HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 12/15/1977 UNAPPROVED
MINUTES
. EDEN PRAIRIE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTNEBTS
THURSDAY, DECEKBER 15, 1977 7:30 P.M., CITY HAM,
MQ1BERS PRESENT: Chairman James Wedlund, Richard Lynch,
and Roger Sandvick
MR1BERS ABSENT: James Cardinal. and Ronald Krueger
STAFF PRESENT: Carl Julie, P.E. Director of Public Works
and Donna Stanley, Recording Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT: David and Robert Green, Chris Johnson,
and Craig Alger
y
1. Minutes of November 17. 1977 regular meetit .
Chairman Wedlund tabledthe Minutes of November 17, 1977 because of lack
of members present for approval.
2. Variance Request #77-1? from David & Robert Green for variance from
re °trireme of the " " zoning di t ict which re uires minimum
lot size og 5 acres, 00' minimum wi hand 0 100' i e yard setbacks-.
• City Engineer Jullie spoke to the proposal to make a lot division of 4 acres &
construct another house on the lot, located at the corner of Shady Oak Road and
Co. Rd. 61. He explained that the zoning is rural and requires 5 acre minimum
lot acre site, with 1001and 50' for setbacks, adding that city sewer is * mile
away, making it possible to extend utilities. He spoke to the Guide Plan Up-
date indicating this area to be in the Transitional Residential Zone, per-
mitting single family lot development without public utilities on 2.5 acre
minimum lot size. He added that there has been no opposition to the proposal.
Wedlund inquired what the extent of existing house was. Robert Green, 6533
Shady Oak Road, explained that he lives in the house presently, and that his
son would like to build the second house.
Wedlund expressed doubt whether this was a variance matter, rather than a
re-zoning situation. He spoke to interpretations both ways, and said he
could not see in the Ordinance where he could interpret this as a variance.
He spoke further to the City Attorney's interpretation, that if the property
is approved for splitting, you can build, and asked Jullie whether the proper-
ty had been split.
Jullie responded that this is what the proponent is requesting, adding that
the zoning category that they would logically apply for was R1-22, - acre lots,
and he felt we should discourage that sort of density in that area because of
no sewer and water.
IJedlund asked what reasons there were to prevent them from splitting next
Year also. Jullie responded that it is the Greens' intention to have two
homes, and that this condition may be put on the variance that the property
may not be split again.
Minutes - Zoning Bd. of Apls. and Unapproved
Adjust. - 2 - Thurs., Dec. 15, 1977
•
Mr. Robert Green commented that some of the area is swamp and that it is not
physically practical to split the property any more„ and that we are surrounded
with situations that cannot change.
Lynch inaui.red what makes this property different than in SW corner of the
City, which has had similiar situations. Jullie explained that the difference
is that this property lies in the "Transitional residential zone" in the pro-
posed Guide Plan, and that this area is serviceable by utilities at some time,
whereas, in the SW corner, we are talldng about areas out of the sewer water
lines, with no trunks to serve them.
Wedlund commented that he finds no fault in looking at the property to do
what the Greens want to do, but does find fault with this determination whether
we are re-zoning this property.
Mr. David Green commented that the reason for living there was because of the
open space and would not want anyone to live there and split lots.
R. Green responded to questions from Sandvick on how long they have owned the
property - 2 yrs., why the house is angled - for the view of Bryant Lake Park.
Sandvick expressed agreement with Wedlund's stand of reservation whether it
would be re-zoning or a variance, but commented that he could understand the
proponent's request.
• Wedlund asked what requirements should be put on this lot if we allow it to be
split, and again stated that he does not feel it should be before this Board
because it is a re-zoning problem. Jullie responded that when he looks at
zoning, he looks at land use, rather than lot size and single family vs.
commercial. He felt that the decision is not on land use, but on lot size,
this case being a variance from lot size.
Lynch expressed concern with the legal ramifications of the problem, but he
said he did not have a problem with what they are doing.
MOTION: Lynch moved that the concensus of the Board was for direction to
Lynch to present this question to the Planning Commission; to direct Jullie
to obtain legal opinion from the City Attorney; and schedule the proponents
for regular meeting in January, 1978. Sandvick seconded, motion carried
unanimously.
3. New Business
None.
4. Adiournment
Lynch moved to adjourn at 8:25 PM, seconded by Sandvick. Motion carried
unanimously.