Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 06-07 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes RegularRegi MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Rose -Mary Utne, Mike Mary Vasaly STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker and Jackie Hoogen The minutes of the II. NEW BUSINESS: B-07-20 Mich 6521 Request: a 5.75 Ms. Aaker informed the bo; a two story home with an attache( main floor living space to the exist are also proposing an addition be the ordinance requirements with t room will encroach approximately MINUTES ar Meeting of the Edina Zoning Board of Appeals Thursday, June 7, 2007, 5:30 PM Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 West 50th Street her, Edward Schwartzbauer, Kevin Staunton and 5, 2007, meeting were filed as submitted. and Carol Bromer .ek Drive rear yard setback variance for an addition A the subject property is a corner lot and consists of two car garage. The applicant is proposing to add ig living and dining room areas. The homeowners ind the home. All of the improvements conform to e exception of the dining room addition. The dining i.75 ft into the rear yard area. Ms. Aaker explained the a plicant is requesting a 5.75 ft rear yard setback variance to allow the back corner f the dining room to overlap the 25 ft rear yard setback. The proposed setback o the dining room is 19.25 ft. Ms. Aaker concluded staff recommends approval of the requested 5.75 rear yard setback variance based on the following findings: 1) There is a unique hardship to the property caused by: a. The location of the existing home relative to the rear lot line. b. The existing home is slightly nonconforming regarding rear yard setback. c. The irregular lot shape and original home placement limit design options. 2) The variance would meet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The encroachment is minimal in amount and scale. b. The improvements would follow the existing wall lines and architecture of the home and would have no impact on sight lines. c. The addition would be a minor point intrusion into the setback that would not be perceivable. and subject to the following conditions: 1) The addition must be constructed as per the submitted plan dated May, 2007. 2) The variance will expire on June 7, 2008, unless the city has Issued a building permit for the project covered by this variance or approved a time extension. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Bromer were present to respond to questions from the board. Mr. Staunton asked Ms. Aaker what the present setback is from the Creek Drive. Ms. Aaker responded the setback from the Creek Drive is a little over 35 feet, pointing out building toward Creek Drive would also require a variance. Mrs. Vasaly asked Ms. Aaker if staff received any comments from adjoining neighbors. Ms. Aaker responded to date staff hasn't received any comments from neighbors for or against. Mr. Fischer moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Mr. Schwartzbauer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Mr. Fischer commented that variances are based on hardship and in this instance a hardship surely exists. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 PM Submitted by E v• l�ro(on �s NOTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF 'HE EDINA ZONING BOARD OF APEALS THURSDAY, MAY 17,2007,5:30 PM EDINA CITY HALL COMMUNITY ROOM 4801 WEST 50TH STREET MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair John Lonsbury, Bill S allerud, and Rod Hardy MEMBERS ABSENT: Arlene Forrest and Jim Nels n I. APPROVAL OF TH E MINUTES: The minutes of the March 15, 2007, meeting were filed as submitted. II. NEW BUSINESS: B-07-19 Amdahl Construction/Dorothy Kvam 49 5 East Sunnyslope Road Request: front yard setback variance Ms. Aaker informed with attached garage located backing up to Minnehaha Cr( maintained with few improves proposing to remove the exis for a five bedroom, two story board the subject property consists of a rambler n the east side of Sunnyslope Road E with the lot k. The home was built in 1950 and has been -Ints. Ms. Aaker said at this time the applicant is ig home and re -build on the site. The proposal is Mme with an attached three car garage. Ms. Aaker explained o ce a home is removed the lot is considered vacant with all new construction requiring conformance with the current code. Ms. Aaker noted because the ordinance equires that the setback of the new home matches the setback of the homes on E ither side a variance is needed. Ms. Aaker said in this instance because of those setbacks the building pad for a new home would be severely compromised because the homes on either side of the subject lot were constructed farther back on the lot than the existing home was. Ms. Aaker concluded staff recommends approval of the variance as submitted noting if granted the new house would enjoy the 30.5 foot nonconforming setback enjoyed by the original house that was constructed in 1950. Approval is subject to the plans presented. Mr. John Kosmos with KK design was present representing the property owner. Mr. Hardy asked Ms. Aaker if she knows if the original house was constructed to code. Ms. Aaker responded it probably was constructed according to code, adding there was no mention of a variance in the building file; concluding, she really doesn't know for sure. Mr. Scott Massie addressed the board and told them he represents the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Faris at 4929 East Sunnyslope Road. Mr. Massie said Mr. and Mrs. Faris have a concern that no one really knows for sure where the south property line is. Mr. Massie explained there have been conflicting surveys done on both properties. Mr. Massie pointed out the Faris house was constructed in 1936 but the land wasn't platted until 1939. Mr. Massie said there is an existing fence along the south property line that has been there for at least 50 years. Mr. Massie concluded he just wanted this issue brought to the attention of the board. Chair Lonsbury asked Mr. Massie where his clients believe the south property line is. Mr. Massie said they believe the existing fence is the property line. Chair Lonsbury said if he understands correctly with regard to the variance request the new house would not encroach on that south setback, adding the proposed house meets side yard setback requirements. Ms. Aaker responded that is correct, adding the only variance required to construct the new house is a front yard setback variance allowing the new house to maintain the front yard setback enjoyed by the old house. A discussion ensued with board members suggesting that Mr. Massie advise his clients to work with Ms. Kvan on resolving the issue with their common lot line. Mr. Skallerud moved variance approval subject to the plans presented and subject to staff conditions. Mr. Hardy seconded the motion noting this property has a unique hardship because of the original placement of the home. All voted aye; motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 pm Submitted by 2 Otte MEMBERS PRESENT: Rose -Mary Utne, Nancy MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Schroeder and Ed The minutes of the II. NEW BUSINESS: B-07-18 Robert Hami 5701 Zenith, Request: An 11.49 ft MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Zoning Board Thursday, May 3, 2007, 5:30 PM Edina City Hall Council Chambers 4801 West 50th Street and Mary Vasaly rtzbauer rch 1, 2007, meeting were filed as submitted. and Lindsay Ackerman So. yard setback variance Ms. Aaker informed the board the applicant and future owner of the home proposes to add a second floor to the one story home and replace the garage. The property is a corner lot with a nonconforming front yard setback given the rounded curve at the intersection of Zenith Ave. and west 57th St. Ms. Aaker said staff supports the request. Staff believes there is a unique hardship to the property caused by the location of the existing home relative to the front and side street. Ms. Naker also pointed out the home as it exists today is already non -conforming, ani J the lot shape is very irregular. Ms. Aaker concluded conditions: 1. The addition must be 18, 2007 2. The Variance will expi building permit or app approval should be based on the following structed as per the submitted plan dated April on May 3, 2008, unless the city has issued a Fed a time extension. Mr. Robert Hamilton was present representing the property owner Ms. Lindsay Ackerman. Mrs. Vasaly asked Ms. Aaker if any neighbors contacted staff with their opinions on the project. Ms. Aaker responded to date staff has heard from the immediate neighbor to the south and a neighbor at mid -block with no objections. Mr. Hamilton addressed the board and said the proposed renovations to the home will enable the family to grow while remaining in a neighborhood that they love. Mr. Hamilton said in his opinion the proposed stoop adds a charming feature to the house. After a brief discussion the Zoning Board acknowledged that the irregular shape of the lot and original nonconforming home placement limited design options and were a hardship. Mrs. Vasaly moved variance approval subject to the plans as presented and the use of like materials, noting the hardship presented by the non- conforminity of the house placement and the irregular shape of the lot. Mrs. Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:55 pm �.1r�►W►�t�)1MAN7/4110— .� --.by 00 2