Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council split on oversized ADU; sends applicant back with findings for April 27
Summary
Council was divided over a request to replace an existing accessory dwelling unit at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard with a larger two‑story ADU (about 2,375 sq ft and 30 ft tall). Staff recommended denial for exceeding size and height limits; after debate a motion to deny failed and the council directed staff to return with a resolution and findings at the April 27 meeting.
The Minnetonka City Council on April 13 considered and delayed final action on a conditional-use request to construct a new accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at 15815 Minnetonka Boulevard after a lengthy and divided discussion.
Planning staff (Miss Thomas) recommended denial because the proposal exceeded two key ADU standards in the zoning ordinance: the 1,000-square-foot cap or 35% of the principal dwelling (whichever is less), and the height limit tied to the principal dwelling. Staff noted that the proposed ADU would be about 2,375 square feet and 30 feet tall — larger and taller than the existing primary residence — and concluded the project would not meet the ordinance’s intent that an ADU be accessory in scale.
The applicant, Kevin Francis, argued the parcel’s 1.35‑acre size, double frontage, large separations to neighboring homes, existing screening (about 81% of the perimeter), and direct neighbor support justified an exception. The applicant also said the combined program (garage, poolside entertaining and living space) made a single structure preferable and that the council is empowered to weigh factors such as lot size and screening when considering departures from the conformance path.
Councilmembers were split. Several expressed sympathy for the applicant but worried about precedent and fairness to others; others said the lot’s size and screening made the proposal unlikely to have adverse impacts. A motion to deny the permit (adopting staff’s recommendation) failed. The council then voted to direct staff to prepare a resolution with findings and conditions approving the ADU for the council’s next regular meeting on April 27.
Why it matters: The item illustrates tensions between existing ADU size limits designed to keep accessory units subordinate to primary homes and council discretion to consider lot-specific factors (size, screening, neighbor support). The council’s decision to seek written findings before a final vote preserves the record and gives members time to refine conditions.
What’s next: Staff will prepare a resolution with council findings and any conditions of approval for the April 27 council meeting; the council will then decide whether to approve, deny or amend the permit based on those findings.
