bza-minutes-sep-22-20
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was held via Webex in accordance with the local emergency declaration made by
the City under Minn. Stat. § 12.37. In accordance with that declaration, beginning on March 16,
2020, all Board of Zoning Appeals meetings held during the emergency were conducted
electronically. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public were
able to monitor the meeting by calling 1-415-655-0001 and entering the meeting code 133 743
2368.
Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Vice-Chair Ginis.
Roll Call
Members present: Chris Carlson, Sophia Ginis, Nancy Nelson, Richard Orenstein, Ryan Sadeghi–
Planning Commissioner
Members absent: Kade Arms-Regenold
Staff present: Planning Manager Jason Zimmerman and Planner Myles Campbell
Approval of Agenda
MOTION made by Nelson, seconded by Carlson to approve the agenda of September 22, 2020, as
submitted. Staff took a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Minutes
MOTION made by Carlson, seconded by Ginis to approve the August 25, 2020, meeting minutes. Staff
took a roll call vote and the motion carried unanimously.
1. 1108 Sumter Ave N
Zona and Todd Pederson, Applicant
Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Density Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Front Yard
Setback Requirements 3.58 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a distance of 26.42 ft. at its closest point
to the front yard property line.
Myles Campbell, Planner, started by reiterating the request and gave the Board an idea of the
home’s location, in the City. He continued to a full background and history of the lot and home, as
well as the current porch the homeowner would like to expand. Campbell expanded on the applicant
request as well as the existing home size and current setbacks. After reviewing the three items
guiding staff analysis, staff found the variance is generally in line with the purpose of the zoning code
as well as the regulations for R-1, but lacking a unique circumstance.
September 22, 2020 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
September 22, 2020 – 7 pm
2
Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 3.58 ft. off of the required 30 ft. to a
distance of 26.42 ft. at its closest point to the front yard property line.
Chair Orenstein asked why staff recommended denial when the request seems so minor. Campbell
responded that the variance is being requested due to the home’s proximity to the front lot line and
it’s not a unique circumstance. The lot has a regular shape and no significant grading challenges. Staff
added that if the Board wanted to approve this variance, they could amend it to then bring the
existing deck into conformity. The conversation continued on the if the setback would start from the
existing structure or from another location.
Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak. Todd Pederson was speaking on behalf of his mother,
the owner of the home. The goal of the deck it to help the applicant’s elderly mother still socialize
and see her neighbors through the isolation of Covid. The applicant answered some construction and
aesthetic questions from the Board.
MOTION was made by Orenstein and seconded by Nancy Nelson to modify the recommendation
and moved to approve 6’7” off the 30’ setback for a total distance of 23’5” at its closest point to
the front yard property line.
Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously.
2. 3125 26th Ave N
Isaac Murphy, Applicant
Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(b) Rear Yard Setback
Requirements 23 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a total distance of 2 ft. at its closest point to the rear
yard property line.
Myles Campbell, Planner, started by stating the applicant’s request and showing a map of the lot’s
location; the lot is an irregular shape and a park is located inside the block. There is an alley
easement at the rear of the property and the applicant would also like to vacate the alley in order to
expand an existing single car garage. The alley is used only by City Public Works in order to attach the
park in the interior of the block. Campbell displayed plans illustrating the potential expansion.
Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 23’ off the required 25’ to a total distance
of 2’ at its closest point to the rear yard property line. Staff does support tabling this item until
the alley vacation is complete.
Nancy Nelson asked the timeline for the vacation. Staff responded they haven’t heard back from
their inquiry but typically there’s a 30-day timeframe. Chair Orenstein asked about a large utility
box and how that would be impacted.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
September 22, 2020 – 7 pm
3
Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak.
The applicant stated that the alley on their side of the block is fenced off and when any utility work
is done, workers can’t even pull a vehicle through the alley and opt to access through properties.
The applicant added that he wasn’t intending to move the utility box and his garage plans didn’t
impact the box.
The Chair asked the applicant why he would like to have the variance approved prior to vacation
approval. The applicant stated he thought the timing would line up and it was in his interest to
move forward. However now it’s late in the season and the project won’t start until spring so he’s
comfortable tabling.
A MOTION was made by Chair Orenstein and seconded by Nelson to table the item until the alley
vacation determination is made.
Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously.
3. 113 Parkview Terrace
Ryan Hanson, Applicant
Request: § 113-88, Single-Family Residential (R-1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(2) Height
Requirements 1.5 ft. over the allowed 28 ft. for a total height of 29 ft. 5-1/8 in.
Myles Campbell, Planner, started by displaying the lot location in the city, and the rear of the
property abuts Theodore Wirth Park. The property has a curve in the front property line but is
otherwise a regularly shaped lot. The lot has a steep slope in the front yard, and the rear is flat next
to the home. The applicant would like to tear down the home and build a new 3-story house. The
rear grading will be filled in to correct negative sloping. Campbell reviewed zoning regulations and
how building height is determined. Staff finds the variance is generally in line with the zoning code
and the home fits with some of the goals in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for environmentally
sustainable housing.
Being that this is a new build, staff would like to see the 1.5’ corrected in design than through a
variance. Staff presented a number of possibilities.
Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance request of 1.5’ over the allowed 28’ for a total height
of 29’ 5 1/8” for a new home, measured from the average grade to the midpoint of the highest
pitched roof.
Chair Orenstein asked for clarification on how the rear grade impacts the build. Staff stated that
the average grade is determined by the front grade but the applicant wants to adjust the exterior in
order to maintain and interior flow from the main floor to the rear yard. Staff is asking if the main
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
September 22, 2020 – 7 pm
4
floor is lowered and design altered, could the height of the overall building then comply with
regulations.
Chair Orenstein invited the applicant to speak.
The applicant stated the restrictions in floor to ceiling height, restrictions on the average grade, and
not being able to change the grade of the driveway so it can maintain usability in the winter. The
homeowner’s goal is to maximize the rear yard as the front yard is very steep and won’t be usable
for use. Ryan Sadeghi asked about lowering the pitch of the roof and the applicant stated they
need to maintain the pitch in order to maintain warranty on the roof material, the material is a TPO
membrane. Sophia Ginis asked why the architects didn’t consider staff recommendations. The
applicant stated that they’re trying to create a step-up layout so the front plane has a smaller
presence and the house doesn’t appear to tower as high.
The conversation continued in to ceiling heights, roofing material, average grade, garage location,
parcel shape, and aesthetic. The Board continued to ask for more details about design to look for
alternatives so the builder won’t require a variance.
Chair Orenstein opened the public forum and commented a letter had also been sent to the Board,
prior to the meeting.
The owner of 106 France Ave S, called for comment and stated this build will have a negative
impact on them and their home. The new build will be 10 feet taller than the current home and the
increase in size will have a patio abut this homeowner’s patio. The homeowner stated they don’t
want to tell the builders and new owners what to do but wanted to express the impacts this
variance and overall build will have on them.
The Board discussed options after the commenter and Commissioner Sadeghi pointed out that
since this is a new build, code should take precedence in his mind and he’s inclined to agree with
staff recommendation. He recognized aesthetic and design but the build should be amended to be
built by-right. A number of Board members echoed this statement. The architect responded and
explained design elements as well as empathized with the neighbors.
A MOTION was made by Chair Orenstein and seconded by Nelson to not follow staff
recommendation and instead approve the variance request of 1.5 ft. over the allowed 28 ft. height
requirement for a total building height of 29 ft. 5-1/8 in.
Staff called a roll call vote:
Aye: Carlson, Orenstein, Nelson
Nay: Ginis; Sadaghi
The motion carried, 3 to 2, to approve the variance request.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
September 22, 2020 – 7 pm
5
Adjournment
MOTION made by Nelson, seconded by Orenstein and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the
meeting at 8:38 pm.
Staff called a roll call vote and the motion passed unanimously.
________________________________
Richard Orenstein, Chair
_________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant