Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 10-15 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OCTOBER 15,1998,5:30 P.M. EDINA MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Helen McClelland, Mike Lewis, Lorelei Bergman, David Byron MEMBERS ABSENT: Rodney Hardy APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the August 20, 1998, meet were filed as submitted. II. OLD BUSINESS: B-97-41 Scott and Leslie Losey 5105 West 49th Street Request: A one year extension of variances for a 14 foot frontyard setback and an 8 foot sideyard setback. Ms. Aaker explained to the Board Mr. and Mrs. Losey are requesting a one year extension of their variance B-97-41. The homeowners have been unable to retain a building contractor within the anniversary date of their approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Losey were present. Mrs. Losey explained it has been difficult to hire a building contractor because of the spring storms. She added they are hopeful construction will begin soon. Mr. Lewis moved to grant the extension for variance B-98-41. Mrs. Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. NEW BUSINESS: B-98-49 * Paul and Kristen Comers 5601 Brookview Avenue Lot 38, Colonial Grove 2nd Request: A 11.7 foot sidestreet setback variance for a garage expansion Ms. Aaker informed the Board the property is a corner lot located in the southeast corner of West 56th Street and Brookview Avenue consisting of a two story home with an attached 18 X 20 garage. The applicants are proposing a two story addition to the back of their home. The homeowners would also like to expand their rather small two car garage by increasing both the width and the depth. All aspects of the home remodel and addition conform to Ordinance requirements with the exception of setback to the sidestreet of the new garage. Ms. Aaker explained the existing attached garage is rear loading from West 56th Street with the north sidewall of the garage located 5.3 feet to the sidestreet lot line. The existing sidewall of the garage is non -conforming. The minimum side street setback required is 15 feet. The current garage is encroaching into the setback area by 9.7 feet. Ms. Aaker pointed out the garage is narrow at 18 feet in width, so the home owners are proposing a 2 foot expansion of the garage width towards the sidestreet. The homeowners are also proposing an expansion of the depth of the garage by 5 feet, allowing for a new garage size of 20 feet in width by 25 feet in depth. Ms. Aaker concluded the proposed sidestreet setback will be 3 feet to the lot line and 17.7 feet to the edge of the street. The Engineering Department has indicated that it is highly unlikely that West 56th Street will ever be widened. Given the existing dimensions of the garage and existing non -conforming setback to the side street staff is supportive of allowing a larger garage. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Comers were present. Mrs. Bergman noted the property is already non -conforming to the street, adding she can support the request as presented as long as no living space is constructed above the proposed garage addition. Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the plans presented, noting the existing non -conformity of the lot, and subject to the use of matching exterior materials. Mr. Byron seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried B-98-50 Pam Lien and Bill Belkamp 5624 Woodcrest Drive Lot 9, Block 3, Colonial Grove 6t" Addition Request: A 2.5 foot sideyard setback variance and an 8.5 foot variance from the ponds edge Ms. Aaker told the Board the subject property is located on the west side of Woodcrest Drive consisting of a split entry walk -out rambler. The homeowners are proposing to replace a one story family room addition that was constructed in 1968 with a two story addition. The home is a "walk -out" on the main floor with the "second floor" at street level. The family room will be on the lower level and the home office, storage area with porch will be on the main level. Ms. Aaker pointed out two variances are being requested to accomplish the addition. A sideyard setback variance is required and a variance from pond setback is requested. Ms. Aaker said the new family room as proposed will be larger than the existing family room. The dimensions of the existing family room are 12 X 15 feet. As indicated on the survey there is little if any opportunity for expansion. Ms. Aaker concluded it is clear that there is little if any buildable area provided on the lot due to the required setbacks and that imposing the required setbacks would pose a hardship for any alteration to the home. The proponents, Ms. Lien and Mr. Belkamp were present to respond to questions. Ms. Diana Willey, immediate neighbor to the north stated she has no objections to the proposal, and supports it as presented. Ms. McClelland questioned if the proponents heard from the neighbor to the south. Mt. Belkamp stated the neighbors to the south have also indicated their support. Mr. Belkamp presented to the Board a signed petition supporting the proposal as presented. Brook Crane, 5610 Woodcrest Drive, said she is present with hesitation, and did sign a petition supporting the proposal. She added her concern is the view she has from her home. She added she can look out her kitchen window and see the pond, and is concerned this view will be lost to her. She acknowledged she is less involved than the north/south neighbors. Ms. McClelland told members of the audience the Board is concerned with massing, and is very careful reviewing the plans. Mrs. Bergman said the plans as presented, in her opinion, maintain the character of the house. She pointed out and agreed with Ms. McClelland that the Board is careful in reviewing plans, but in this instance she agrees with staff that on this lot there is little if any buildable area provided on the lot due to the required setbacks, and the additional setback from the pond. Mrs. Bergman stated she can support the proposal as presented. Mrs. McClelland addressed the question from Ms. Crane, informing her the City does not regulate view. She added she in unsure if the proposed addition will impact views, adding she can understand the concern. Mr. Lewis moved variance approval subject to the plans presented and the use of matching materials. Mrs. Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B-98-49 Sandy Senn 4511 Grimes Avenue South Lot 11, Auditors Subdivision No. 172 Request: A variance to allow a deck structure on the lot line that is the subject property's sidestreet and the neighbors front - street. A 30 foot setback variance. Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is a corner lot located in the northeast corner of Grimes Avenue and Sunnyside Road. The home faces Grimes Avenue with sidestreet frontage along Sunnyside Road. There are homes fronting both Grimes and Sunnyside, which requires that the property respect two front street setbacks most of the yard area is exposed to either Grimes Avenue or Sunnyside Road. The home owner is hoping to accomplish a deck in the side street area adjacent to Sunnyside Road. The proposed structure will be a two level deck with an upper level adjacent to the house and the lower level three steps below providing access to the driveway. Ms. Aaker explained the imposed setbacks indicate that nearly the entire existing home is non -conforming in terms of setback. Any addition to this home would require a variance. The homeowner has indicated that the deck and landscaping is intended to provide a bit of privacy and simulate the feel of a small backyard. The homeowner is also trying to gain more usable yard area. The homeowner had hoped to construct a privacy fence however, the maximum fence height allowed in the frontyard area is four feet. Imposing the required setbacks does poise a hardship for the property, nothing can be accomplished without a variance. The addition is for a deck and not for fully enclosed living space, which can be viewed as less intrusive on the streetscape for all four seasons. The Zoning Board has however been reluctant to grant variances that allow no setback from a lot line. The proponent, Ms. Senn was present to respond to questions. Ms. McClelland commented in all her years serving as a member of the Zoning Board she has rarely reviewed a variance that so completely meets the hardship standard. Board members voiced their agreement with Ms. McClellands observation. A discussion ensued with Board members agreeing the hardship standard has been met in this instance, noting they cannot support a zero -lot line variance, even with such difficult circumstances and constraints. Ms. Bergman suggested re -designing the porch/deck to provide a deeper setback than submitted. Mrs. Bergman said if the deck is redesigned correctly the same result the proponent desired can be achieved. After a brief discussion the Board agreed to allow the porch to be constructed no closer than two feet from the property line. Mr. Byron moved variance approval noting the severe hardship that exists on this lot with approval conditioned on: the deck/porch area cannot be constructed less than two feet from the lot line, with the final layout of the proposed deck/porch area to be approved by City staff. Mrs. Bergman seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. r9� _6 "61 "kN ,i FIS, -