Laserfiche WebLink
variance request, we reverse and remand to the City for reconsideration under the correct <br />standard. <br />Liebeler owns property located in Minnetonka. Krummenacher is Liebeler's <br />neighbor to the west. Liebeler's property consists of a 2.4 -acre lot, which contains a <br />2,975 -square -foot home and an attached two -car garage. The property also contains a <br />detached flat -roofed garage that a previous owner constructed sometime in the 1940s. <br />The City has an ordinance requiring that the detached garage be set back a minimum of <br />50 feet from the property's boundary line. Minnetonka City Code § 300.10. Liebeler's <br />garage was constructed before this ordinance went into effect, and it does not satisfy the <br />setback requirement. Specifically, the garage is nonconforming because it is set back <br />only 17 feet from the front yard lot line. Because the garage was constructed before the <br />ordinance became effective, however, the garage is a permissible nonconformity. <br />On March 31, 2008, Liebeler applied for a variance to expand the detached garage <br />by adding a pitched roof and a second -story room above the garage that could be used as <br />a yoga studio and craft room. Liebeler's proposal was to renovate the garage itself, both <br />to fix its leakage problems and improve its appearance, and also to expand the garage by <br />adding a living space above it. Because adding a second story to the garage would result <br />in a vertical expansion of a nonconforming structure, Liebeler was required, under the <br />Minnetonka City Code, to apply for a variance from the City.' See Minnetonka City <br />1 It appears that Liebeler did not attempt to move the garage to a conforming <br />location because the unusual characteristics of the lot made relocation impracticable. <br />Liebeler's lot is L-shaped with only 45 -feet of frontage on the road. Moreover, there is a <br />(Footnote continued on next page.) <br />3 <br />