HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 08/21/1980 APPROVED
MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
THURSDAY, August 21 , 1980 7:30 P.M. City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: James Wedlund, Chairman, Ronald
Krueger, and Richard Lynch
MEMBERS ABSENT: Roger Sandvick and James Dickey
STAFF PRESENT: Carl Jullie, P.E. Director of Public
Works and Sharon Gagnon, Recording Secretary
CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL
Minutes of July 17, 1980 regular meeting.
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Krueger, to approve the minutes of
the regular meeting of July 17th. Motion carried unanimously.
2. Buildinq Moving Request #M80-18 submitted by Steven W. Mendele to move
a home presently located at 11518 Leona Rd. , Eden Prairie, to Lot 7,
Block 3 in Duck Lake Vista.
• Present at this meeting were Grant Sutcliff, 7070 Eden Prairie Rd. and
Tim Pierce, developer and realtor for Duck Lake Vista.
Tim Pierce explained that he had stipulated 'to Steven Mendele that he
add a brick trim, re-roof and paint the home in the purchase agreement
for the lot.
Mendele added that he intends to add a double garage.
Lynch questioned if he planned to use the existing garage as part of the
house.
Mendele replied that he was not.
Lynch stated that he felt the house appeared small and asked the square
footage.
Mendele said there was 1200 sq. ft with a 14 X20 living room, three bedrooms
and a dining room. He said he was in carpentry and planned to add a deck
by next spring. The windows must be changed because of fire code in order
to escape so he planned to replace them with a more modern window.
Wedlund inquired about the siding.
Mendele said that he was not changing the siding but would be painting it and
adding the brick trim requested by Tim Pierce.
Wedlund questioned Sutcliff in regard to his concern with this moving request.
Bd. of Appls & Adj -2- Thursday 8/21/80
• Sutcliff said he was attending this meeting representing his interests and
that of his mother-in-law. He explained that his neighbor's homes ranged
from 1965 to 1980, including the home of Mr. Johnston which was moved in
this area this year. Sutcliff commented that he was glad egress windows
must be installed in the proposed home to be moved since he was concerned
with fire code and energy efficiency. The home of Mr. Johnston has not
been brought up to date in this regard. Ord. 135 allows a home to be
moved to be up to 10 years older than the surrounding homes within 500
feet in the area. If the Mendele home is 1959 vintage would the City
allow the next home to be 1949. The house across the street is dated 1980
so there is more than a 10 year discrepancy in age.
Wedlund asked if Sutcliff had any objections to Mr. Johnston's home as it
now stands.
Sutcliff replied that the home has not been brought up to code and there is
an excessive grade for the driveway. This grade could have been controlled
if a new home would have been built rather than moving in an existing home.
This home shows signs of stress and strain from the aged lumber cracking.
A new home would be slower in settling.
Wedlund asked Pierce if this was to be a trend in this area to allow older
homes to be moved in.
Pierce said he has received calls in regard to purchasing lots with older
homes but had turned them down since they could not be adapted to the area.
• Mendele has agreed to make necessary changes in a contract. He feels he
has the most to loose since this is his development. He has sold 4 lots
since the sign for the house moving has been posted. The only mistake he
felt with Mr. Johnston was not to request a new roof. The square footage
of Mendele's home is equivalent to the others including the new home
which is 1 ,056.sq. ft.
Lynch was concerned about the electrical code since the home must have only
90 AMP service. He also noted insulating the home to R22 and meeting the
combustion code.
Mendele said he has talked to an electrical contractor but would change
things after the move since the foundation would include these things. He
would be adding a new furnace since the present one is oil .
Wedlund expressed his desire to excuse himself from voting since he lives
relatively close and feels he could be personally involved. He said he was
uncomfortable about the situation and felt the same way as Sutcliff that
this was setting a precedence for older homes. Changing exterior conditions
could make it look new but he views the house still as a 1959 vintage.on
Leona Rd.
Sutcliff questioned the boundary restrictions on the survey. He pointed out
there was only 9.7 on the garage side and 12.9 on the house side and 35' from
the edge of the City utility easement which should be 45' .
• Wedlund said the house slants more to the right side and is not parallel to
the lot line. He suggested that the house could be moved back on the lot.
Krueger also noted that the garage could be built as 22' instead of the 24' .
Bd. of Appls & Adj -3- 8/21/80
• Pierce felt the surveyor may have aligned the house to the road.
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Krueger, to approve the building moving
request M80-18 with the following stipulations:
1 .Change all bedroom windows in each of the three bedrooms to conform to
the requirements of Section 1404, egress or rescue windows.
2.Install in a close proximity to all sleeping areas a smoke detector.
3.Stairway to the basement is required to have a minimum of 6'6" head-
room. Install handrail on one side of stairs, 30" - 34" above nosing
and return ends to wall .
4.Install fire-rated 5/8" thick gypsum board on common wall of garage and
habitual space, tight joints installed vertically and return on
perpendicular walls and ceilings at least 4'0".
5. Install minimum 1 3/8" solid wood door with automatic door closure in
opening frame between garage and house.
6. Provide minimum R-22 insulation in ceiling joists with ventilation.
Investigate side wall insulation and submit energy calculations for
the building envelope.
• 7. Install combustion air into the furnace, at combustion chamber within
12" of floor.
8. 32" Brick veneer trim on front.
9. Expansion of single car garage to double car.
TO. Electrical to be brought up to 1980 code.
11 . Meet set back requirement of RI 13.5 and submit new survey.
12. 240# asphalt shingled roof installed.
Motion carried with Wedlund abstaining.
DISCUSSION: Sutcliff stated that he did not feel it was necessary to
request asphalt shingles since the fire code in fiberglass
is better.
3. Variance Request #80-19 submitted by Clayton A. Seeman to permit an
addition 9'6" from the side yard setback located at 15423 N. Eden Dr.
Clayton Seeman explained to the Board that he presently had a tuck under
garage and he proposed to add an addition consisting of a utility room and
a 24X24 garage to his home. This would create a 9'6" side yard setback.
• Wedlund questioned Seeman if he planned to convert the present garage to
home use.
Seeman replied that he would be retiring soon and wished to use it as a work
room but not as living area.
Bd. of appls & adj . -4- 8/21/80
•
Wedlund asked if he had explored any other options for the addition such as
an unattached garage.
Seeman replied positive but his wife wants this plan with the utility room. The
addition is placed in this position in order to save a Blue Spruce Tree.
Krueger pointed out that this should be considered an accessory structure.
Jullie stated that the definition of an accessory building is:
"A subordinate building or portion of the main building which is located
on the same lot as the main building and the use of which is clearly
incidental to the use of the mainbuilding".
The Staff until recently considered an attached garage as part of the house
but is now considered an accessory structure With this interpretation,
the setback requirement would be 10' and Seeman would only need a 6" variance
or change his plans accordingly and withdraw the petition.
Seeman stated he would need the 6" in order to save the Blue Spruce Tree.
MOTION: Lynch moved to approve the variance request for 6" since it is very
nominal. There were no objections by any neighbors and this would allow him
to maximize his use. of his property. Granting of this request would not be
detrimental to the health and welfare of the City of Eden Prairie. Wedlund
• seconded the motion and added that Seeman would be saving the Blue Spruce
by granting this request. The motion and addition passed unanimously.
4. Variance Request #80-20 submitted by Richard Anderson, Inc. to allow 34'
as the height of the building located at Lot 1 , BlockrI Crosstown Industrial
Park 2nd Addition.
Present for this request were Renell Roberts, the architect, and Craig Anderson.
Anderson explained they had originally planned to build a 2 story, 32,000 sq.ft
building but since three current customers from other suburbs requested
50,000 sq. ft. , it became necessary to propose a 3 story building. The
surrounding neighbors have approved this concept. The area is well forested j
with trees 45 - 50' in height and landscaping will be added. If the building
was constucted 3' into ground instead, the handicap ramp would make the 1st
floor look as if it was in the basement.
Wedlund noted the Gelco project and the decision to approve a building in
greater height now that our Fire Department has the necessary equipment to
handle it.
MOTION: Wedlund moved, Krueger seconded, variance request #80-20 with the
findings that the Ordinance was probably written back in the days when the
Fire Dept. could not reach this height with equipment. It is a welcome
addition to Eden Prairie with a well thought out plan. It is not injurious _to
the health and welfare of the citizens of Eden Prairie. Motion carried
• unanimously.
5. Variance Request #80-21 submitted by Woody Ginkel to allow a 2 story addition
to be built 13 from the rear yard property line.
Bd. of Appls & Adj -5- 8/21/80
• Ginkel explained that he wished to build a two story addition to his home
at 9050 High Point Circle. This would be 14 X 15 with a family room on the
walkout level and a sun room/porch on the upper level . The addition would match
the house perfectly. The lot is at the end of a cul-de-sac creating a pie
shape with only 100' in depth. The neighbors on each side would be at an
angle to the addition so they would not view it, only the neighbors to the
rear. The most that could be added without a variance would be 7' which he
felt would be impractical .
Wedlund questioned the letter received to the Board with concern over the
security situation over the bikeway system too close to the rear of the house.
Ginkel stated the additon would be 13' from the bikeway and the common area
for the bikeway is 30' so he felt there would be no problem.
MOTION: Krueger moved, seconded by Wedlund, to approve variance request
#80-21 since it will be a pleasing addition and the neighbors did not abject.
The bikeway does not create a problem and it would not be injurious --to---the
health and welfare of the citizens of Eden Prairie.
6. Other Business.
Wedlund wished to have the Building Dept. check on a deck being built in
Stewart Highlands next to Valley View Rd. to make sure the setbacks are
being met.
• 7. Adjournment.
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Wedlund, to adjourn at 8:55. Motion carried
unanimously.
CITY OF .EDEN PRAIRIE
8950 EDEN PRAIRIE RD
EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5534440
PHONE 937-2262
APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE OR �'
BUILDING MOVING PERMIT PURSUANT
TO ORD 135, 77-6 AND 79-34
DATE June 23, 1980
APPLICANT'S NAME Steven W. Mendele
ADDRESS 3219 W. 60th Street
Edina, Minnesota ZIP 55410
PHONE (HOME) 925-1692 (WORK) 631-2717
APPLYING FOR: VARIANCE
BUILDING MOVING PERMIT
ATTACH THE FOLLOWING WITH VARIANCE APPLICATION
1 . 8Z X 11 survey showing lot lines and setbacks of existing and proposed
structures and location of buildings on adjoining properties. Also
show pertinent topographical features such as trees, fences, berms,
steep slopes, ponding areas, roads, existing and proposed elevations.
2. Letter addressed to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments explaining
nature of variance request and reasons why conformance to the literal
provisions of the City's ordinances would cause undue hardship.
3. Legal description of property to which variance applies.
4. $25.00 fee payable to City of Eden Prairie.
ATTACH THE FOLLOWING WITH BUILDING MOVING PERMIT APPLICATION
�. 82 X 11 survey showing lot lines and setbacks of existing and proposed
structures and location of buildings on adjoining properties. Also
show pertinent topographical features such as trees, fences, berms,
steep slopes, ponding areas, roads, existing and proposed elevations.
2. Six color photographs of (a) two or more views of the building to be
'moved, (b) the lot on which the building is to be located, and (c)
rothe lands and structures thereon adjacent to the lot on which the
building is to be located.
3. Letter addressed to the Board of Appeals and Adjustments explaining
general construction details, size and year of construction of