HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 11-02 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Regular:J
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
HELD ON THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1995
5:30 P.M., MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Rose Mary Utne, Chuck Ingwalson, Len Olson
MEMBERS ABSENT: David Runyan
STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker, Jackie Hoogenakker
I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
The minutes of the September 7, 1995, meeting were filed as submitted.
H. NEW BUSINESS:
B-95-52 Margaret Mary Berres
5349 Kellogg Avenue
Lot 17, Block 5, So. Harriet Park
Request: A two foot sideyard setback variance and a four foot frontyard setback
variance
Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is lcoated on the east side of Kellogg
Avenue and south of West 53rd Street. The home consists of a one story mansard roofed home
with a detached two car garage located in the rearyard. The property owner is hoping to remove
and remodel the roof to include replacing the existing car port and adding a front overhang with
posts. The new roof will be hipped with dormers.
Ms. Aaker explained the carport is an existing structure that is currently setback three feet
to the side property boundary. The minimum current required setback for carports and attached
garages is five feet. The carport will require replacement given the alteration of the roof lines.
The ordinance allows the maintenance and repair of existing non -conforming structures however,
doesn't allow for replacement of a structure at a non -conforming setback without a variance. The
homeowners plan to maintain the existing building footprint with regard to the portico. The only
a noticeable visible change will be the new roof line.
Ms. Aaker concluded staff believes the new roof line design compliments the surrounding
properties and that no adverse impact will occur with either variance. Staff supports the request
as submitted.
The proponent Ms. Berres was present.
Ms. Utne asked Ms. Aaker if the proponents are planning to widen the carport. Mr. Aaker
explained the carport will not increase in size, it is non -conforming, and any changes or
renovations require compliance. A variance is therefore required to replace the carport after the
roof line is altered.
Mr. Ingwalson said in his opinion the change to the roof -line is an improvement, and will
not negatively impact the neighborhood. Mr. Olson agreed.
Mr. Olson moved variance approval subject to the plans presented and the use of like
materials. Mr. Olson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
B-95-53 Jon R and Mary K Hawks
7712 Tanglewood Court
Part of Lot 4, Block 6, Braemar Hills 3rd Addition
Request: A 3% lot coverage variance on a double dwelling unit
Ms. Aaker explained the subject property is located at the end of Tanglewood Court cul-
de-sac. The subject property is a double dwelling unit with one home located in front facing
Tanglewood Court and one behind which is not visible from the front street. The double dwelling
parcel was divided into two separate lots, with the subject property consisting of a "neck lot"
behind the front lot.
Ms. Aaker explained the zoning ordinance indicates that requirements for lot area and
dimensions, building coverage, setbacks and height shall be applied to the entire double dwelling
unit building and the entire lot, and shall ignore any subdivision of the building and lot which has
been or may be made in order to convey each dwelling unit separately.
Ms. Aaker said the homeowners are hoping to expand their family room and add a screen
porch on the northwest side of their home. Taken individually as separate parcels the subject
property is at slightly more than 20% lot coverage with the neighbors home exceeding 25% by
12 % to equal 37 % coverage of its subdivided lot. The ordinance however, requires that the entire
parcel and structure be considered when reviewing lot coverage. Review of lot coverage for the
entire parcel reveals that the existing coverage is slightly over 25 %, therefore to achieve any
addition requires a variance.
Ms. Aaker concluded given that the home and subject lot back up to the open space of
Braemar Park reducing any perception of overcrowding and given that the addition will not exceed
25 % of the individual lot, staff supports the request as submitted subject to the use of matching
materials.
The proponent, Mr. Hawk was present.
Mrs. Utne asked if similar or like building materials will be used on the addition. Mr.
Hawks said siding and roofing will match the existing dwelling.
In response to a letter the Board received from impacted neighbors, Mr. Hawks said all
building materials will match the existing house, and the addition will be completed in a timely
fashion.
Mr. Ingwalson commented the Board has heard a number of lot coverage variance requests
in the past concerning double bungalows, and the resulting problems that occur when one side
desires to add-on. Continuing Mr. Ingwalson stated caution should be expressed to future builders
that when they design a double dwelling unit building they should pay close attention to lot
coverage as it relates to future expansion.
Mrs. Utne asked if any windows will be removed. Mr. Hawks said only one existing
window will be removed, and more windows will be added to allow in more light.
Mr. Ingwalson moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, and the use of
consistent materials. Mr. Olson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried.
:_ 1 RI) C_ 0,11_D0 i
The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.