bza-minutes-jan-25-22
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
This meeting was conducted in a hybrid format with in‐person and remote options for attending,
participating, and commenting. The City used Webex to conduct this meeting and members of the public
were able to monitor the meeting and provide comment by calling in.
Call To Order
The meeting was called to order at 7 pm by Richard Orenstein.
Roll Call
Members present: Chris Carlson, Richard Orenstein, Kade Arms‐Regenold
Members remote: Chuck Segelbaum – Planning Commissioner
Members absent: Nancy Nelson
Staff present: Myles Campbell, Planner
Approval of Agenda
MOTION made by Carlson, seconded by Orenstein to approve the agenda of January 25, 2022, as
submitted.
Motion carried
Approval of Minutes
MOTION made by Arms‐Regenold, seconded by Orenstein to approve the December 28, 2021 meeting
minutes.
Motion carried
1. Address: 448 Westwood Dr N
Applicant: Scott Crooker
Requests: 19.4 feet off the required 35 feet to a total distance of 15.6 feet; 24 square feet over the
allowed 1,000 square feet for accessory structures
§ 113‐88, Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(a) Principal Structure Front
Setback
Myles Campbell, Planner, discussed this item was presented to the board at the previous meeting
and staff is recommending to table until the February meeting. The applicant requested more time to
work with their architect and revise plans in response to neighbor comments.
A MOTION was made by Carlson and seconded by Orenstein to follow staff recommendation and
table the item to February 22, 2022.
Motion carried
January 25, 2022 – 7 pm
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
January 10, 2022 – 7 pm
2
2. Address: 104 Lawn Terrace
Applicant: Tom DeRoma
Requests:
1. 2.6 feet off the required 12.5 feet to a total distance of 9.9 feet off the side property line.
§ 113‐88, Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(c)(2) Principal Structure Side
Setback
2. A variance from the building envelope requirements for a portion of the new garage.
§ 113‐88, Single‐Family Residential (R‐1) Zoning District, Subd. (f)(1)(e)
Myles Campbell, Planner, discussed the plot and home in relation to its neighborhood in the City.
The applicant’s request is to allow for a new addition to their home, a garage. The existing attached
garage is 14’ wide and the applicant would like to expand that to 22’ and allow for a second vehicle.
Staff went in to details on the applicant’s request, plans, and the roof area that is outside the building
envelope.
Practical Difficulties
1. At 22’ in width, the new garage is of a reasonable size, while still allowing two vehicles to be
parked inside. In addition, the setback incursion here is minimal and still preserves a large
portion of open space between the addition and the property line. Staff believes the proposal
as shown is reasonable.
2. The home’s location on the lot was not caused by the current property owner, and options such
as a tandem or detached garage would necessitate the removal of existing outdoor living space
(patio in rear yard). Staff believes the property exhibits unique circumstances.
3. The resulting side setback would not greatly differ visually from a standard setback, and other
home’s in the immediate area have similar setbacks. While maintaining the matching roof gable
with the main home creates an issue for the building envelope, it also keeps the addition and
home aesthetically similar. Staff believes the proposed use would not alter the essential
character of the area.
Other Considerations
Staff assesses whether the variance represents the smallest feasible variance or if there are other
options available:
A tandem style garage could eliminate the setback variance but would mean the removal of
existing outdoor living space behind the garage.
Recommendation
1. Staff recommends approval of the variance request for 2.6 feet off the required 12.5 feet to a
total distance of 9.9 feet off the side property line.
2. Staff recommends approval of the variance request, exempting a portion of the new garage from
the building envelope requirement, as shown in the plans submitted.
City of Golden Valley BZA Regular Meeting
January 10, 2022 – 7 pm
3
Members and staff discussed the house size and height, the building envelope, and the roofline.
The Chair invited the applicant to present.
Tom DeRoma, Applicant, introduced himself and gave an overview of the property and his request.
The applicant discussed the tie in points and angling the roof in the opposite way to meet the
envelope requirements but that could lead to ice dams along the house. The applicant consulted a
structural engineer and they agreed the front gable would be best.
The Chair opened the public forum at 7:27pm
There were no in person comments.
There were no virtual commenters.
The Chair closed the public forum at 7:28pm
The Chair opened the discussion. Carlson stated two car garages are standard in the area and a
minimal change in the side setback doesn’t impact the character. Arms‐Regenold stated that the
request for a 22’ wide garage is reasonable. Commissioner Segelbaum added that the requests are
small in comparison to the practical difficulty.
A MOTION was made by Orenstein and seconded by Carlson to follow staff recommendation and
approve request for 2.6 feet off the required 12.5 feet to a total distance of 9.9 feet off the side
property line.
Motion carried.
A MOTION was made by Orenstein and seconded by Arms‐Regenold to follow staff
recommendation and approve the variance request, exempting a portion of the new garage from
the building envelope requirement, as shown in the plans submitted.
3.Adjournment
MOTION made by Carlson, seconded by Orenstein and the motion carried unanimously to adjourn the
meeting at 7:29 pm.
Motion carried.
________________________________
Richard Orenstein, Chair
_________________________________
Amie Kolesar, Planning Assistant