Loading...
04-22-08 BZA Minutes Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2008 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Boudreau-Landis called the meeting to order at 7:20 pm. Those present were Members, Boudreau-Landis, Morrissey, Segelbaum, Sell and Planning Commission Representative Cera. Also present were City Planner Joe Hogeboom and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. I. Approval of Minutes - February 26, 2008 MOVED by Sell, seconded by Morrissey and motion carried unanimously to approve the February 26, 2008 as submitted. II. The Petitions are: 130 Louisiana Avenue North (08-04-03) Robert & MarvAnn Cook, Applicants Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Subd. 10(A)(2) Rear Yard Setback Requirements . 14.1 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a distance of 10.9 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (east) property line. Purpose: To allow for the construction of a sun porch and deck. Hogeboom referred to a survey of the property and explained that the applicants are proposing to replace the existing deck with a new sun porch and smaller deck located in the same location. He noted that the existing deck already encroaches into the rear yard setback area and that the proposed new sun porch and deck would not encroach any further into the setback area. Segelbaum asked if the existing deck is considered to be legally non-conforming. Hogeboom stated that there was not a building permit on file for the original deck but there was a permit to rebuild the deck in 1997. Sell asked when the home was built. Robert Cook, applicant, stated that the home was built in 1970 but he bought it in 1994. Boudreau-Landis asked if any action needed to be taken regarding the original deck before they could deal with the proposed new sun porch. Hogeboom stated that if this Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2008 Page 2 variance request is approved no action would be needed regarding the existing deck because it would be torn down. Sell asked if there are any footings under the existing deck. Todd Obele, Minnesota Rusco, contractor for the project, stated that there are 15-inch bell footings, 42 inches deep. Segelbaum asked if there is anything unique to this lot and if it is similar in size to the lots around it. Hogeboom referred to an aerial photo and noted that this lot is similar in size to the lots around it, however, this home was placed much further back on the lot then others around it. Cook stated that when he replaced the original deck made sure he built it to code. He re-built it smaller and increased the support underneath it. Obele added that the current deck is constructed with 2 x 8 lumber and the proposed new sun porch addition will be constructed with 2 x 10 lumber and it won't encroach any further into the setback area. Cera asked the applicant to describe the proposed addition. Obele showed the Board some elevation drawings of the proposed sun porch and explained that the roof will be in line with the roof on the house. Cera asked if the proposed porch will be a 3-season porch. Obele said yes and explained that the sun porch will not be heated space. Segelbaum asked the applicant if the City mentioned the setback issues in 1997 when he replaced the original deck. Obele referred to the inspection observation reports he received from the City's files and noted that a variance wasn't required at that time. Cera asked the applicant if he spoke with the neighbor behind him to the east. Cook stated that the house behind his is for sale. He said he tried to speak with them several times but was not able to talk to them. Boudreau-Landis asked the applicant what he feels the hardship is. Cook stated that the house was originally built right up to the setback lines with the exception of the front and there is no room for any type of expansion. He added that the neighbors have no comments regarding the proposed addition and he can't improve the quality, or add to the value of his house without a variance. Obele reiterated that the location of the house on the lot initiates the need for a variance for anything the homeowner wants to do. Segelbaum asked the applicant if he had thought about building just the sun porch and not the deck. Obele said they couldn't build just the sunroom because there needs to be an exit from the back of the house. He added that it is just a small deck area and the building code requires there to be a landing with stairs. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2008 Page 3 Boudreau-Landis opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment Boudreau-Landis closed the public hearing. Sell said he thinks it is unfortunate that this house was placed on the lot the way it was and that the homeowner wasn't told he needed a variance when he replaced the deck in 1997. He said there haven't been any complaints about the deck, they are improving their property and they are not going any closer to the property line than the existing deck already does so he would be willing to support this variance request. Segelbaum stated he is concerned if the existing deck is legally non-conforming or not because if it is not, it seems to be a very large variance request. Morrissey said she thinks the existing deck would be considered legally non-conforming because they were issued a building permit to construct it. Cera said he feels a deck being in the setback area is much different than a structure or an addition being in the setback area. Morrissey agreed that it is a fairly significant variance request but anything they would want to build in the back yard would require a variance and there is no where else the homeowners could do any improvements. Cera said the key issue to him is deck versus structure. He added that a hardship can't be something created by the homeowner. Morrissey stated that this homeowner didn't build the house so she doesn't see this as a situation the homeowner created. Sell stated that if this proposal came before the Board without the existing deck involved he'd feel differently, but the deck has been there since 1997. Morrissey agreed. Segelbaum stated that the Board is supposed to consider the reasonableness of a request and he is not sure that this variance request of greater than 50% is reasonable. He said another thing the Board is supposed to consider is the impact on the surrounding properties. This proposed sun porch will improve the value of this house, but he is not sure what it will do to the value of the other homes in the area. He agreed that a sun porch is much different than a deck in this location. Boudreau-Landis agreed that this proposal is for something significantly more than just a deck and it will change the look of the house, but he feels alright with this request because the deck is something that has been there for a long time. MOVED by Sell, seconded by Morrissey and motion carried 3 to 2 to approve the following variance request. Members Cera and Segelbaum voted no. 14.1 ft. off the required 25 ft. to a distance of 10.9 ft. at its closest point to the rear yard (east) property line to allow for the construction of a sun porch and deck with the condition that the proposed 3-season porch can never be converted to a 4-season addition. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board,of Zoning Appeals April 22, 2008 Page 4 III. Other Business Election of Officers MOVED by Segelbaum, seconded by Morrissey and motion carried unanimously elect Sell as Chair. The Board agreed that Segelbaum would serve as Vice Chair as he is the only returning member. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 pm. YhL ~...a. Mike Sell, Chair