Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 09/20/1979 APPROVED MINUTES • EDEN PRAIRIE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, Sept. 20, 1979 7:30PM, CITY HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: James Cardinal , Roger Sandvick, Ronald Krueger, Richard Lynch MEMBERS ABSENT: James Wedlund STAFF PRESENT: Carl Jullie, P.E. Director of Public Works and Sharon Gagnon, Recording Secretary CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL I . Minutes of July 19, 1979 regular meeting. This item will be continued to the Oct. 18, 1979 regular meeting. 2. Minutes of August 16, 1979 regular meeting. MOTION: Cardinal moved, Krueger seconded, the minutes of August 16, 1979 regular meeting. Motion carried with Lynch abstaining. 3. Variance Request #79-29 submitted by Parker Hannifin Corp. to use a steel product for siding in lieu of other acceptable material for a building to be built at Lot 1 , Block 1 Shady Oak Industrial Park 4th Addition. Jim Beiswanger from Parker Hannifin Corp. explained that their company wished to construct a building which would be 47,000 sq. ft for light assembley, shipping and warehousing and 8,000 sq. ft. for office space for a total of 56,000 sq. ft. The variance request for the materials used will be for the larger portion of the building. This building would be replacing their operation in Granite Falls, Mn. John Thompson explained that their company designs and builds their own buildings as energy conscious as possible. The last several years they have been using the Armco System. The panels in the plant area will be 28' high X 2 ft. wide with no exposed hardware and a baked enamel finish which is guaranteed for 20 yrs. Lynch questioned if the panels could betaken, apart after construction and what kind of foundation would be used. Thompson replied that the panels can betaken apart after construction and the building would have a solid block foundation. Lynch questioned the R factor. Thompson stated that the building would have a R factor of 16 or 20 and the U factor would be .05. Lynch questioned Jullie in regard to dealing with these situations on an individual basis. Bd. of Appls & Adj -2- Sept. 20, 1979 • Jullie felt the staff had some concern in regard to this situation and felt each specific case must come before the board. Lynch questioned if this was an Armco Building. Thompson explained they use their wall system but they design and construct their own building. Lynch noted that Public Safety and the Fire Dept. find nothing wrong with this system. Thompson stated that it had an UL rating and was Factory Mutual approved. Cardinal noted that in the staff recommendation that the site plan provide for bumper curbing along the building adjacent to parking areas to prevent vehicles from damaging the siding. Thompson felt this was a good idea and would not be any problem. Sandvick questioned the impact on this siding from high winds or twisting winds. Thompson stated they had never lost a panel or even a partial panel . The • wind load is to code. MOTION: Cardinal moved to approve the variance request for the use of Armco wall systems since it is well thought out and attractive. It will be a benefit to the company and the community. Since this is a relatively new theory, it still should be considered by the community. Approval of the system is not a special priviledge. The cost is conventional to other construction. This is not a detriment to the citizens of the community. Along with the approval , a concrete buffer or some such system must be added between the automotive parking and the building. There wasn't any opposition. Krueger seconded, motion carried. 4. Variance Request #79-30 submitted by Ban Con, Inc. for a 9" front yard setback allowance for property located at Lot 8, Block 2 Hillsborough 2nd Addition. Hans T. Hagen, Jr. , president of Ban Con explained that the setback of this home is off by 9" probably because someone knocked down the stake and when the home is sold, the owners will need clear title. Cardinal questioned if the homes were built that needed the variances. Hagen said these were the model homes. MOTION: 'Cardinal moved to approve the variance on the basis that the home is built and it would be unreasonable for this infraction of inches to have • the home moved. He felt the Building Dept. should be cautioned to watch the foundation inspections better. There is no harm to the neiqhborhood and this is necessary for clear title to the property. Sandvick added there was no opposition, Krueger seconded, motion carried. • Bd. of Appls & Adj -3- Sept. 20, 1979 5. Variance Request #79-31 submitted by Ban Con, Inc. for a 6" front yard and 4" side yard variance for property located at Lot 7, Block 2 Hillsborough 2nd Addition. MOTION: (same as variance #79-30) 6. Variance Request #79-32 submitted by Ban Con, Inc. for a zero front yard Tot line for property located at Tract B RLS 1384 Ridgewood Condominiums). Hans T. Hagen, president of Ban Con explained that they had been before the Board approximate a year ago but had been refused the approval for a zero lot line because of the opposition from Ridgewood Condominium Assn. The zero lot line is necessary because of the steep grade. They subsequently got together with Ridgewood Condominium Assn. and have resolved their differences between the parties involved. The six items resolved were additional parking spaces, certain areas of landscaping, lighting, landscaping adjacent to garages, cross easements and the trash area. Bob McCullum, attorney representing Ridgewood Condominium Association, explained that they had reached an agreement regarding certain issues but only after a law suit had been initiated against the banks involved and Ban Con, Inc. The law suit was dismissed after the parties got together and worked out the details. Part of this agreement was for renumeration • to owners of Ridgewood Condominium Assn. and 36% of the cost of maintainance for the parking area would be absorbed by the new condominiums. He had spoken to Roger Pauly and was told that it would be_ improper to go forward and issue a building permit until the declaration of easements and convenance was signed. Sandvick questioned if all the owners have to sign the agreement and how many signature have been received. McCulIum answered that all the signatures must be on the agreement before it can be filed with the Registrar of Titles. Presently they h-aVe 33 signatures and need 60. Hagen stated they would like to start moving and grading the soil and get the parking lot started. McCullum felt the association would not oppose this but wanted the actual construction to wait. MOTION: Lynch moved to continue the matter to the October meeting or a special meeting if all the signatures have been met. Cardinal seconded, motion carried. 7. Other Business. • Jullie explained to the Board that the City had received a lettter from Bernard Hamilton to appeal the Board's decision. Hamilton had requested a setback of 33' instead of the required 50' for a garage he was building in rural zoning. After researching Ord. 135, Wally Johnson, Building Official , Bd. of Appls & Adj -4- Sept.20, 1979 explained that an attached garage is considered an;:accessory structure which needs a 30' setback in that zone. Jullie noted that in the case of Micheal Axtman that had applied for a variance for an attached garage in RI 22 zone that an accessory structure needs only 10' . The City would be sending letters in regard to this. Jullie also told the Board that the City Council had passed a Code of Ethics. Every appointed official and department head must declare any other interests, including financial , in the City of Eden Prairie. Cardinal questioned if financial interests included customers. Jullie stated that any questions should be directed to the City Attorney. 8. Adjournment. MOTION: Cardinal moved to adjourn at 9 :45. Krueger seconded, all in favor. •