Loading...
08-09-94 BZA Minutes 1.342 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE GOLDEN VALLEY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS I August 9, 1994 The regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was heTd Tuesday, August 9, 1994 at 7 PM, City Hall Council Conference Room, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. The following Board members were present: Acting Chair Herb Polachek, "Elllilie Johnson, Mahlon Swedberg, and Linda McCracken-Hunt. Also present was Gary Johnson, Staff Liaison. Approval of Minutes - July 12, 1994 MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Swedberg and motion carried unanimously to approve the July 12, 1994 minutes as submitted. ------------------------------------------------------------ Minutes of the Petitions are: 7340 Half Moon Drive (94-8-29) Michael and Sandra Hobbs Request: Purpose: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) which requires a 35 foot front yard setback -- house built at 31.5 feet -- variance for 3.5 feet off the required 35 feet; and Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(I) which requires a 15 foot side setback -- north side setback variance for .25 to a distance of 14.75 feet and south side setback of .35 feet to a distance of 14.65 feet. I To make the house legally non-conforming so a fully conforming 141x 211 addition and replacement deck may be constructed. The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent owners. Mr. and Mrs. Hobbs were present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indi- cating that the existing house was placed 31.5 feet off the front property line and 14.75 feet from the north side property line and 14.65 feet from the south side property line when the house was built in 1959. The proposal now is to add a fully conforming 141x 211 addition and to replace an existing deck to the rear of the house. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by McCracken-Hunt and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) and Subd. 7(C)(I). 5929 St. Croix Avenue North (94-9-30) William and Phyllis Lyders Request: Purpose: Waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) which states that a new variance must be granted for an addition to a structure where a previous variance has been granted. I To construct a two-story addition onto the west side of their home. 1343 I Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Two The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent property owners. Mr. and Mrs. Lyders were present to answer questions. No other interested per- sons were present. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating that Mr. and Mrs. Lyders were granted a variance in 1988 to allow construction of a deck within the shoreland of Bassett Creek and a sideyard setback for the existing house. Also, not mentioned on the survey was a shed which is in the side setback and possibly in the five (5) foot drainage easement. Mr. Lyders described the proposed addition and the need for more space. A dis- cussion followed about the shed in the side setback. Mr. Lydersexp"lained that- it is approximately 81x 121 and located for accessibility. No permit is required for a shed less than 100 sq. ft. The Board expressed its concern as to whether or not the shed could obstruct the drainage easement on that side of the lot. Member Swedberg asked Mr. Lyders if he had any flooding problems due to the fact that this basement elevation is below the flood elevation. Mr. Lyders said it has seldom been a problem. A discussion followed over requiring a "Hold Harmless" letter from Mr. and Mrs. Lyders as part of the building permit applica- tion due to the potential hazard of flooding waters in Mr. and Mrs. Lyders home. The Lyders agreed to the request. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve a waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) along with the following conditions: I 1) Mr. and Mrs. Lyders are to present a "Hold Harmless" letter acceptable to City staff as part of the Building Permit application; and 2) Before a permit is issued, the City Engineer is to report on whether or not the non-conforming shed is in the drainage easement and if so what action needs to be taken regarding the shed. 2535 Vale Crest Road (94-8-31) James and Virginia Anderson Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(1) which requires a 15 foot sideyard setback -- variance for 2 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 13 feet on the south side property line and 13 feet off the required 15 feet to a distance of 2 feet on the north side property line. Purpose: To construct a conforming 121x 231 addition onto the rear of the home. I The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent property owners. Mr. Anderson was present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating variances are needed to make the house legally non-conforming soa conforming 121x 231 addition may be added to the rear of the house. The existing house was built within 13 feet of the south setback and an existing deck built and repaired without a permit is within two (2) feet of the north setback. The deck is not built to current codes. 1344 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Three Mr. Anderson came forward and explained why he needed a variance. Member Johnson asked Mr. Anderson who built the deck? Mr. Anderson said it was existing when he bought the house, but he replaced the deck in 1988 but didn1t realize he needed a permit. He explained the deck is needed as an access to the north door and also to prevent erosion. Member Johnson asked about making the deck smaller. Mr. Anderson said that would be difficult and the neighbors have no problem with its location. I MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Swedberg and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for a waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(I) of two (2) feet off the required 15 foot sideyard setback for the south side and 13 feet off the required 15 foot sideyard setback for the north side with the condition that the existing deck on the north side be brought up to current code. Member Johnson commented that while the deck should have had a permit before it was built, erosion preven- tion makes it necessary to have a deck in this location. 5610 Golden Valley Road (94-8-32) Joel Reiss Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) which requires a 35 foot street setback -- house within 30.7 feet -- waiver for 4.3 feet; and Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(I) which requires a 15 foot I sideyard setback -- waiver for 1 foot to a distance of 14 feet from the northwest side property line. Pu rpose: To construct a deck onto the northwest side of the home. A second deck, to be constructed, approximately 10 feet away will be conforming. The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent owners. A repre- sentat i ve of the contractor, Pat Flynn, was present to represent theh~~~.()~!1~rs. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff repbft indicating that the exist- ing house was placed within 30.7 feet of the front property line when the house was built in the early 1950's. The proposal is to add a two level deck to the north side of the house. The lower level of the deck would extend one foot into the required 15 foot side setback. Mr. Flynn explained the topography and landscape of the site. The area that the deck is proposed is unusable as is. Member Polachek explained that variances are granted because of hardships. He could not see a hardship for a 14 foot deck. Member McCracken-Hunt asked if the homeowner considered a 13 foot wide deck in lieu of the 14 foot wide deck proposed. Mr. Flynn argued that a 14 foot deck makes the yard more usable. Member Swedberg countered that open space is as valuable as any other use. MOVED by McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Swedberg and motion carried unanimously to I approve the waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) for 4.3 feet off the required 35 foot front setback and deny waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(I) of one (1) foot off the required 15 feet from the northwest side property line. :1345 I Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Four 2013 Hillsboro Avenue (94-8-33) Donald and Christine Strom Request: Waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) which states that a new variance must be granted for an addition to a structure when a previous variance has been granted -- construction of garage 21.5 feet from Duluth Street; and Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(B) which requires a rear setback of 20% of the lot depth -- variance of 8.53 feet off the required 27.24 foot rear yard setback to a distance of 18.71 feet. To construct an addition of 91x 241 onto the rear of the garage. Purpose: I The petition was in order and consent obtained by adjacent property owners. Mr. Strom was present to answer any questions. No other persons interested in this matter were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating that a front yard variance was granted for a garage on a corner lot in 1978. Now an addition is proposed for that legal non-conforming garage. A discussion started over the second variance request for 8.53 feet off the required rear setback. Gary Johnson stated that since the detached garage is an accessory structure it could be as close as five (5) feet to the side or rear property line. Member Swedberg asked Mr. Strom if the garage is attached in any way to the house? Mr. Strom answered no. It was decided that because this is an accessory structure and as such could be as close as five C5} feet to the side or rear setback that there was no need to act on the second variance request. Member Swedberg asked Mr. Strom about the piles of materials scattered around the yard. Mr. Strom said that most of the materials would be used for the addition. Member Swedberg stated that he would suggest that a condition of approval of the waiver would be to clean up the materials within six months of completion of the addition. A discussion followed over discrepancies between the submitted survey and what was actually built. Mr. Strom said that the existing garage is 241x 261, not the 241x 241 shown on the survey. Also, the front setback off of Duluth Street is actually 21.5 feet not the 17.5 feet shown on the survey according to Mr. Strom. It was explained that this is a proposed survey not an as-built survey. MOVED by McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for a waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4). The approval is conditioned on the removal of outside storage within six months of completion of the addition. I 1346 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Five 6533 Winsdale Street (94-8-34) William and Karen Hills Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(2) which requires a sideyard setback of 15% -- waiver of 5.15 feet from the required 11.25 foot sideyard setback on the west side property line to a distance of 6.1 feet. Purpose: To construct a conforming 12'x 14' deck onto the rear of their house. The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent owners. Mr. and Mrs. Hill were present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating that the existing house was built in 1953 and located 6.1 feet from the west property line. The proposal is now to build a conforming deck to the rear of the house. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Swedberg and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for a waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(2) of 5.15 feet off the required 11.25 foot sideyard setback on the west side property line. Without the waiver, no expansion of the house would be allowed. 3200 Manor Drive (94-8-35) David and Suzannah Hanzel Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(2) which requires a sideyard setback of 15% -- waiver of 6.05 feet from the required 11.25 foot sideyard setback on the east side property line to a distance of 5.20 feet. Purpose: To construct a conforming 12'x 16' deck at the northwest corner of their house. The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent owners. Mr. and Mrs. Hanzel were present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating that the existing house was built in 1947 and located 5.2 feet from the east property line. The proposal is to build a conforming deck to the rear of the house. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by McCracken-Hunt and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for a waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(2) of 6.02 feet off the required 11.25 foot sideyard setback on the east side property line. Without the waiver, no expansion of the house would be allowed. I I I 1347 I Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Six 537 Meadow Lane North (94-8-36) Roberta Toutges Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) which requires a 35 foot front yard setback -- addition will put front of home at 27.75 feet -- variance of 7.25 feet off the required 35 feet; and Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 12(A) which states that detached accessory buildings shall be no less than 5 feet distant from any lot boundary line other than a street line -- variance is for 2.9 feet off the required 5 feet -- garage site at 2.1 feet from the side rear property line; and Pu rpose: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(C)(2) which requires 15% of the lot width -- variance for a 5.4 feet from the required 12 feet to a distance of 6.6 feet on the north side property line and a variance of 6 feet from the required 12 foot sideyard setback to a distance of 6 feet on the south side property line. To make the present home and garage legally non-conforming so an addition can be built onto the south side of the home. I The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent property owners. Roberta Toutges and friend, Dean, were present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Acting Chair Polachek asked if the garage addition was for a home occupation. Ms. Toutges answered no, that they only intend to do work on their own cars (they own four). Member McCra~ken-Hunt asked that since this proposal was for such a large addition did they consider tearing down the existing house and starting over. Ms. Toutges stated that was not con- sidered. Member Swedberg asked who designed the proposal. Ms. Toutges said she did with the help of a draftsman. A discussion followed over the proposed design. Ms. Toutges explained that they were trying to save a tree in the back yard. Variations of the proposal were discussed. Member McCracken-Hunt noted that the neighborhood is made up of smaller houses but the proposed design just looks like tacked on additions with no coherence of design. . Member Swedberg stated that he could find no reason for granting a waiver. The proposed design was simply too large and Ms. Toutges is asking for too many waivers to get the addition onto the lot. He could see no hardship. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by McCracken-Hunt and niotion carried unanimously to deny the petition for waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A), Subd. 7(C)(2) and Subd. 12(A) the consensus being that alternatives in design that meet required setbacks be explored. 4610 Golden Valley Road (94-8-37) Kristen Larson Rieser I Request: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 12(A) which states that detached accessory buildings shall be located wholly to the rear of the house or main building to which it is incidental with at least 10 feet of separation between the main building and the accessory building or buildings. When so placed, the accessory building or buildings shall be no less than 5 feet distant from any lot boun- dary line other than a street line which shall be 35 feet. 1348 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Seven Purpose: To construct a garage to the front of the home and 10 feet from the side property line. I The petition was in order and consent obtained from adjacent property owners. Kristen Larson Rieser and Tim Rieser were present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Member Polachek gave a brief summary of the waiver request indicating that a detached garage was being proposed in front of the house and 10 feet from the house. This would require a waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 12(A) which requires accessory structures to be located wholly to the rear of the house. Ms. Rieser explained that the reasons she wanted to locate the garage to the front was to provide a safe play area behind her house for her children. Also, this location provided more off street parking. Thirdly, this location provided future expansion of her house (ie. a breezeway between the garage and house). Member McCracken-Hunt pointed out the screening on the neighbor's home and was this considered as a way to lessen the impact of a garage in front of the house. Ms. Rieser responded that she did not consider doing that. Member Swedberg explained that the City is protective of front yards and asked about other alternatives such as the proposal Ms. Rieser made to the Board in October of 1992. Member Johnson also wanted to know if the previous plan or other variations could still be considered. Ms. Rieser expressed her concern that the previous plan may not be acceptable to her neighbor. I After in depth discussions of possible alternate plans Member Swedberg sugguested that the waiver request be tabled until next months Board of Zoning Appeals meeting so that other alternatives could be explored. Ms. Rieser rejected this suggestion because it would take too much time. She explained that if the peti- tion was rejected by the BZA she would appeal to the City Council at its August 16th meeting. MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by McCracken~Hunt and motion carried 3 ayes and 1 nay to deny the request for waiver because no hardship was proven and not all alter- natives explored. 1820 Maryland Avenue North (94-8-38) Keith Dunder Request: Waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) which states that a new variance must be granted for an addition to a structure when a previous variance has been granted; and Purpose: Waiver of Section 11.21, Subd. 7(A) which requires a 35 foot front yard setback -- vari ance for 4 feet from the front setbiick,to..a distance of 31 feet -- not addressed with previous variance. To construct a conforming addition onto the rear of the home. I 1349 I Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Eight The petition was in order and consent obtained from the adjacent property owners. Mr. Dunder was present to answer any questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Mr. Dunder explained that the proposeed addiiton would be con- forming but that he ahd been here once before for a variance so he was required to come again for this new addition. Durign the course of applying for this waiver he discovered that he needed a second waiver for the existing structures front setback. MOVED by McCracken-Hunt, seconded by Johnson and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) and Subd. 7(A). 1001 No. Tryol Trail (94-8-39) Dr. Bruce Meese/Maureen Murphy Request: Waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(40 which states that a new variance must be granted for an addition to a structure when a previous variance has been granted. Purpose: To construct a conforming two-story addition onto the home. I The petition was in order and consent obtained from ~djacent owners. Dr. Meese was present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Dr. Meese started with explaining that his proposal was to put a conforming addi- tion onto the rear of the house but that since a previous variance was given in 1985 for a sideyard setback, he was required to request another waiver. Member Johnson asked Dr. Meese if he was aware that during the 1985 waiver discussion it was stated that nothing would be built on the roof of the garage. During the visit to the site for this petition it was noted that a screened porch is now on the roof. This screened porch was built without a permit. Dr. Meese stated that the 1985 petition was made by the previous owner. Dr. Meese was not told when he bought the house that he could not build a porch on the garage. He was also unaware that a screened porch would require a building permit. He built the porch himself. Member McCracken-Hunt stated that as far as the waiver on the petition goes, there has been a previous waiver granted and now a conforming addition is being proposed. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by Swedberg and motion carried unanimously to approve the petition for a waiver of Section 11.90, Subd. 4(C)(4) which states that a new variance must be granted for an addition to a structure when a pre- vious variance has been granted. I 905 Hampshire Avenue South (94-8-40) BLR, Inc. -- Cactus Creek Saloon & Steak Outfitters Request: Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) which requires a 35 foot front setback -- variance for 2 feet off the required 35 foot front setback to a distance of 33 feet; and Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) which requires 35 feet of front yard landscaped green area -- variance for 4 feet off the required 35 feet to a distance of 31 feet; and 1350 Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals August 9, 1994 Page Nine Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) which requires that 1/2 of the required side and rear yard setback shall be landscaped -- waiver of 7 feet off the required 10 foot rear setback to a distance of 3 feet. I Purpose: To bring the property into conformance to construct an new entry onto the building. The petition was in order and consent from adjacent property owners. Mr. Mark Ramberg, the architect, was present to answer questions. No other interested persons were in attendance. Staff Liaison, Gary Johnson gave a brief staff report indicating that the existing structure was placed within 33 feet of the front setback. Also, existing parking is within 31 feet of the front propert~ line and within three (3) feet of the rear property line. The proposa~ is for an addition to the existing vestibule. The addition would conform to s~tPg~K. requirements. Member McCracken-Hunt noted that the first waiver is for the existing condition. A discussion followed concerning the requested waiver for the parking within the front setback. Member McCracken-Hunt asked if that parking was needed for zoning requirements and could they be removed. Mr. Ramberg said they were not needed and that the entire parking lot is to be rebuilt. Members examined the landscape plan. MOVED by Johnson, seconded by McCracken-Hunt and mot i on carried unanimously to I approve waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) of two (2) feet off the required 35 foot front setback for the structure and Subd. 6(C)(4) of seven (7) feet off the required 10 foot rear landscape requirement but denial of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) of four (4) feet off the required 35 foot landscape front yard. Other Business No other business was presented. Adjournment adjourned the meeting at I