Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 09-18 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HELD ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18,1997 5:30 P.M., MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chair Helen McClelland, Mike Lewis, Geof Workinger and Rodney Hardy MEMBERS ABSENT: Gordon Johnson STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker, Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the May 15, 1997, meeting were filed as submitted. II. OLD BUSINESS: B-97-40 Charles Snyder 5501 Wooddale Avenue Lot 20, Block 11, South Harriet Park Request: A 10.4' sidestreet setback variance for an overhang with posts, with greater setback to be provided for a bay window and a room addition Ms. Aaker said on August 21, 1997, the Zoning Board of Appeals met and heard the request of Mr. Charles Snyder for a 10.4 foot sidestreet setback variance with an overhang with posts. At that time the application was tabled to allow the homeowner the opportunity to review their plans and revise them. The proponent, Mr. Snyder was present to respond to questions. Mr. Lewis said in reviewing the old plans, revised plans, and meeting minutes, it appears the proponent responded to concerns raised at the August meeting. Mr. Lewis said the safety of residents/children to the street because of the location of the previous door has been addressed, and their safety was the important issue. Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the revised plans presented, and the use of matching materials. Mr. Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Ill. NEW BUSINESS: B-97-46 David and Leanne Collins 5917 Ashcroft Avenue Request: A 2 foot sideyard setback variance for building height Ms. Aaker informed the board the subject property is located on n the east side of Ashcroft Avenue just north of West 59'' Street, consisting of a one and one half story home with a detached two car garage. The homeowners had submitted building permit application to add a 4'X13' extension behind the home and to extend a shed dormer along the backside of the second story. Ms. Aaker explained the homeowners have indicated the addition will eliminate a chronic icy and hazardous entrance located on the north side of the home and that it will put the new entrance to the house in close proximity to the garage instead of the present entrance that is located opposite to where it should be. Ms. Aaker concluded the proposed variance is minimal in scope and would appear to have limited impact on neighboring properties. The proponents Mr. and Mrs. Collins were present. Mr. Workinger asked if the exterior materials will match the existing. Mr. Collins said all exterior materials will match. Mr. Workinger asked if a window could be added. Mr. Collins said they plan to add a window or windows, depending on what style of window is chosen. Mr. Workinger moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, the use of matching materials, noting the distance of the subject home to the home to the north. Mr. Hardy seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B-97-47 Joel and Natalie Gottesman 5717 Schaefer Road Parkwood Knolls 8t' Addition Lot 5, Block 1 Request: An 8 foot setback variance from a pond Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located on the east side of Schaefer Road, just north of Schaefer Circle. The home consists of a one story walkout rambler with an attached three stall garage. The homeowners have planned an extensive remodel of the home to include a 12 foot expansion of the garage to the south, an addition of a breakfast area and covered front stoop in the front of the house and a master bedroom addition to the back, (northeast corner) of the house. All aspects of the project conform to the Ordinance requirements with the exception of the master bedroom addition. The masterbedroom addition will encroach eight feet into the minimum 50 foot setback area required from ponding areas. Ms. Aaker explained prior to the 1992 Zoning Ordinance amendment, the setback requirement from lakes, ponds or streams was 25 feet. The Department of Natural Resources mandated that the City adopt certain setback standards from all wetland areas. The setbacks doubled for most waterbodies and tripled for others. Ms. Aaker told the Board the homeowner has indicated that the expansion cannot go forward or to the side to acquire an adequate amount of space and dimension. They believe the proposed solution will be the least impacting because it is an addition to the rear of the home. Ms. Aaker concluded staff believes the addition is a logical extension of the home. Given that the pond setback requirement had been 25 feet at the time when the home was constructed and given that the 8 foot variance will still provide a 42 foot setback from the pond, staff supports the request. The proponents Mr. and Mrs. Gottesman were present to respond to questions. Mr. Hardy asked if there is an outlot for the pond. Ms. Aaker explained the flow is southward, and has never threatened the structure, adding there is not an outlot present. Ms. McClelland asked if there is any water present in the yard now. Mrs. Gottesman said no. She added since they have lived in the home they have not had any problems with flooding. Mr. Workinger asked if the basement of the home has ever experienced any water damage. Ms. Gottesman explained that the rearyard actually slopes away from the house, and to date they have never experienced any water seepage into the basement area. Mr. Workinger stated he has no objection to the proposal as presented. Mr. Lewis agreed, adding he believes the proposal is reasonable. Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, and the use of matching materials. Mr. Lewis noted with an addition of this size it is important that 3 all materials match and tie-in with the existing structure. Mr. Hardy seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B-97-48 Michael Perkins 412 Griffit Street The south 30 feet of Lot 4 together with one half of the vacated alley and the north 90 feet of Lot 7 together with one half of the vacated alley, all in Block 14, Mendelssohn Request: A 4.25 foot sideyard setback variance due to building wall height of a new addition Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located on the west side of Griffit Street consisting of a one story rambler with an attached two car garage. The homeowners have planned a second story masterbedroom addition and a great room addition to the back of the home. All aspects of the plans conform to the Ordinance requirements with the exception of sideyard setback relative to sidewall building height. The home was built in 1959 and has had no significant improvements made to it since the time of construction with the exception of a screened porch. The homeowner has indicated that they and their architect had reviewed other designs that would meet the Ordinance requirements, however, found that the floor plan and design of the home was limiting. In addition, the home was built with sideyard setbacks that would allow for no closer setback. The design of the 2"d story masterbedroom anchors the north side of the home balancing the front facade. The home will be re -sided with cedar shingles with 1X6 trim boards. Impact of the addition would be minimal on the home to the north. The adjacent home to the north is located 63.8 feet from the north wall of the subject home. The neighbor to the north of the property built an unattached free standing garage with minimum setback adjacent to the subject home. The second floor of the addition would be next to the garage and would not interfere or impede the views from the neighboring house given the substantial distance between structures. Ms. Aaker concluded the purpose of the Ordinance addressing setback relative to building height is to reduce the impact of taller structures on neighboring properties. Given the distances between the two homes, staff believes that the addition is a logical solution given the floor plan of the home. Staff supports the request and would suggest any approval to be tied to the plans presented. Mr. Geof Gustafson was present to represent the property owner. 4 Ms. McClelland said if she recalls correctly the garage of the house directly south of the subject site is the closest structure. Ms. Aaker said that is correct, the proposed addition is located north of the neighbors garage. Ms. McClelland added it appears the house to the north recently underwent an addition. Ms. Aaker said that is correct. Mr. Gustafson said when planning the addition it was felt the proposed location is best, with minimal impact on the south neighbor. A discussion occurred between Board Members with them in agreement the location of the addition offers the least impact with the suggestion that the mass of the addition be broken up by either adding accent trim, or windows. Ms. McClelland moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, the use of matching materials with the suggestion of breaking up the mass with windows or accent trim. Mr. Hardy seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B-97-49 Thomas Rauechle and Edith Burnier 4634 Bruce Avenue Lot 18, Block 9, Country Club District Fairway Section Request: A 3.8 foot sideyard setback variance for a two story addn to the rear of the home Ms. Aaker told the Board the subject property is located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Bruce Avenue and Country Club Road. The home consists of a two story colonial with attached tuck -under garage. The homeowner is proposing to remove an existing two story portion of the home and replace it with a family room addition, expanded kitchen, and powder room on the main level with an office addition to the second floor. The home is currently non -conforming with a 7.8 foot north sideyard setback instead of the required 10 feet. In addition, due to the second story building wall height 1.6 feet of added setback is required. Ms. Aaker pointed out the homeowners have proposed extending a legal non- conforming north building wall. The property is located along a block of lots with widths of 60 feet. Lots with widths less than 75 feet are able to accomplish a setback of five feet to the side lot line. The subject lot is 64.86 feet in width along the Bruce Avenue frontage, however lot width measured 50 feet back from the front lot line (as per code) is approximately 80.5 feet. Lot widths over 75 feet must maintain a minimum sideyard setback of 10 feet. All lots in close proximity enjoy the five foot sideyard setback standard. If the five foot standard were imposed upon the addition, no variance would be required. y� u Ms. Aaker explained the design of the addition is sensitive to reducing the impact on the adjacent property. The second story addition extends only 10.67 feet from the back wall of the home before setting back an additional two feet. The design incorporates a lowered top plate height in the 2"1 floor closet area to reduce the height impact and provide interest. The second floor drops down to a balcony providing a transition in height from the second floor addition to the first floor family room. Ms. Aaker concluded the proposal is to extend an existing non -conforming setback, on a lot with a deeper setback requirement than that required for all other surrounding lots. The design is a sensitive addition and will match the character of the existing home. Staff supports the request based on the plans provided. The proponents, Mr. Rauechle and Ms. Burnier were present. Mr. Hardy asked Ms. Aaker the standard width between houses in this neighborhood where there is no driveway. Ms. Aaker said on this particular block the majority of homes are located on lots less than 75 feet in width. The spacing is usually 10 feet between structures. Mr. Hardy observed the adjacent home is two story. Ms. Aaker said that is correct. Ms. McClelland said in her opinion while the design of the addition compliments the existing structure there should be more windows in the kitchen area, not only do most people want bright kitchens, windows will also break up the building mass. Mr. Workinger agreed. He stated he would like to see more windows to soften the mass of the addition. Mr. Benson, architect for the project, said the reason no windows are located on that wall is because the kitchen has insufficient cupboard space. Mr. Workinger explained what the Board wants to see is a breakup of that wall from the exterior vantage point. He added if something can be accomplished to breakup the mass, like off -setting the wall, or adding some form of accent trim, windows may not be required. Mr. Workinger reiterated the Board wants to see something on that wall. Mr. Benson said they intend to carry on with matching brick. Mr. Hardy suggested doing something creative with the downspouts. They can be detailed, or boxed in to create a design. Ms. McClelland said she would like to see the architect design something that will break up the mass. R Mr. Lewis agreed, he stated he believes it is important to reduce the impact of a large blank wall. Mr. Hardy moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, the use of matching materials, and subject to review by staff of the final exterior of the north wall (kitchen area and 2"d floor) with features placed in/on that wall by either windows or trim, etc.. The final product should soften the impact of that area from near neighbors. Mr. Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye, motion carried. B-97-50 John T. Carroll Jr. 5801 South Drive Lot 3, Mirror Lakes in Edina Request: A 10 foot sidestreet setback variance for a garage addition Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located in the southwest corner of South Drive and Mirror Lakes Road consisting aa rambler with an attached two car garage. The home and garage face north towards South Drive. The homeowners are hoping to attach a third garage stall to their existing two car garage. The home is required to maintain two frontstreet setbacks. Ms. Aaker pointed out the home located directly south and adjacent to the subject home faces Mirror Lakes Drive and provides a frontyard setback of 35 feet. The proposed sidewall of the garage would provide a sidestreet setback of 25 feet. If there were no homes facing the sidestreet, setback from the sidestreet property boundary would normally be 15 feet. Spacing between the addition and the most affected home (to the south) will remain at approximately 120 feet. Ms. Aaker explained the homeowners have indicated there are homes in the neighborhood that have garages similarly located as the one being proposed. The garage extension will be located where an existing concrete slab with surrounding solid wall fence is currently located. Ms. Aaker concluded the addition will have minimal impact on adjacent properties given the distance between structures. Staff supports the request as submitted. The proponent, Mr. Carroll was present. 7 Ms. McClelland said her concern is maintaining the balance of the house, and in this instance that has been accomplished. She said she wants the materials used to construct the new stall to match the existing house. Mr. Workinger asked Mr. Carroll the type of exterior materials he plans to use. Mr. Carroll said matching siding will be used on all sides of the new garage stall. Everything will tie in. Mr. Carroll said he will also put in at minimum, one window. He asked the Board to note that visually there will be a change, but the change will not be as dramatic because presently there is a slab poured where the new stall will be constructed, and that slab is surrounded on three sides by a privacy fence. Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the plans presented and the use of matching exterior materials. Mr. Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. C.J