HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 07-06 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE EDINA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
HELD ON THURSDAY, JULY 6, 1995
5:30 P.M., MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, David Runyan, Rose Mary Utne, Len Olson, Robert
Hale, Chuck Ingwalson
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker, Jackie Hoogenakker, Joyce Repya
I. NEW BUSINESS
B-95-20 Kumar and Kiran Belani
5509 Interlachen Boulevard
Lot 3, Block 1, Leary's Addition
Request: An 18.167 foot rearyard setback variance
Ms. Aaker informed the board the subject property is located on the South side
of Interlachen Boulevard between Skyline Drive to the East and Interlachen Bluff to the
west. The home is a two story contemporary styled stucco home. The home was
built with a rearyard setback of 26 feet. The current ordinance requires a minimum
rearyard setback of 25 feet. The homeowners are hoping to add onto an under
utilized sitting room in the back of the house by expanding it and turning it into a
family room. In addition, they hope to accomplish a covered walkway behind the
addition. The proposal would provide a 14 foot rearyard setback to the building
addition and a 6'10" setback of the covered walkway.
Ms. Aaker concluded given the existing site conditions and orientation of the
house and the limited impact of the addition, staff supports the request.
The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Belani were present
Mr. Olson asked Ms. Aaker if the proposal were approved would lot coverage
become an issue. Ms. Aaker said lot coverage is not an issue. The property in
question has adequate square footage to support the addition, and more.
Mr. Ingwalson asked if any comments were received from impacted neighbors,
especially the property to the side/rear. Ms. Aaker said the planning department has
only received two calls, and the property owners indicated they have no problems
with the proposal. Mr. Ingwalson asked if one of the callers was the most impacted
1
property to the rear. Ms. Aaker said the callers did not identify their location.
Mr. Hale said the property to the rear appears to be a neck lot, with the
potential for redevelopment because of its size. Ms. Aaker said the neighboring lot
meets all setbacks, and pre -dates the ordinance. Mr. Runyan acknowledged the
neighboring lot is large, and has the appearance of a neck lot, but we cannot
speculate on its future development potential.
Mrs. Utne stated she does not have any problems with the variance request,
but has a concern regarding the existing fencing. She pointed out it is in a state of
disrepair. Mrs. Belani said the fence will be replaced when the addition is added. Mrs.
Utne asked if approved that the existing fence either be removed and replaced with
a new fence or improved.
Mr. Runyan said in reviewing the plans he noted the scale of the proposed
addition is low, which reduces impact.
Mr. Hale noted the possibility of the proponents purchasing 25 feet along the
width of the lot from the adjoining neighbor. This would maintain adequate spacing,
and eliminate the need for a variance. Continuing, Mr. Hale said he does not have a
problem with the proposal, the impact will be minimal, but has a concern about
redevelopment of the neighboring lot.
Mr. Ingwalson moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, and the
use of matching materials, with the condition that the existing fence be either removed
and replaced with a new fence, or repaired. Mr.Hale seconded the motion. All voted
aye; motion carried.
B-95-21 West Village Homeowners Association
5511-5555 Village Drive
Blocks 1-7, Findell Clark Addition
Request: A 13'6" setback variance for an area identification sign;
and a variance to permit the erection of a sign exceeding
three feet in height in the "clearview zone"
Ms. Repya informed the board the subject property is located on the West end
of Village Drive which is South of West 70th Street and West of Cahill Road.
The West Village Townhomes were developed in the 1980's. At that time, a
wooden sign was erected to identify the project. Over time the sign fell into a state
OA
of disrepair and was removed about five years ago. Since there has been no sign to
identify the West Village Townhomes.
Currently, the homeowner's townhouse association is proposing to erect a new
area identification sign in what is believed to be the same location as the original sign.
Ms. Repya concluded the lack of an area identification sign has been
problematic for the West Village Townhomes for some time. The proponent has
attempted to work with the ordinance by placing the sign as far from the curb as
possible without compromising the evergreen trees which are an important element
in their landscape plan.
Upon viewing a mock-up of the proposed sign at the site, it appears that the
requested location would not block the view of traffic in the cul-de-sac, thus, staff
recommends approval of the variance request subject to the plans presented.
Mr. Merle, representative of the West Village Homes was present to respond
to questions.
Mrs. Utne stated she can understand why a sign is needed in the proposed
location, but does not understand why they need the increased height variance.
Mr. Merle, representative for the Homeowners Association, explained the extra
height request is to accommodate snow storage.
Mr. Runyan acknowledged that a snow pile could obstruct the sign if it was
constructed to code.
Mr. Hale asked Ms. Repya if a precedent would be set if this sign were to be
approved. Ms. Repya stated this is a unique situation because of the private driveway
situation, there are no conditions in the City that are similar. The setting of a
precedent should not be an issue.
Mr. Olson moved variance approval. Mr. Ingwalson seconded the motion.
Ayes; Olson, Ingwalson, Runyan. Nay, Hale, Utne. Motion carried.
Mr. Ingwalson commented that variances are to meet unique situations, and in
this instance it is appropriate, and in his opinion the approval is not precedent setting
because of the unique circumstances of the site. Mr. Runyan agreed. He asked Mr.
Merle if the landscaping will be replaced that will need to be removed as a result of
constructing the sign. Mr. Merle said the area will be re -landscaped.
B-95-22 George and Marsha Buchok
3
5225 Halifax Avenue
Lot 33, Block 1, South Harriet Park 2nd Addition
Request: A 2 foot sideyard setback variance for a deck
Ms. Aaker informed the board the subject property is located on the East side
of Halifax Avenue between West 52nd Street and West 54th Street. The house is a
two story stucco and shingle home with a detached two car garage. The homeowners
added a two story addition to the back of the house in 1994 that included a family
room on the main level and a master bedroom above. When planning the addition the
homeowners had hoped to include a deck/walkway to run along the northside of the
house to connect to a main deck area behind the new addition.
Ms. Aaker concluded staff can appreciate the desire of the applicant to achieve
a five foot catwalk to allow side door passage to their deck. Given that the deck
structure is elevated on posts and is not enclosed by solid walls, and given that an
existing portion of the building protrudes to the same non -conforming setback staff
can support the request.
The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Buchok were present.
Mr. Runyan asked if the catwalk will be constructed off the lower level. Mr.
Buchok responded it will be constructed off the lower level.
Mr. Hale noted the proposed walk -way is elevated, and questioned if it is
possible to reduce the walk -way to three feet, instead of the proposed five feet. Mr.
Buchok said it is possible to reduce it to three feet, but five feet is desired for
adequate door opening space, and for people to comfortably pass each other on the
walk -way. Mr. Buchok said in his opinion the character of the house is maintained if
the walk -way is kept at five feet, concluding in his opinion it keeps the lines of the
home cleaner.
Mrs. Utne asked if the structure will be constructed with a railing. Mr. Buchok
said it will have a railing, and will comply to all codes.
Mr. Ingwalson noted that neighbors will not even see the deck/walk-way. Mrs.
Utne agreed, she commented the proposal is a workable solution, and adds interest
to the house.
Mrs. Utne moved variance approval subject to staff conditions. Mr. Ingwalson
0
seconded the motion. Ayes; Utne, Olson, Runyan, Ingwalson. Nay, Hale.
II. ADJOURNMENT:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:05 p.m.