoll Street 1401 1400 1400 1401 Knoll St z 7821 7813 a� 7729 7721 7713 � 7705 7637 7629 1337 ¢ 75 7613 1325 a 1336 L a rl. 4' 1301 7624 �i 7820 7812 1300 1325 7728 7720 7712 7704 7632 7612 1300 75 PI;JriIOWh Ave N 7801 7729 7701 1224 1227 1228 1219 1218 1213 Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN e 55427-4588 ityof 763-593-8095 TTY-763-593-3968 www.goidenvalleymn.gov C�IVE planning@goldenvalleymn.gov MAY P L 3 � Zo�9 ldvall ANNING APPLICATION sr• V Zoning . . - - Street'address of property in this application: R 0 1s a APPLICANT INFORMATION Name(individual,or corporate entitiy): F Address: 5514017 Phone num jEtEaiddr Authorized Representative(if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone number: Email address: Property Owner(if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone number: Email address: SITEINFOPMATION Provide a detailed description of the variance(s)being requested: 4%.AC'S*►t •. V 4.ctaft ae, ';,.C- cti►� �4�«� Co•n ea�� nz4 0611ta d c�v�w oy w ad.o�..�- Qart+•��- des• -tant,� c s..a%6,L VJ.� rorty v�.i.k ��} `,. -cu F Q.�- opt�•r �1•c ��. ��b o r s .�cb�Qv k�. 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: na_ D\LC- Oc%\X.W c�S. �.� �...�bm� ; s �'� �•. .�, pft� \tom,. a(\0) s h o vt v�� O ci vtaa c.�►k b 4,e.te. 1 q'r V' p 4ft{..r Cyt. �p C tw%L.n o V.c- 6vC:VLba4y �..lt 4 O A. J Pia-ening 1 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 . • 763-593-8095 1 TTY:763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.govlannin city0 y P g@goldenvalleymn.gov ®1�e l valley Zoning Code - 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. What is unique about your property and how do you feel that it necessitates a variance? Explain how the need for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. Explain how,if granted,the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 cit o 763-593-8095 TTY.763-593-3968 www. oldenvalle mn. ov planning@goidenvalleymn.gov f 9 Y 9 p g@goldenvalleymn.gov ®Iden 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. PEQUIPED ATTACHMENTS IX 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) O 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) 0 Fee:$200 application fee for Single-Family Residential,$30o application fee for all other Zoning Districts RI 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 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. l111 1 � k. la �I Illlllli I I Illlllllli �,, , ` i r Mr'�...�S.��r .� -��;���,. .. ., �.w.„. � � a,; �. �j�x ;�. ' =4t R•,t ,\ � A q.x ��I ,r :: � '. I � '� _ �S;���( ♦meq' {{�r a� „.� >t) �� VSA 27 pj o 1 , r r` r` a:K !11111 ell X< , r J ` rW *♦k1 !* M„�y ,� �� }fir M M t k°",'S'' ~�. ^Yyf 1 � 1'�f''ti{�l'r} i�: ,t£w Sift �i►'�����J��, T� �� . , � i• 7 I I ••, 9M_^ .. 1 .�. a :.„?`�;�;•=,r, ,,r.,.-_ 1, i Mrd . IV N oft if At N t� aXt � R• <' / ,r i w po y / r iM,. . � �v�! ; ,. �•err �. .- I 7'� ^� .� I(' i� + INS ♦ i� � �, •.. ��_�� ((ice .�, �, A {� ^' 4�- y .cj yT� ,r �� � j II I !•1 , t � '�'.r.,i'�1►i w. tl�:.., y I I,,' t1 E m �� �� hyo r rwn ;r d• at .r• }� NokAil t '� , �YA ref s�f; �t I 1 r + ,, +a 1�i a,,• ����� �'� ,.�. '...gip 1�T'�� sf �` •, ,� ! �: 'ti t`k .��'��, f." i�! ��Y �:.: . ikA ���y��y it• I � t f I r•G, �.�jrdy sr�1, / � I� o! � �. ,�! Jic{ 'r.�`Ky pry 4 �•r � � �' y��"' . r®r l�.+ i .i .�� ��} .�. 7 y ' � }1., 1 M�.alP Fl4C` J Iit��,F� CIL t.,• err _ J +}•y '.�uyy.t i� ..y.......:,;. 9" / '� ,'lex. '✓.^A /,'!r' It J`t yf 1e'1. �( --✓^ \ It ��. 410. � •fir, }• �fid / •`j /., i �' i '- f ! jr `� •i. «' < 'ih� •�r ee �` (I {. u: Q - t t ti�r`r .4 1Ov'' r i ti JM Ate r � , L _ r l I r 4Ir i� ,1 / M ^l 0 !s W/ U ff�Ys v LL 3Pn , CA • Q ^r �/��(,` O ^V O t�V N l� l� ^! "`•+ 4S ° a '�°pjy, rzzi l Ld c7 O Q1 m 2 2 \� �"V O � ••ter � '� z Y L F- O till D 41 y I`——————————D 83----—————— I I V) I wo I z83 ---------_h ,� Al „J9,61.00 S I h h --28691-- I 04 Z9 N 071. �-anu0 Pl0 J Lri � w a0� ------------ 003 - ---- �� � V) q) ru m it mo A a , C� N N N N I P T O .. 332 � m ° °� F3l -------y\- - -_--- m QI m c m �6'3F °° v' rjim N m °fit Ni N N ^IN N N NI ^I f --f'0'OLl — M .9f,91.00 S --------0 ——----- - 1 ? � I I i--------ink--------- it '> o a o o n x LA o c v clcz c3r"" U � u y � � ,� O c3 � � � O � (•" � u � O `z u V 4. u u a' r ° L- � v y u u u O O N vOi 'O 5 O u O 02 % ° m w co O v ^O ? cv O ^C to v O ami ai — m y R u r O CJ ca c o r'- a u , ° of j N E- o o c o a °' •v', o u u g � z Q 3 o u _ O e, F� 'G Q O c, p U C >= cs C a C i ae C O a "a p n c E R u " 0 u CZ a I~ v O -Y u su, 3 O u V) O W a.� . . °v k o . .uc -v .c° 25 a - u u c o a > H ?? p u O p u ..c cs 0 •° a -o o r o M o > o v w Y >~ v {� cz D o E a • p Q OOf) °u Fes- u° o 'ten o :3 Ln .0 c ° 2 W o Of5. gol 11 valle' y Physical Development Department 763-593-80195/763-593-8109(fax) Date: June 25, 2019 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Jason Zimmerman, Planning Manager Subject: 1025 Ravine Trail Robbie Hyland, Applicant Introduction Robbie Hyland, representing the owner of the property at 1025 Ravine Trail, is seeking a variance from the City Code to construct a new home on a recently subdivided lot. __........... __.___ __.._......_ f..............._.____ _ ............ ...._..... ............ ......... Variance Request I City Code Requirement The applicant is requesting a variance of § 113-88, Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning 2.5 feet over the allowed 1 foot increase in District, Subd. (f)(2)(3), Height Restrictions: the average grade to an increase of 3.5 feet at average grade for a new structure shall be no more the front building line. than 1 foot higher than the average grade that j previously existed on the lot. Background • The lot is approximately 11,768 square feet and zoned for Single-Family Residential use. • It was subdivided from the residential lot to the north in 2018. • The lot is 106 feet wide and abuts right-of-way and a sound wall along 1-394 to the south. Due to the presence of the adjacent right-of-way, the lot is technically a corner lot and has two front yards with large setbacks. • The proposed home has two levels above ground and one level below ground including a side loaded, tuck-under garage. • There is a substantial change in elevation from the back (east) of the lot to the front (west) — approximately a 30 foot drop. • Significant modifications in topography will be needed to manage drainage on the lot when the new home is constructed. Retaining walls are proposed to be constructed to the east and to the south in order to create flat areas for a rear yard and for a reasonably sloped driveway approach to the garage. 1 • The Zoning Code limits an increase in finished elevation of a structure (the average grade)to 1 foot over the grade that exists in the location prior to construction (the existing grade). • The average grade of a structure is determined by calculating the average of 3 points of elevation along the front building line. • The existing grade is measured at the approximate location on the lot of the front building line under current conditions. • Height limits (28 feet to the average height of the highest pitched roof) are established by measuring upwards from the elevation of the average grade. • The existing grade has been calculated by staff as (876 +871'+874')/3=873.7'. The allowed increase of 1 foot would bring the average grade up to 874.7'. • Averaging 3 points along the front of the proposed home (using the proposed grading plan) results in a proposed average grade of(880.5'+880'+871')/3=877.2'. This is 2.5' above the maximum allowed in the Zoning Code. • The applicant states that the average grade of the lot is being raised in order to deal with the "reverse walkout" situation on the lot, to meet driveway needs, to help with drainage, and to match the architecture of the neighboring home. • The single-family property to the north has a lawn that rises approximately 10'-18' from the street to the front of the building. The grading being proposed by the applicant would roughly equal this change in elevation. Analysis 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. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. The construction of a new home on a vacant residential lot is a reasonable use of the property. 2. The landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that are not caused by the landowner. Due to existing topology and it technically being a corner lot, the location of the buildable envelope on the lot is in the middle of a steep slope. Any construction of a home must deal with modifying the topography in order to create a flattened area for a building pad and grading the surrounding earth in such a way as to drain stormwater away from the structure. The applicant has chosen to do this by leveling the back (east) portion of the lot and raising the west (front) portion of the lot. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality. The proposed construction with an approved variance would not alter the essential character of the locality since the proposed grading would roughly match the topography of the neighboring residential property to the north. There are no structures to the south. 2 Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant's needs without requiring a variance. As this is a vacant lot, there should remain a number of approaches to residential construction that result in a structure that is in compliance with the Zoning Code. Staff believes there is at least one other option that could be pursued without requiring a variance— the elevation of the proposed home could be lowered by an additional 25. However, this would likely present challenges in terms of creating positive drainage along the rear of the home and could require higher (or more) retaining walls along the rear of the property. Lastly, staff assesses whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant's needs. It is not clear to staff if an additional 2.5 feet of elevation could be found that would eliminate the need for a variance while essentially maintaining the layout and grading plan that have been proposed. Recommendation While staff believes other alternatives might be found that would avoid the need for a variance, the request that is being made appears to meet the 3 points of examination. Based on these findings, staff recommends approval of the request for a variance of 2.5 feet over the allowed 1-foot increase in average grade to an increase of 3.5 feet at the front building line. 3 Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 city .1. 763-593-8095 1 TTY:763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.gov I plan ning@goldenvalleymn.gov p0 en PLANNING APPLICATION cJ valley Zon,ing Code Variance Street address of property in this application: APPLICANT INFORMATION Name(individual,or corporate entitiy): Robbie Hyland (HBRE) Address: 1025 Ravine Trail Phone number: Authorized;Representative(if other than applicant): Name: Address: Phone number: Email address: I Property Owner(if other than applicant): j Name: 1 Brian Peters Address: Same i Phone number: Email address: SITG l INFORMATION Provide a detailed description of the variance(s)being requested: We are looking to add 6' of soil elevation to the front elevation of a proposed new 1 construction project. I f 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: 3 3 The lot is challenging providing a reverse walkout type home. In order to meet the driveway needs, keep similar architectural needs as the neighbor and meet building height requirements, elevation increase is needed. I 4 I Planning 1 7800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,NIN 55427-4588 city of 763-593-8095 1 TTY:763-593-3968 I www,goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goidenvalleymn.govO®I L9 valley .. Zoning CodeVariance (continued) Minnesota State Statue 462.'357- re u.ires-'that'a property exhibit"practical difficulties!!1 order fora 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 al#er the essential character of the locality To demonstrate how"your`request.will comply with Mnneso#a Stake Statute"462.357,p.lease.respond to the following questions: Explain the need for your variance request and how it will result in a reasonable use of the property. In order to meet driveway slopes, maintain the same architectural looks as the neighbor, meet building height requirements, additional soils elevations are required. What is unique about your property and how do you feel that it necessitates a variance? We are building into the side of a hill. With it being the reverse of a walkout, and to obtain common architectural interest, this would be in the best interest for all parties. Explain how the need for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. It is vacant lot. New construction will require some variance to current ordinance since this lot is so challenging. ! i f I i Explain how,if granted,the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. i i It will acually achieve to overall goals set out by the city. Maintaining architectural interest amongst the all neighbors, help with the drainage, and meet all other ordinances currently in place. I Planning 17800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 city o f 763-593-8095 1 TTY:763-593.3968 I www.goldenvalleymn.gov I planning@goldenvalleymn.gov roI(�f b valley e Zoning . . - 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. We have been working with city officia;s and they are the ones who have agreed that a variance is the best solution here as the lot being built is not typical and the ordinances won't work here. ;Currant survey of your property,including proposed addition and new piopq�ed;bu�ldmg and structure setbacks,(a copy of Golden` Valley's survey:requirements isavailable upon request,apphca#idn consider ci;ncoinp)9,a without a C Vr . t property survey)' One current color photograph of the area affected by the propgsed variance(attach a printed photograph to this apphca.tipri or emeil,a;digital image to planning @goldenvalleymn.gov;submit a. ._.igrial photographs as.eeded) Fee:$too application fee for Single Family Posidentia1 $3op app.licatipn lfee for all other Zoning Dtstncts; Legal description:Exact legal description of the land involved m tha 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). : 's Name of Applicant(please print): Robbie Hyland Signature of Applicant: Date: 6-7-2019 Aulhorl�ed.Representative.(if other than:a pplican.#.) Name(please print): f Signature: Date: 77777 Property pkrner(F other#han applicannt) i. Name(please print): I Signature: � Date: to-7--j`1 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(M.,763.593.3968)to make a request. Examples of-alternate formats may include large print,electronic,¢ra:lle,audiocassette;etc. h� f'�JJ BOB BOO $3' tog $16 816 824 901 $20 915 1001 1015 1001 900 f= 1009 920 Subject Property: 1000' 1025 Ravine Trail 1020 4112 4102 4030 4022 x hi rr .. s ' a . e M. _ ,s y . N x i. a s 2 �k _ w 5 • _y a Y aS� P L f:.; E OS � I a `o o f0 U d W Q °; O O ami w aai E m > N N m a N O °O w yW� a C a N N N M {.{� 'd N < ((3ppy� Y p ZOO o ✓= U U C p Z QI 0) Z Y O O W $ Z 3 2 W V � `� O=zV) m .`sz IF � `N L.L O 3 U n < H <�v O N W_ Ld o = QOU o _. U'(V( O Ww It a-- W Z(J W Q wQZ o = U NN W� 10 Om U Z d w ELL. 0U .1^^1 p m N w� 'p O M CCIS ZO- W< o NOmN pU mhN 8ccg o U P N Z W K K < a ----------- F-- 016 e XVAA3AING 03hdd �'}VV w ' LLJ —i O ; o m I -------------- ------------------------ ---------"906'-- - __--------- J --< `.bOG_ �O o ----------------- ---------------- 906--'�, 406----- ---------- ----------- ------------------------- Z06--__ ------------------ ____--------"-906 -'---�-QD 006___ W - _ -----"--006 Z_ co ca-ax S _ --_ __-968" --- I_ 1 ---- O�----------------- ~¢.J 868--------------- ---�-E7 in ZO6----W -gam n7 _ _. agg ago ----______________ _ J oVll}�Y[r.l�_N -__ _ W _ 1.C _ 068------ bg8'-i'fl 86 J ------ _ -&8 � - B (n Q z gg2",O%' 888-_ __ - OBa '__ ag. __ - ___-- sa' O ®�- -----------99 -988 <0 fV _____________% '' bas &y z ( r w F— -91 ;nl� �M 9 Z9g 888_,_ wU 0 --co M 00 2 ` a8 (ne- oee 099 ca -b8 0 0 Zq ---- �0 1 J 8 , ' 9t I f m -'-- uj w o $P ------ 8_ - 3 ao� a- 1 0 LU co I oLU - m LLto LLI __088______' ��Lr) -a18 `11111 - ----- -----OL9--- �� ��9 _ - __ a 08- w�-W-- ---v A F(? 8 co CD 08 ----------- n Hca 11 r "----B9B---- ------------ -------- 9t2 --- - d 01 ' - Z - -- 4 A bI - -ZGB'---- < 1 I I 9 9[8 _ $68 1 -- ----------------- —` — 0[ _ __ --- �.�� 8------_- -__-� `r"OLH 9L8 � ___ _.8"10-- � V _ Zt8 1 __ _________----'-- '-- ------------ __- _ 99B -8_e -- 998___9_� !_ _ ____ `V- mII i mn � ------------- --------- - 1. --------- -j �.99gS"864 --------- 'M oITo D ao v OD bya II I mI' I I ' g6 4s C7 5 <z I_ > < W I- U' z H ------ 16 L �•., f 1 0 J �✓ ---_ fn U W > _ Z99, < 0 w V= ' -098_ N }Jo0 Q �� X88 - GD m LL=Z F- WH 0 OJ W D LL LL Ow >W H N w o ♦- d N r 0 o Hg0F O O `n rn 000 o ix Z i D 0'C7 J tY z o z LL m�w N ul O if o � W 000 W 2 0 o"', LL W oZso O d 0 Cy -��� CL z O O (14 o11 o �w FILL ��(wn ��> Qw� j i m $ �(<i�w� w g m w�NY U IL Q ° p wQ w OCL0 �� JLL:`CL= m I F-pW W W U r > If I < 1<i m ww Z O OJ 0 m � o LL: �'�0 O ? < x zp� m Q I oC,U �N w O= � Cm7j OD 3: oU Z a I Of C) Oa.x N 0 wU)O FW- ern LL w W wv w II J W w�� Owu-w w J zxa(n �� 0 x� xN �U) ' 2'<n IX(D (n U W W W W w =U J d N (/) NJ U) LL c ' ; w 0 D< O > O 0000 J> J O < < z0 z0 'n Ir J 0 , -0Lu O w t�i u�u�ugu� <W < O m I�x I�x iF Q4 � I f F- < I mala-0-j < a < <<<< F- z fl V400'-IIVW10H�o0HHOU18 sUadx3 5u11apoway0 , IU ( j `JNIJ-dV iO)R N`JIS3G-iva i:)311HD8V �,,,/I`1�QI��C3 .�C V5.,Pl,.e W.H� �!L�eN JU Q r g 0-1-1 `NJIS34 3VIC)H HOHle w, a� L l9 1 liFl9 LU a n a 2' 'v sm ED - ----------- 1111 Hill v Q M1 / �I'I VIII) IIII �IIIIII�I�II�IIIIIIIII. I' ' -----i ----J, z - I I I w 1 1 I 1 � FE T71 X41 111 1 I I I Fo I 1 I o � L= 0 W � LU � ® _ LL DDS ® LU §d �o J LL LU � m IZ n-a In n � rl F 000 o00 V � --i BUM z W S3 MUD � � 1 I w ®oaa \ i � � W I 1 ® ®oaa LU 4 - 1 IU � WE: 92 W00'lIV W10HOGHHOW8 sy.a0x3 8Ullap"al 0 �JNI.L�V6(])R NJIS3C1 iv? n.LO311HOHV gfiuiplineauwH s X11 `NEMS34 3WOH H�23le C/ a l9 1�1�18 p.n U. .0-.5 .8-.Z t (.131 3A 0�31d)3�'7 N3d71111000 TJ13► 11VI l C13W)OCI0,£ l�bYll 331 Du 9xL d314 'ivm PUd13J --- ------------- — —————————— — -------- ��VTfI sJPllNltrl3Zl ------------- ---- 9 Q,n I I r------i Q,n I I I I 7�� I I III I of II I I I I I I I aooa'rro 0.Lx0.9Y II ----- �0 a, q 70.91• I I I ua 't I I �` tu I I I mm}R I I II Y I -------------- -------------- ------------------------------ Iml-.4z .4 I III .L-.6 —rdw WOW ra.wO 6 I I �Q mvaa+•'Gsa'1io I 'gym 0 \ 0 0 Z 0 Y O I ----- r ----- - t — ------ L - I IIII I �' Id 1;t — 4 V 3 II .9 Q LL .I-.4 I� — II Z , =3 ------ I I alai ;e I I I x 7 O ILiocv II I •°�� II �p�'w H _ U- I � a.tat am ,II 3 �a I ' ' .£ � .II-.g• • � __J Ian � I, T- I I', I 0 I LW n(—yl II I I Q \ I I I 0 .I-.Ll 7p • (I IUP"A � K= - - — --J L— \ 9 — 1�- A00-11V W10HOGHHOU19 SNBdXj Bu11•PoluB21 pJ EJNLLAV2i4 V NOIS3O'ivan-Lo3111-108V ��N3CIIS Szl�l�d gt33u." .'j AWOH 0-1 1 NJIS34 3040H HOHle �,/ 1911188 n LL� Qr Q-- H8 9L We L "K8 we .v • i 'f C3Gail1 �D� � � iy -—- - - ---—-—- —-—- - - -—- - - ---—-—- _----_ vaso olur-w-I.nw1 3� 9 u11 y�1 IIIA ------- ------ -- n IIII x IIII cnIIII ° amlu vrron.vr �o ® N d ? � fill flf.^. � � � g • -�1 IIII fill a auAll _ - - -—-_ - = OOIeVTi6 �� V WIY'lBl JDS+i01 1L w� 0 n � 1111 --------------- �o.cv1• - 1 "' III p 06,1 � � III •A � � � � 0i III T � O III z �.a e a III in 70.Yt• IIII _ 1111 U— m� ---- IIII` a u U 4 rt131n nu nl to ' N.Jo A x0, __ YaoLL 71ur-N-4poa NaOi4J ' e� fill aJW d�1 z r �1td IIII W ,p0-.Z'� fill- •o �m '410Hs III �i 3 qq.1 0 e I WOH s I IL 7o.fz. IIII n .0 II .p IIII C tu eo I - I - vitals r w ataootl i17G1117 70.rt "L--------� lI aurwaacal d "r: "�Id HS 949E Id 0L9L '71d 0L9L n pr a IE .0-�9V )( W00'-IIVW10H@OHH061B svadx3 BUllepOWaa ••0 u N �( SNUJVNd Q NOIS30 ivuniO311HO?JV 9 Bulpling awoH �-t-t `NE)IS34 3woH rt�aie ��N�CIIS ! Szl�13c1 pr Iwoo L-91F9L 1 NB Q m 70.fc ------ - w ae� _ m _ III Ll L dip .8-£ III ,4-,£I ? II �I IIIW V ---- ------------- � A1�1,t I III I _ a S 02 7d O,yL�� �l1 C — O dOt'lil I N � N I � E4 I Q,9e<9,L I O W Lu I I •o=n lrti �i II � Illm a L I � m ivb ry v w. oow wacbm 3 NIS 3 0 � Wr Qr M MEMORANDUMgolden valley Physical Development Department 763-593-8095 1763-593-8709(fax) Date: June 25, 2019 To: Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals From: Emily Anderson, Planning Intern Emily Goellner, Senior Planner/Grant Writer Subject: 4240 Bassett Creek Drive Paul and Dawn Speltz, Property Owners Introduction Paul and Dawn Speltz, owners of the property at 4240 Bassett Creek Drive, are seeking the following variance from the City Code to construct a garage: Variance Request i City Code Requirement The applicants are requesting a variance of I § 113-88, Single Family Residential (R-1) Zoning 5.85 feet off the required 35 feet to a I District, Subd. (f)(1)(a), Front Yard Setback distance of 29.15 feet at its closest point I Requirement: the minimum front yard (west) to the front yard (west) property line. I setback requirement is 35 feet. .. ... .... .... ..... ........ ............................._............................_..._........._.........._............ Background • The applicant previously came before the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 23, 2019. The original proposal requested a variance of 14.52 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 20.48 feet at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line to build a garage with additional storage space and a mudroom. The Board of Zoning Appeals denied this request. • The lot is approximately 14,000 square feet and zoned for Single-Family Residential use. • It is a corner lot with two front yards facing Kyle Avenue to the west and Bassett Creek Drive to the south. The house and garage currently face Bassett Creek Drive. • The lot is surrounded by Bassett Creek to the east and single-family homes to the north, west, and south. • The home was constructed in 1969. • The footprint of the existing home is approximately 1,821 square feet. • The existing home is three stories -the lower story is a "walkout" to the rear yard on the northeast side of the home. • The footprint of the existing 2-car garage is approximately 480 square feet. It is approximately 20 feet wide and 24 feet long. • The applicant is proposing to convert the existing garage to living space and build a new garage on the west side of the home. • The proposed front yard setback is 29.15 feet from the front yard (west) property line. The required setback is 35 feet. • The distance between the curb and the property line along Kyle Avenue is 14.12 feet. • The proposed garage is 30 feet wide and 24 feet long, totaling 720 square feet in size (see "Diagram B" attached). This will expand the existing footprint of the home by approximately 40%. • There is a gazebo in a non-conforming location on the northwest side of the property. The applicants plan to remove the gazebo as part of this proposal. • The applicant notes that the existing home was built on a hill sloping down toward Bassett Creek. The home was built about 55 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bassett Creek, which is the line used to measure compliance with Shoreland setback requirements. A minimum of 50 feet is required, which limits the buildable area on the east side of the home. • The minimum setback requirement on the east side of the home is 25 feet. The home is currently 14.58 feet from the east property line, so expansion here requires a variance. • Buildable area in the northeast part of the lot is limited by the floodplain established by Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) (see survey attached). • The minimum setback on the north side of the lot is 12.5 feet. The proposed side yard (north) setback is 16.85 feet. • The applicant notes that the existing garage is supported by a "spancrete" floor. It is in disrepair and must be replaced in order for the playroom underneath the garage to continue being utilized. Since it is structurally unsafe at this time, cars cannot be parked inside. • It is also noted that the existing garage is not wide enough for two cars. It is 20 feet wide. Expanding the garage to the east by 2-4 feet is possible with a rear yard variance, but it would bring the house very close to the floodplain line and the Shoreland setback line. • Expanding to the east is also complicated by the presence of retaining walls. • The applicant notes that the presence of two front yards and steep slopes limits the buildable area on the property. • The applicant notes that if the new garage was built within the buildable area, the resulting rooflines would eliminate three existing windows, resulting in the loss of two bedrooms as they cannot be legal bedrooms without windows (see Diagram A in attached). • It is noted in the application that this proposal would tie into the colonial look of the home. • The applicant currently stores recreational and maintenance equipment outside. The additional storage space would allow this equipment to be stored indoors instead. • The applicant notes that reducing the size of the proposed garage from 30 feet wide to 24 feet wide would not impact the size of the front yard setback variance request. • If the proposed garage were reduced to 24 feet wide and 24 feet long, the total square footage would be reduced from 720 square feet 576 square feet. This would expand the existing footprint of the home by approximately 32% rather than 40%. There is sufficient space on the lot to build a shed for additional storage, but this is not the applicant's preference. Analysis 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. In order to constitute practical difficulties: 1. The property owner must propose to use the property in a reasonable manner. A two-car garage is a reasonable use of the property. 2. The landowners' problem must be due to circumstances unique to the property that is not caused by the landowner. The buildable area in the northeast and east parts of the lot are limited by topography, floodplain, and Shoreland setback requirements and by the existence of two front lot lines of the corner lot to the west. Because of the constraints on the buildable area, a new garage located within this lot's buildable area would result in the removal of three windows and therefore two bedrooms. The existing home was built with a narrow 2-car garage for today's standards, which is 20 feet in width. The existence of a "spancrete" garage in need of repair is primarily an economic circumstance of the property owner and in staff's opinion, should not be considered in this analysis. 3. And the variance, if granted, must not alter the essential character of the locality With the smaller variance request than the original proposal in April, staff feels that the essential character of the locality would be altered by the proposal for a garage larger than the standard size of 24 feet long and 24 feet wide. The addition significantly increases the building footprint, but the majority of the addition falls within the buildable area. The applicant states that if the garage was fully placed within the buildable area, it would result in the loss of two bedrooms, would appear to be two stories given the slope of the yard, wouldn't tie into the colonial look of the home, and would have a great impact on the neighbor's view, making the variance the preferable option. The applicant intends to maintain the character of the home when designing the new addition. The applicant notes that the neighbors' sight line will benefit from the storage of the applicant's jet ski, tractor, and garbage cans as well as their cars in the 30-foot wide garage. While the applicant notes that the size of the variance request does not change by reducing the width of the garage from 30 feet to 24 feet, it is important to note that variance decisions are based on all of the facts presented in the application. Therefore, the size of the proposed garage does impact the nature of the variance request and the findings for approval. Additionally, staff assesses whether other options are available to meet the applicant's needs without requiring a variance. It appears that one option would be to replace the "spancrete" floor so that the garage and playroom underneath it can continue to be utilized. A shed could be built to store equipment. The applicant noted that this would be a large financial investment, but would not result in any additional room in the narrow garage. Lastly, staff assesses whether the proposal requests the smallest variance necessary to meet the applicant's needs. The applicant could place the garage within the buildable area. However, the loss of two bedrooms should be avoided. The Board of Zoning Appeals has typically approved setback variances for garages no larger than the standard size to fit 2 cars plus some storage, which is 24 feet long and 24 feet wide. The Board has not typically based setback variance decisions for garages on the unique storage needs of the current resident. Rather, the approval of the variance has been focused on accommodating 2 cars. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request for a variance of 5.85 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 29.15 feet at its closest point to the front yard (west) property line. Staff recommends adding a condition to the approval of this variance: • The proposed garage must be reduced to 24 feet wide and 24 feet long, as shown in "Diagram U attached. • As proposed by the applicant, the non-conforming gazebo in the front yard must be removed. It should be noted that the issuance of a right of way management permit for the proposed new driveway would require the concurrent removal of the existing driveway. vv 2401 4-120 z a 2400 60 2361 2360 Subject Property: 40 4240 Bassett Creek Dr 4 2340 4141 4330 2321 4240 4201 Gt 2 a? 31 4321 4311 4241 ` S$6ttf 4221 230.1 2241 221 22so 2240 2250 2221 214 0 _ 2220 u Planning 17800 Gold en Valley Road,GoldenValley,MN55427 4588 763.593-80951T1Y:763 593 39681vvvvw.goldenvalleymn.goviplanning^goidenvalleymn.gov Valle PLANNING APPLICATI Street address of property in this application: 4240 Bassett Creek,Drive Name(individual,or corporate entitiy): Paul and Dawn Speltz 1 Address:4240 Bassett Creek Drive Phonenumber: Email address: I i Authorized Representative(if otherthan applicant): Name: Joe Iverson-Iverson Homes Address:2605 Campus Drive, Plymouth, 55441 Phone number: Email address: Property Owner(if other than applicant): Name: Same as applicant l Address: Phonenumber: Email address: Provide a detailed description of thevariance(s)being requested: e are seeking a variance in the allowed setback on our west property line to allow construction of a new garage.Because our lot is a corner lot,our side yard(to the west)is onsidered a"front yard"and has a 35 foot setback.We are requesting a variance of 6 feet to a distance of 29 feet to the closest point of the west property line. 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: Our current garage is an"elevated"garage made of spancrete,and there is a fully finished playroom underneath the garage.We have recently had water intrusion into the playroom which lead us to discover that there had been a long-term water intrusion from the front of the house(between driveway and house)in conjunction with the salt and water from vehicles in the garage, that has resulted in over half of the spancrete spans being deemed structurally unsafe.We have been advised to not park vehicles in our existing garage at this time by a structural engineer. Our existing garage is only 20x24.We have difficulty parking both of our vehicles in the garage and still being able to open the car doors. During the summer months we cannot park one of our vehicles in the garage to allow for bikes, scooters etc.We have had our vehicle parked in our driveway gone through on at least three occasions,including theft of personal items.We do our best to keep the vehicle locked,but parking it outside,exposes us to ongoing theft concems.The expense to repair the existing garage space,where we will continue to have overall space issues,has caused us to seek alternative garage options.In order to expand the garage in existing location would also require a variance and push us toward the creek. It also would have to be a two-story addition,given the elevation of our i lot in that area.We are also concerned about rebuilding an elevated garage to face future similar issues of water intrusion and structural deterioration. We anticipate removing the deteriorated concrete spans and installing wood floor joists to create a living space in the existing garage footprint. We have reviewed the lot and are faced with a significant elevation change across the yard,and flood plain and creek issues on our northern and eastern property lines.The only viable alternative for building a new,appropriately sized garage,is to remove our existing patio and expand the house out to the west.We explored the possibility of placing the entire structure within the"buildable area",however we were advised that with the resulting rooflines, we would lose three existing windows on the house's northern exposure as well as two on the east exposure which would eliminate 2 bedrooms in the house, as they cannot be legal bedrooms without windows.This is because in order for the structure to be 24 feet wide and within the buildable area it would have to be shifted into what we consider our backyard,running along the back of the house,what is designated a"side yard"by code. (See Diagram A and adjacent photos). Planning 17800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 rft t�J 763-593-8095ITTY:763 593 39681www.goldenvalleyrnn.govIplanning@goldenvalleymn.gov p� ' c� galley ML �► • . , W-K Minnesota State Statue462.357 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 atter 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 wilt result in a reasonable use of the property. Our house is a corner lot, and therefore under the code we are considered to have two front yards.We are requesting a variance to the west,which is our home's true side yard. Because it is considered a"front yard"we have a 35 foot setback.The existing house at the closest point is at 35 feet.our existing garage is not structurally sound and is 20x24.To expand the existing garage we would also need a variance to the east. (To bring the existing garage up to existing standard for space of 24x24 we would need a 4 foot variance to the east for a total footprint into the variance area of 96 square feet). The necessary variance to allow construction of the 24 foot deep garage to the west as we are requesting, requires a 6 foot variance for only a very small portion of the total garage(approximately 47 square feet into the variance area,so we are asking for a smatter overall variance than what would be required to expand our existing garage to a 20x24). Presently we cannot park any vehicles in the garage, and have a small non-conforming gazebo/shed that needs to be removed which will eliminate what limited storage space we have. if repaired can only park one vehicle in our existing garage. In addition to our vehicles,we have a jet ski and Lawn tractor, presently stored in the yard. Building a new garage will enable us to park our vehicles,and store our additional items conceated from neighborhood view.This will increase the overall appeal of the neighborhood. The requested new garage is in line with today's vehicle sizes and storage needs is a reasonable use of our residential property.Whether we were to build a 24x24 or 2430 at our proposed location our variance need is the same 47 square feet of the westernmost corner,as the width is all within the"buildable area"of our yard,it just the depth that is the issue. Whatis unique about your property and how do you feet that it necessitates a variance? Our property is unique in that we are a corner lot, and therefore per the City Code we have two front yard setbacks(our actual Front yard along Bassett Cree Drive and also along Kyte Avenue to the West). In addition,we are on a hill with a significant elevation change along the property(our backyard grade chang from Kyle Ave to the creek is over 11 feet).We are also adjacent to the creek and have flood plain concerns on the northeast corner of the property.There i no other feasible location for an expanded garage that is not"elevated"as our existing garage is. If we were not a corner lot,we would not need a variance as the proposed structure would be within the normal side yard setback. Finally we limited within the"buildable area"by the angle our existing house is placed at in conjunction with the setbacks along the West and North property tines.Based upon the placement of the existing house,and the north setback line we cannot build a structure that is 24 foot deep and 24 foot wide without shift behind our house,blocking existing windows to two bedrooms reducing our overa number of bedrooms from 5 to 3. Exp ain how t e nee for a variance is based on circumstances that are not a result of a landowner action. Our home was built in the 1960s when garages were smaller,and the home was built at that time with a 20x24 garage.We also had no disclosure of the wate intrusion at the time of purchase,and did not become aware of the issue until water leaked into our playroom.We have met with architects and contractors and have determined there is no other viable location for a reasonably sized garage on the property other than the requested location.We have spent the entire winter unable to park in the garage due to the structural issues with our current garage. We explored the buildabte area,however due to the side yar set back to the north, and the angle of the house and the setback to the west,we are unable to place a 24 foot wide garage in the buildable area without shifting the structure back along the north fagade of the house, blocking three windows,including two bedrooms.The placement of the existing home,as we l as the setback lines are not the result of landowner action. Explain how,if granted,the proposed variance will not alter the essential character of your neighborhood and Golden Valley as a whole. We purchased our house,in large part because of the traditional colonial look of our home.We fully intend to maintain the character of home,and have worked closely with our contractor and architect to ensure that we maintain the front fayade and that the addition does not result in a feeling of a disproportionate garage to the existing structur . We are going to tie the rooflines into the existing home,so that they are symmetrical to the other side of the house.(see Photo below).Golden Valley as a whole is benefited when houses are updated to conform with the current standards,which include at least a 2424 garage.This will benefit not only us,but also future owners.Our neighbor's view will be improved in that we will be able to park our vehicles,jet ski,tractor and garbage cans inside the garage.It will also create some additional privacy in our backyard, that does not currently exist due to the corner lot.Finally is should be noted that there is a substantial boulevard between our property line and the actual curb on Kyle Ave (1 feet),therefore our proposed structure will still be roughly 43 feet from the actual street,even with the variance. Finally,the appearance of this structure will be tied in the existing house.If we were to attempt to do the structure in the"buildable area"in addition to loosing the windows/bedrooms to the house,it would be a large garage(likely t e eastern wall of the garage would appear to be two stories given the slope of the yard,placed in the middle of our backyard.It would not tie in with the colonial look of the 4enn,-and wo4klifnpact the neighbor's view. TheFefaFe the small is prefeFable to this aption,as the StFUrtlffe will 441 be FROFe than 3q fePt fFaFn the 6444 and will maintain the character of the neighborhood. Planning 17800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN SS427-4588 it I,of 763-5.93-8095 TTY:763-593-3968 www.goldenvalleymn.govlplanningCa-goldenvalleyrrin.gov l l r' 1 ` valley 0 HUM M SEEN= The City requests that you consider all available project options permitted by the Zoning Code before requesting a variance.The Board of Zoning Appealswill 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. We have not determined any location on the property that would allow us to build (or expand the existing)garage to a 24x24 garage without requiring a variance.We do not desire to expand the existing garage because it would require a variance toward the creek, and potential flood plain,further elevated construction and continued elevated parking,which has already resulted in structure issues.If we were to fill in to rebuild the existing garage we would lose the existing living space of our playroom,which was a setting feature when we purchased the home, as we have young active children.Finally, within the buildable area the new structure would block windows to two bedrooms,reducing our home from a 5 bedroom home to a 3 bedroom home.Becau of the unique layout of our lot, the proximity to the creek,and the significant elevation change on tot there is no other viable location to build. Current survey of your property,including proposed addition and new proposed building and structure setbacks(a copy of Golden O 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 ® emaila digital.itnagetoplanning@goldenvatteymn.gov;submit additional photographs as needed) ® Fee:$200 application fee for Single-Family Residential,$300 application fee for all other Zoning Districts Legal descri tion:Exact legal description of the land involved in this a i lication attach a se i aratesheet if necessa r): 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 oneyear,the variance expires.I have considered alt options afforded to methrough the City's Zoning Code and feet thereis noatternatewayto achieve my objective except to seek a varianceto 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 otherthan applicant),or propertyowner(if otherthan applicant). - Name of Applicant (please print) __..,,�.,. __ Si nature of Applicant: Date; Name (please print) Signature: Date: Name (please print) Signature: Date: Pleasenote:The Cityof Golden Valley will send notice ofyour 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. ui. 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. In i K FF &goo-* 1 klI'" 51 1 bi -ado LL ILI LU LL r ...._....... ..L... .�'� W 1 t aLO, M4131;. 3111.Ndumv Y a � p o ? 3 e < ✓' m a t w y $$ E � Iy Z z Earo'� m{0a I 4 w g � I I I o o 10-X a a A `o � u� g II ^ nI! ' I a WO c O v � z wnl3 � I A, t" p^uj LL J Q y �x py�Qp mpp 3i M C aZ. F Yn 4 U uqx uj `-• S � C Jj � � C N Q ��� m @p W N N aIIg a. A p ` m m !- LL DWS � N M T 41 t0 W sraae•ups IJ YG f¢.ansa aay,vx�� nvv luxvM� xawa�o clxwcwaano, vgA M �eal_I auvu v3xo let LL �00'Ob`4 MLIo00N ,.-��� T:J/0111 Lli a LL. 1 v" ZN st ui 47 . OZ 18 3.3001 .00§� t LJ o I a LIJ 9] -,n.r,n , - v .� v ` + Ld _-___.........� _ I AW 0 z E E �_..... � a �N � C c0 �, d mW ZZ 6 C m mLL wMwua1� `a rn O 0 0 t- a m G C O N Ul Ul U Q LL EO }^ z Kt LL N O d J C � W ' G 6 O I � � t�y a� zEa .X2 " 0 c in E s y�v Wd 3 N I *o-�* Va N rnCL 0 z FnN 3 Z yayly1 �'u Yvc m5a8 WU I An Q 9 YO y N y i P. W J 2 ui V C CI UtCq 0 W E O (w � 4' erfz°EE I LL eW o _ m IJ V! 9 w 5 � .o � H c MOPui E N f an+ O w l N ga= ° o i4 3 c w 0 gs n m rowPd S. D .C � ac W N Sgo 1•: •d it 3 ct O � \t^il Wrid B+YNOQan4yYJ[Y3��V v N• 1MYry LllY4 MIEN AyNyOM �3l61T NJ n3+va01 35�� f 3Wi blawn C /'3wna`wix+v>�ixro 4 8 J N ' :H �� R Iri �� A �>✓ 1 7DW �� j c, '�"�° �-��� iY��`..:,: � •'� 1^ IBJUS C04 / r_ Ld Ld - `� - 1(1 A I v l JI tIVJI VY J1I\f Gr- Ld ..................._........_-__ _.................M.. r � O \ W h !�.c� w ' ael�"_ `�llpea�.r _ � [',n•� � /'.i� � j, . 'k. -`�•a.�++a rens r � _ � 5 �cW_.. �d:Y�F "'#► r �.* `ter"' tii1.,' ��}i�p �{ ''I* ... 1,1�-Y/' P/ '1� mo /y �.r I�' b .. S� �"' �I n °` �f!."d't � �;� T�•^'-" �I�b�:O�" s p f' �iii •�. ri (k i e y h .t - F n " yrs yic�._i.' 77 e, Planning I 78000oldenValley Road,Golden Valley,MN 55427-4588 city of 763-593-8095 TTY:763-593-3968 www.goldenvalIeymn.gov planning@goIdenvalIeymn.gov golden valley i 11 F i d , x Current View of property from Kyle Ave standing at the curb. Ir l jl I.I�S 1 4 l' A Current view of home from creek looking at current garage. (Garage is on second level, playroom underneath, Jet Ski stored outside (right corner of photo). Planning 17800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 5 5427-4588 city of 763-593-8095 TTY:763-593-3968 1 www.goldenvalleymn.govl planning@goldenvalleymn.gov golden sr valley -z r Planned new roofline view from Kyle Ave Planning 17800 Golden Valley Road,Golden Valley,MN 5 5427-4588 cit 1,n/ 763-593-8095 TTY:763-593-3968 www.goldenvalleymn.gov planning@goldenvalleymn.gov go,de* valle a Q J r.� 1 S 4 t4 . M Backyard view, circled posts demark the structure in the "buildable area" showing the three windows that would be Blocked by the garage addition. Basement window was a planned egress addition during the construction process. Given the elevation change, the roofline would block all three windows to the back. (Dining room and two bedrooms). . � \ \ \ a f � � \ . ; \ L� y \. . . \ L L \ I / �L / . / ... L / . < y \ . p }/ L C L- L « �` !