Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994 04-21 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA ZONING BOARD HELD ON THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 1994 5:30 P.M., EDINA CITY HALL MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Helen McClelland, David Byron, Geof Workinger MEMBERS ABSENT: Don Patton and Mike Lewis STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker, Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Mr. Workinger moved approval of the minutes of the February 17, 1994, meeting minutes. Mr. Byron seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. II. NEW BUSINESS: B-94-16 Judy and Marianne Fast 5944 Fairfax Avenue Lot 12, Block 11, Fairfax Addition Request: A 9 foot sidestreet setback variance Ms. Aaker explained the subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of West 60th Street and Fairfax Avenue. The homeowners are hoping to add a deck onto the rear of their home. The property is a corner lot with the home currently non- conforming in terms of side street setback. The existing side street setback is 9 feet. In 1984 there was a variance granted by the zoning board of appeals which was approved and which allowed a 10 by 24 foot addition onto the rear of the home to enlarge the living room and dining room at the same 9 foot setback. 1 Ms. Aaker concluded given the variety of setbacks occurring along West 60th Street it would appear that the deck addition would not be out of character with the neighborhood. It may also be argued that the corner lot situation imposes more restrictive standards than an interior lot which would allow the deck to be five feet to a side lot line. Ms. Aaker said staff could support a variance at the existing 9 foot setback which would reduce the variance to 6 feet. The applicants however, desire to extend the deck over an existing patio area that is currently 6 feet to the side street lot line and 21 feet to the edge of West 60th Street. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Fast were present. Ms. McClelland asked Mr. Fast if the existing fence would stay. Mr. Fast stated it would be removed. Ms. McClelland questioned if they would want a fence along the deck to provide more privacy. Mr. Fast stated they had not considered a fence for privacy at this time. Continuing, Mr. Fast said the reason they requested the 9 foot setback is because then deck than will cover the existing patio slab. Ms. McClelland pointed out if the 6 foot variance is granted the slab that remains visible can be used for flower planters. Mr. Byron asked if the deck is approved at 6 feet would the deck be flush with the house. Ms. Aaker said the deck will be flush with the house. Mr. Workinger stated he also shares Ms. McClelland's concern regarding privacy and suggested that a privacy fence be constructed to screen the deck from neighbors and vehicles. A discussion ensued with board members in agreement with staff that the variance be kept at 6 feet. Mr. Byron moved approval of a 6' sideyard setback variance. Mr. Workinger seconded the motion. All voted aye; B-94-13 Charles T. Moore 4417 Ellsworth Drive Lot 5, Block 6, South Garden Estates 3rd Addition Request: A 4 foot frontyard setback variance for a front entry. An a 1.5 foot frontyard setback variance for an overhang with Posts. 2 Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located on the south side of Ellsworth Drive between Wooddale Avenue and Oaklawn Avenue. The home on the subject property is a split level home built in 1958. The homeowner is in the process of remodeling the entire interior of the home. All aspects of the home remodel conform to the ordinance requirements with the exception of the proposed entry. Ms. Aaker explained the homeowner hopes to accomplish a vestibule for energy efficiency and to create a transitional area that provides coat hooks and benches prior to entering into the living room. Currently, there is no transitional area between the front door and living area and there is no coat closet by the front door for storage. Ms. Aaker concluded it would appear that the magnitude of the variance is minimal and would have little if any impact on the streetscape. Staff hesitates however, to support any additional introduction of living area into the established setback area. The proponent, Mr. Moore was present to respond to questions, and his architect, Mike Eggert was also present. Mr. Byron asked Ms. Aaker if the board has ever approved enclosed entry ways that encroach into the frontyard setback. Ms. Aaker said the board has traditionally been very protective of the front streetscape, and have not to her knowledge approved enclosed front entryways. Ms. Aaker noted there has been a recent pattern of requesting entry stoops with overhangs, and posts, but all have been approved with the condition they remain unenclosed. Mr. Byron questioned if a front entry is enclosed is it considered living area. Ms. Aaker said it is. Enclosing it creates living area. Helen McClelland questioned if they considered incorporating the posts more into the front facade. She added she agrees with staff that she cannot recall approving an enclosed front entry, and asked the architect if he could work more within the ordinance requirements. Mr. Eggert explained what they were trying to accomplish is a functioning enclosure, not only decorative. Mr. Eggert explained the layout of the house pointing out the need for an enclosed space. Mr. Byron commented if the board decides to approve the four foot variance the 1 1/2 foot variance request may not make that much of a visual difference. Board members agreed stating they can understand the need for the enclosed space but feel the request encroaches too much. 3 A discussion ensued with the board tabling this item to allow the proponent and architect to discuss the proposal, and possibly alter it to a more conforming solution. B-94-14 Michael J. Doran 5845 Kellogg Avenue Lots 13 & 14, Block 3, Fairfax Request: A 25 foot lot width variance and a 2290 sq. ft. lot area variance for a legally platted lot Ms. Aaker informed the board the subject property is located in the northeast quadrant of Kellogg Avenue and West 59th Street. The property consists of two 50 foot wide legally platted lots with the home located on the southern most lot. The property owner is hoping to sell Lot 14 as a separate parcel for the future development of a single dwelling unit. Ms. Aaker explained the neighborhood was originally platted with lot widths of 50 feet, depths of 132-134 feet and areas of between 6600 and 6700 square feet for development of single dwelling units. As homes were developed some chose to purchase two lots or portions of an additional lot. The subject property consists of two legally platted 50 foot wide lots, with the home located entirely on one of the lots. Ordinances have changed since the time the area was subdivided requiring larger lots in new subdivisions. Reviewing the lot in the context of the existing neighborhood demonstrates that the subject lot is consistent both with conditions occurring along the 5800 block of Kellogg Avenue and occurring within the neighborhood at large. It is clear that at the time of subdivision all of the 50 foot wide lots had the potential for the development with a home. Ms. Aaker concluded staff recommends approval of the request as submitted. Mr. Workinger asked why the board is hearing this request. Ms. Aaker clarified even though the lot is legally platted our ordinance requirements have changed requiring a variance for development. Ms. McClelland questioned if the property owner is paying taxes as one parcel how can it be divided. Ms. Aaker said that is not an issue. Many individuals who own an adjoining lot(s) combine the parcel under one tax statement. Ms. Aaker explained the lot is still taxed, but the property owner receives one statement. Mr. Armist, 5817 Kellogg Avenue stated he is against the variance. He added the neighborhood is established with mature trees and he is very concerned that a new home will not conform to the character and symmetry of the existing neighborhood. Ms. Joan Stern, 5808 Kellogg Avenue, told board members she is concerned that a house constructed on this lot, if it is allowed, may be substandard, and devalue the existing homes in the immediate neighborhood. Ms. V. Dash, 5837 Kellogg Avenue suggested if Mr. Doran needs money that he sell the whole parcel. She added her property is immediately next door to the vacant lot, and is the most impacted. Ms McClelland asked Ms. Dash what rooms in her home abut the vacant lot. Ms. Dash said her bedrooms are on that side. Ms. Jody Hoe, 5816 Kellogg Avenue pointed out in her opinion this block is different from the blocks nearer Valley View Road. She added as one gets closer to Valley View Road the houses are not as valuable. She stated she wants her neighborhood preserved and the property values maintained. Mr. Fisher, 5901 Kellogg Avenue stated in his opinion if a nice new home is constructed on this vacant lot the property values of the existing neighborhood will probably go up. He pointed out this is a platted lot, and the property owner should have the right to sell it. A property owner at 5832 Kellogg pointed out 50' lots are narrow and privacy can become an issue, and suggested if a variance is granted that a similar style home be constructed, not a modern home. Mr. Byron observed our ordinance requires construction of a two car garage noting it is difficult to construct a two car garage on a 50 foot lot. Mr. Workinger noted if a house is constructed (cape code style) at a width of 33 feet there will probably be enough room for a driveway. Mr. Workinger stated he is unsure if a height variance would be needed. Mr. Dvorak, 5840 Kellogg stated his concern is with aesthetics, adding the lot is beautiful and treed, and if the variance is granted he suggested a complementary house be constructed. Ms. McClelland said she agrees with the concerns expressed by neighbors and stated they are legitimate. She pointed out no homes have been constructed in this neighborhood since 1959. Continuing, Ms. McClelland stated the homeowner to the 5 north will be impacted, and a new house if not constructed with care will violate the character and symmetry of the neighborhood. Ms. McClelland said in her opinion, Edina is being over built, and every lot in Edina does not have to be developed, especially in established neighborhoods. Concluding Ms. McClelland pointed out this neighborhood has many wonderful trees, and has a mature streetscape, a new house will violate this character. She noted a subdivision request was denied on Grimes Avenue that is very similar, 50 foot lots, sprinkled in with 100 foot lots in an older area. Ms. McClelland said she cannot support the request. Mr. Doran told the board his intent is not to upset the neighborhood, he added he only wants to sell the lot. Mr. Workinger said he appreciates the charm and character of the neighborhood and believes if a new modern house is constructed it will negatively impact this neighborhood. Mr. Workinger said he understands the plight of the property owner but wants some sensitivity in designing a new house. Mr. Workinger continued it is very important to him that the house that is built on this lot blend with the neighborhood. Concluding, Mr. Workinger said he supports the request because in his opinion the property owner has a right to sell and develop a legally platted lot. Mr. Workinger pointed out many individuals when Edina was being developed purchased additional lots with the potential to sell them in the future. Mr. Workinger said if approval is granted he wants the board to be able to review, and comment on the design plans of the future house. Mr. Byron said he recalls the granting of a variance for a vacant lot on 54th and Xerxes, but stated he believes this neighborhood is different from Xerxes Avenue. Continuing, Mr. Byron said in his opinion the width of the lot will make it hard to develop without requiring other variances, and that is something we should consider. Mr. Byron pointed out this neighborhood evolved over a period of time, and is established, with mature vegetation, similar housing styles and a new modern looking house will detract from the neighborhood character. Mr. Byron stated he believes these points should be considered when we hear a request. Mr. Byron stated sometimes ordinances catch up with the public, and not everything can work. Mr. Workinger said that while he agrees with comments regarding the established neighborhood, that is not an issue, the lot is legally platted, and if we can exercise some control over what is constructed the impact may be minimal. Mr. Byron noted we do not have authority to tell a future property owner what style of house they should built. Mr. Byron commented he is not clear if a lot is platted, if it is automatically entitled to be developed. Mr. Byron moved to deny the variance request subject to the concerns brought up during discussion. Mr. Workinger seconded the motion. Ayes; McClelland, Byron. Nays; Workinger. 0 Ms. McClelland informed Mr. Doran he can appeal the decision of the board. A neighbor suggested that Mr. Doran sell 25 feet of his property to Mrs. Dash. Mr. Doran would benefit financially and Mrs. Dash would be able to enjoy the extra space and the lot would remain as is. Mrs. Dash said she does not want to purchase 25 feet of the vacant lot. Continuation of table B-94-13, Moore, 4417 Ellsworth Drive Mr. Ellsworth and his architect presented a plan that would encroach into the frontyard setback by three feet. The board members stated in this instance an enclosed entry does may sense and agreed the three foot encroachment will not negatively impact the neighborhood. Mr. Workinger moved approval of a three foot frontyard setback variance subject to the revised plans being approved by staff and that the materials used match the existing dwelling. Mr. Byron seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 111. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. kie HoogG6Wker I� 7