Planning Commission approves front-yard setback variance for poolhouse at 5501 Nantucket Place

The Minnetonka Planning Commission on June 26 approved a front-yard setback variance for a proposed 14-by-14 poolhouse at 5501 Nantucket Place, allowing the structure to sit 24.5 feet from the property’s front line and about 12 feet from the back of the curb. The commission voted 5–1 to grant the variance; the decision is final and subject to appeal.

Staff had recommended denial, saying the application did not meet the city’s variance criteria because the proposed location conflicted with the ordinance’s 35-foot front-yard setback for accessory structures and would alter the neighborhood’s building line. "The yard could accommodate the proposed pool house in a separate location," staff said in its report. Staff also concluded the proposal did not demonstrate unique circumstances not caused by the property owner.

Applicants Dan and Katrina Philp told the commission the proposed location lets an adult supervise both the pool and the cul-de-sac where neighborhood children gather. "This allows us to both keep an eye on the pool and the cul de sac at the same time," Dan Philp said, adding neighbors had written letters of support. Several neighbors who spoke at the hearing described frequent informal gatherings in the cul-de-sac and said the structure would not harm property values or neighborhood character.

Commissioners debated the three legal criteria for a variance: consistency with the ordinance’s intent, whether the request is reasonable and caused by unique on-site circumstances, and whether it would alter neighborhood character. Staff emphasized the ordinance applies equally where a lot abuts a park and where it abuts another house; there is no separate front-yard standard for lots adjacent to public land. Staff also noted the proposed location would change the separation between structures and the roadway.

Commissioners split in deliberations. Those who voted yes cited the cul‑de‑sac location, the adjacent Purgatory Park, the existing driveway and retaining wall, and neighborhood support as factors that made the proposal reasonable and unlikely to harm neighborhood character. Those who voted no cited public-safety concerns with a structure approximately 12 feet from the curb and the commission’s role in upholding uniform setback standards.

Planning staff supplied a slope check during the hearing; a staff calculation indicated the slope north of the pool did not meet the city’s definition of a steep slope (staff described the threshold as "around 16–20%"), meaning no additional steep-slope rules applied. Applicants said relocating the structure behind the pool apron would require removing existing decking and a boulder retaining wall and would be costly and disruptive.

The motion to approve the variance was made by Commissioner Hansen and seconded by Commissioner Waterman. The roll call on the approving motion recorded yes votes from Commissioner Waterman, Commissioner Brink, Commissioner Hansen, Commissioner Henry and Chair Maxwell; Commissioner Minion recorded the lone no vote. The commission’s approval is a final decision and is subject to appeal to the City Council per the appeal process described by staff.