Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 09-20 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Regularf ! s 0 a yk� (n y • INcORPORQ'� � 1886 MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Zoning Board Thursday, September 20, 2007, 5:30 PM Edina Community Room 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, MN MEMBERS PRESENT: Acting Chair Rodney Hardy, Arlene Forrest and Jim Nelson MEMBERS ABSENT:- John Lonsbury and Bill Skallerud a a gip. STAFF PRESENT: I '2 Kris Aaker and Jackie Hoogenak ' I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the July 19, 2007 meeting were filq bmitfed II. NEW BUSINESS: B-07-40 James and Kathryn Mahy 4201 42nd Street West, Edina, MN Request: a 6' front yard setback variance a .*fie street setback variance Ms. Aaker informed the board the subject property is a corner lot consisting of a one and one half story home fronting west 42nd St with a detached one car garage fronting Grimes Ave. The property owners are planning a 1 Y2 story addition above the first floor of their home to include a full second floor and attic bedroom area below the roof line. The plan also includes a front porch to span the entire length of the front facade. All portions of the plan conform to the ordinance requirements with the exception of setback from the front and side streets. Two variances are required for the project and both are variances from street setbacks. The property is subjected to two front yard setbacks along both west 42nd St. and Grimes Ave. There are homes fronting both streets so the average front yard setback along west 42nd St and Grimes Ave. are imposed upon the property. Ms. Aaker explained the home currently conforms to the front yard setback along west 42"d St. The homeowners would like to add a 6 ft deep porch onto the front of the house that would require a 6 ft front yard setback variance. The porch proposes 180 sq ft of encroachment into the front yard setback. It should be noted that up to an 80 sq ft porch is allowed to encroach into the front yard setback area without requiring a variance. The proposed porch exceeds the allowable encroachment by 100 sq ft. Staff cannot support a variance from front yard setback to increase the porch beyond the 80 sq ft. Staff is recommending denial of the 6 ft front yard setback variance. Ms. Aaker pointed out the zoning ordinance requires that corner lots respect the front yard setbacks of homes fronting along an adjacent side street. The Grimes frontage requires a side street setback of 28.5 ft. The existing home is nonconforming with a porch, (soon to be converW to a maxi room), located 14.2 ft from the side street, (Grimes). The proposed addition eve the existing first floor of the home requires a variance of approximately 4.4 ft to allow a I Y2 story addition above the main floor. Part of the proposed porch addition on the main floor will also encroach into the side street setback. Staff is supportive of continuing the e"111 nonconforming setback. Ms. Aaker concluded staff recommends denial of the 6' front yard setback variance and recommends approval of the requested 4.4' side yard setback variance based on the following findings: 1) There Is a ii hardship to the property caused by: a. The location of the existing side wall relative to the side street lot line. b. There is no benefit to throperty if the addition were to be reduced in size along Grimes Ave.: c. There are limited design tions given the two required front yard setbacks. 2) The varwmeet the intent of the ordinance since: a. The encroachment is an existing condition and is minimal in amount. b. The improvements mein the existing wall lines and architecture of the home. 'i" c. The addition would be consistent with and farther way from, the street than the existing easterly nonconforming building wall. Approval of the 4.4' side street setback variance is based on the following conditions: 1) The addition must be constructed as per the submitted plan dated August 2007. 2) The variance will expire on September 20, 2008, unless the city has Issued a building permit for the project covered by this variance or or approved a time extension. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Mahoney and their contractor R. Hobb from Residential Renewal were present to respond to questions. Mr. Hardy questioned why the proponents couldn't design their proposal to meet Code, especially in light of the fact that City ordinance now allows an 80 square foot unenclosed encroachment into the front yard setback area. Mr. Hobb responded when drawn the allowed 80 square foot "porch" addition appeared rather small and out of scale with the rest of the house. He added in his opinion a larger front "porch" was aesthetically more pleasing. Mr. Hardy told the proponents, he has no problem with their request for a side street setback variance; however, he believes the proposed "porch" could be redesigned to meet Code. A discussion ensued with board members in agreement that the proposed porch could be redesigned to meet Code. Board members acknowledged a porch may be what the applicant desired but Code was recently changed to allow an encroachment into the front yard setback area and board members felt the change in Code provides ample opportunity for design of a new front entryway or a small "porch" area of 80 sq. ft. Mr. Nelson moved to deny the 6' front yard setback variance based on staff findings. Mrs. Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Mr. Nelson moved approval of the 4.4' side street setback variance based on staff findings, subject to staff conditions, subject to the plans presented and the subject to the use of like materials. Mrs. Forrest seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 5:50 PM S&W1R.�►�74%,9 �. ►.v�� �►_��� �i,� C�- • /