Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/12/22 - ADMIN - Minutes - Board of Zoning Appeals - RegularOFFICIAL MINUTES OF DECEMBER 22, 2016 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a meeting on December 22, 2016 at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota – Council Chambers. Members Present: Susan Bloyer, James Gainsley, Henry Solmer Members Absent: Justin Kaufman, Paul Roberts Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator 1. Call to Order – Roll Call The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioner Gainsley served as chair. 2. Approval of Minutes of November 29, 2016 Commissioner Solmer made a motion recommending approval of the minutes of November 29, 2016. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA: None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Variance: Side and rear yards Location: 3951 Quentin Avenue South Applicant: Kim Erickson Case No.: 16-43-VAR Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that the applicant, Kim Erickson, has requested a 20.7 foot variance to the required 25 foot rear yard and a 2.0 foot variance to the required 7.4 foot side yard to construct an addition to the home and garage. The purpose of the addition is to expand the kitchen and attached garage. Mr. Morrison discussed existing conditions of the property. He noted that it is a corner lot. He reviewed R-2 District standards comparison. Mr. Morrison reviewed the remodel proposal. He presented the property survey with proposed addition. Official Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals December 22, 2016 Page 2 Mr. Morrison discussed the property being a corner lot and in this case the front of the house does not face the front yard. The front yard is along Vallacher because it is the shorter of the two property lines. He explained by code the Vallacher property line is the front lot line and thereby the front yard. He indicated the property lot lines, setbacks and buildable area. He said the house currently encroaches into the rear yard. It’s a legally non-conforming situation which can continue to exist but cannot be expanded upon without a variance. Mr. Morrison presented the floor plan of the existing home. He presented the proposed remodel area. The goal of the kitchen remodel is to make it more useable. The garage addition would remain a one car garage with more space for lawn equipment, trash cans and snowblower. Mr. Morrison reviewed the staff analysis of each variance criteria. Staff recommendation is for denial. He said there are criteria staff could agree with but staff looked at the fact that there are options available and that the side yard variance does infringe on the open space of the neighbor’s property. Commissioner Bloyer asked about the buildable area for the detached garage. Mr. Morrison responded that the drawing presented was a little misleading because detached garages work under a different set of rules. He explained those rules. Commissioner Bloyer asked about minimum side yard, interior side. She asked for the current setback. Mr. Morrison showed the side yard setbacks, adding that a wall would continue to maintain the 5.4 setback. Commissioner Gainsley commented that options have been given to the applicant which would not require a variance. He said there is no hardship. Mr. Morrison said the applicant can speak to it but staff heard from the applicant hardship is due to irregular shaped lot. Primarily the reason the applicant chose this design for the remodel is due to the small kitchen. Commissioner Gainsley opened the public hearing. Kim Erickson, applicant, said she has lived in the home 15 years. The hardship is due to the small kitchen they are not able to eat in the kitchen. Most of the time they eat their meals sitting on the sofa in the living room. The porch is a three season porch and they’ve been able to eat in the porch only two months of the year. Official Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals December 22, 2016 Page 3 Ms. Erickson said a standard size single car garage has about 288 sq. ft. She said for whatever reason her garage was built 4 ft. shorter with 223 sq. ft. Once trash cans, lawnmower, snowblower, grill, etc., are in the garage there is not room for a car. She said she wanted to make her garage bigger without losing her backyard. Ms. Erickson said she appreciates the city suggesting options for a two car garage but then she wouldn’t have a backyard. She wouldn’t even be able to see the backyard. She would lose garden and if grandchildren were to play back there she wouldn’t even be able to see them. Ms. Erickson explained that in bumping out the area from the porch she is trying basically to get the fridge in line with the counters. She distributed photographs to the board. She distributed two letters to the board in support of the variance from Carol Olson, 3961 Quentin, and Cameron Stromme, 4921 Vallacher. Ms. Erickson stated that she wants the size of a single car garage and she is willing to scale that back so that there would be 5 feet to appear like a side yard setback. Commissioner Gainsley asked if Ms. Erickson designed the house. Ms. Erickson said it was built in 1947 and she doesn’t know who the builder was. There have been three previous owners. Commissioner Solmer asked how many bedrooms the home has. Ms. Erickson responded it is a 3-bedroom house. She said the bedrooms are all on the Vallacher side of the house. Shawn Nelson, New Spaces, contractor for the applicant, said they looked at various design proposals to meet their needs. He believes the plan meets the zoning intent as well as the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. He spoke about the very irregularly shaped lot. He spoke about the side yard. He said the applicant is willing to redesign that side of the garage to be at the 5 ft. setback which meets the intent of zoning regulations to have a minimum of 10 ft. between adjacent properties. He said doing the attached garage in that way does allow for open space behind the property, which is their backyard. Mr. Nelson said the kitchen proposal would provide the space needed to provide seating in the kitchen. He said the refrigerator is in their living room now. They are looking for a kitchen that would meet their basic needs. The addition doesn’t encroach any further on the neighbor’s property. Mr. Nelson said the minimum normally between two buildings is 10 ft. They have greater than that. If it was considered rear yard to side yard there would be a minimum of 30 ft. Where it is added on there is in excess of 30 ft. of open space behind that because of how their building extends. They are meeting the intent of the zoning regulations. It is consistent with the character of the community. He said the proposal does not negatively impact neighbors or the neighborhood in any way. Official Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals December 22, 2016 Page 4 Mr. Nelson spoke about attached versus detached garage during cold weather. It isn’t simply an economic decision. There are considerations like safety, security and less shoveling. He said the reality with a two car garage option is that almost the entire rear yard would be paved over increasing amount of impervious surface on the lot. The single car garage would be beneficial as well as consistent with the intent of the zoning code. Commissioner Gainsley said the city and state have developed guidelines for pervious and impervious surfaces. He asked if there is any concern about square feet of impervious surface. Mr. Nelson said he isn’t concerned about impervious for the plan they’ve proposed but said he is concerned about a two car detached garage. Commissioner Solmer asked how many cars are routinely kept at the residence. Ms. Erickson said currently they have three cars. Commissioner Solmer asked if there is no parking on Quentin. Ms. Erickson responded that is correct during snow emergency. Quentin is one of the main streets plowed regularly. She said three cars can squeeze in the drive if they are parked right up to the garage door. Which means they can’t remove their snowblower easily. Commissioner Gainsley closed public hearing. Commissioner Bloyer said the hardship is the shape of the lot. Besides the fact of reducing visibility and reducing their own rear yard with a detached garage it would create an incentive for small children to play in the neighbor’s back yard rather than their own legal backyard. She asked why anyone would play behind the garage. A storage shed on the Vallacher side wouldn’t be appreciated by the neighbor. Commissioner Bloyer stated she thinks there is a hardship that warrants giving a variance. Commissioner Solmer said he could see approving the 2 ft. setback along the side by porch for usable space because it’s next to neighbor’s backyard, not their living space. But the 5 ft. setback proposed for the garage makes it directly closer to the windows on the neighbor’s house and cuts off their light. Commissioner Solmer commented that as noted by applicant, parking is an issue. The city tries to promote two car garages. There is no way this one car garage can be expanded into a two car garage. There is no perfect solution given the shape of the lot. He said it is possible to put in a generous sized two car garage without a variance. Commissioner Solmer said he could see expanding the existing kitchen but he has trouble with the garage proposal. It’s already non- Official Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals December 22, 2016 Page 5 conforming and a garage expansion would make it worse for the neighbors. He said the present neighbor may not object but of course they won’t be there forever. Commissioner Gainsley said he agreed with Commissioner Solmer and parts of Commissioner Bloyer’s reasoning. He said he is reluctant to give variances where there are viable options which could mostly serve the applicant’s need and meet the city’s requirements. He said he sees the need from the applicant’s point of view but is not sure he sees it from the city’s point of view. He added that variances aren’t really necessary when other options exist. Commissioner Solmer said he agreed. Commissioner Gainsley made a motion to adopt a resolution denying an application for a 20.7 foot variance to the required 25.0 foot rear yard and a 2.0 foot variance to the required 7.4 foot side yard required for property located at 3951 Quentin Ave. S. The motion passed on a vote of 2-1 (Bloyer opposed). Mr. Morrison read the statement regarding appeal to the City Council. The 10- day appeal period ends on January 3, 2017. 5. Unfinished Business 6. New Business A. 2016 Annual Report Mr. Morrison said he would add this evening’s variance case to the annual report and email the revised version to the board. Commissioner Bloyer noted a minor correction to be made on the 3338 Library Lane report. Commissioner Gainsley made a motion to accept the report as amended. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. 7. Communications 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Official Minutes Board of Zoning Appeals December 22, 2016 Page 6 Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary