Loading...
10-23-12 BZA Minutes Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 23, 2Q12 A regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held on Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at City Hall, 7800 Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, Minnesota. Chair Nelsan called the meeting to order at 7 pm. Those present were Members, Boudreau-Landis, Maxwell, Nelson and Planning Commission Representative McCarty. Also present were Director of Planning and Development Mark Grimes and Administrative Assistant Lisa Wittman. Member Johnson was absent. I. Approval of Minutes — September 20, 2012 Regular Meeting Boudr�au-Landis noted that the wrong meeting date was used in the first paragraph. MOVED by Boudreau-Landis, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve the September 20, 2012 minutes with the above noted correction. II. The Petition(s) are: 1426 Aquila Ave N Leslie Hackina, Applicant (12-10-16) Request: Waiver from Section 11.21 Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 12(E) Accessory Structure Requirements • No one detached accessory structure shall be larger than 800 sq. ft. in size. The proposed garage/workshop would be 1,096 sq. ft. in size. Purpose: To allow for the remodeling/expansion of the existing garage. Request: Waiver from Section 11.21, Single Family Zoning District (R-1), Subd. 12(E) Accessory Structure Requirements • Each property is limited to 1,000 sq. ft. of accessory structure space. The proposed garage/workshop would have 96 sq. ft. more than the allowed 1,000 sq. ft. of accessory structure space Purpose: To allow for the remodeling/expansion of the existing garage. Grimes explained the applicant's request to add on to the existing 1,008 square-foot garage. He noted that the existing garage was built in three phases, the originaf garage, a garage addition and then a shed addition. All three phases were granted building permits by the City at the time they were built. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 23, 2012 Page 2 Also, at the time the existing garage was built, the City did not have requirements regarding the size of individual accessory structures or the total amount of accessory structure space allowed. He referred to the photos submitted by the applicant and explained that the applicant would like to flip the location of the current garage and workshop spaces and add a 4-foot "bump-out" addition onto the front of the garage space with a covered walkway in front of the workshop space. Grimes referred to the agenda and staff report and explained that the square footage listed on the documents are incorrect. The proposed garage/workshop would be 1,176 square feet in size not 1,096 as stated and the total accessory structure space would be 176 square feet more than allowed, not 96 as stated. The reason for the change is that the covered walkway area was not counted in the overall square footage as it should have been. Nelson asked if th applicant would still need a variance if the proposed garage was attached to the house. Grimes said yes, because properties are allowed 1,000 square feet Qf accessory structure space whether it is attached or detached. Leslie Hacking, Applicant, referred to the illustration of the proposed garage remodel and explained her proposal to bump out the garage, add a service door and add a covered walkway that would protect her from the weather on the way from the garage to the house. She added that she is also planning on moving the location of the driveway because it currently sits right next the house which is not ideal. She noted that only one ather neighbor would be able to see the garage. Nelson asked the applicant why the current size of the garage can't accommodate what they want to do. Wayne Petrie, representing the applicant, stated that if the praposed garage space was only 24 feet deep the service door they are proposing would hit the car inside the garage. Hacking added that the walls of the original garage are cinder block, with footings, so they can't be moved. McCarty noted that the applicant could add a service door in the wall dividing the garage and workshop spaces instead of bumping the front of the garage out 4 additional feet in order to install a service door. Petrie said if they did that, the service door would still hit a car parked in the garage. McCarty stated that the door could swing into the workshop space instead. Hacking added that they would have to walk through the workshop space to get outside if the door was in the wall dividing the two spaces. Hacking stated that another plan would be to move the back wall of the proposed new garage space in, or forward, 4 feet which would keep the structure at its original square foatage, but they wouldn't be staying within the original footprint. Maxwell asked if the applicant would still need a variance if she moved the back wall forward 4 feet. Grimes said yes, because they wouldn't be in the original footprint and wauld be expanding the use. Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals October 23, 2012 Page 3 Hacking noted that the neighbor to her south has 1,114 square feet of accessory structure space. Grimes stated that he hasn't reviewed the neighboring property but he would guess that they might have built their garage prior to 2008 when the City Code was amended to allow a maximum of 1,000 square feet of accessory structure space. Hacking referred to the survey of the property and noted how far away the neighboring property is from her garage. Nelson explained that the Board has to consider several criteria when reviewing a variance request including circumstances unique to the property and she is not sure what the unique circumstances are in this case. Hacking said she thinks it is unique that the driveway is located only 2 feet away from the house. Petrie added that the size of the lot is unique for the neighborhood. Nelson asked when the home was built. Petrie said he thinks the house was built in 1913. Boudreau-Landis asked Grimes about the intent of the ordinance restricting the size of accessory structures. Grimes stated that the City didn't want garages to be larger than the houses; some people had numerous accessory structures and the City Council at the time felt that 800 square feet is large enough to build a three-car garage. He stated that another issue was the height of accessory structures and oftentimes large garages mean there might be an illegal home occupation occurring. Nelson asked if the reason the applicant can't shrink the size of the garage is that it is constructed of cinder block and has footings. Petrie said yes, the original garage won't be moved because it is all cinder block and has frost footings. Grimes reiterated that the applicant has the ability to keep or re-build the garage its current size in the same location. Boudreau-Landis asked if the applicant could construct an overhang without posts in front of the proposed workshop area. Petrie said he didn't think the roof could cantilever that far without posts or brackets. Boudreau-Landis asked if the applicant is allowed to reduce the size of the structure. Grimes said yes, they could reduce the structure to less than 800 square feet or replace it to its current size of 1,008 square feet. Boudreau-Landis showed the applicant another possible design that wauld have a similar look. Nelson opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing no one wishing to comment, Nelson closed the public hearing. McCarty said he doesn't see the uniqueness with this property. He said what member Boudreau-Landis came up with would be a good alternative and would only require the variance to allow it to be larger than 800 square feet in size, which he would support. Maxwell said he likes the applicant's proposal but he can't find anything that could be considered unique with this property. Boudreau-Landis agreed that the proposal looks Minutes of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals Ocfiober 23, 2012 Page 4 amazing and it would add to the neighborhood, but he feels there is a way to get something very similar even if it adds more to the cost of the projeet. He also agreed that he wauld be supportive of a variance to allow the structure to be larger than 800 square feet in size. Hacking asked about shifting the back wall of the proposed new garage space forward 4 feet and still constructing the 4-foot bump out area in the front of the garage. Maxwell suggested granting a waiver allowing the applicant to shift the garage wall 4 feet forward. McCarty said he would be in favor of granting the first variance request to allow an accessory structure to be larger than 800 square feet in size and allowing the applicant to keep the same 1,008 square foot size of the structure as it exists. Petrie asked if that would include the proposed walkway. Grimes noted that a 30" overhang could be built. Petrie said a 30" overhang wouldn't cover the width of the walkway. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Boudreau-Landis and motion carried unanimously to amend the language in the first variance request to state that the proposed garage/workshop would be 1,176 square feet in size. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by Boudreau-Landis and motion carried unanimously to approve a variance request to allow an accessory structure to be larger than 800 square feet in size. The proposed garage/workshop space is allowed to remain 1,008 square feet in substantially the same footprint as the existing garage/workshop. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to amend the language in the second variance request to state that the proposed garage/workshop addition would have 176 square feet more than the allowed 1,000 square feet of total accessory structure space. MOVED by Maxwell, seconded by McCarty and motion carried unanimously to approve a variance to allow the proposed garage/workshop to have 8 square feet more than the allowed 1,000 square feet total for a total of 1,008 square feet of total accessory structure space in substantially the same footprint as the existing garage/workshop. III. Other Business No other business was discussed. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 pm. , �� ' � + Nancy Nelson, C 'r Mark W. Grimes, Staff Liaison