Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 02/14/1991 i . APPROVED MIffiTffi BOARD OF APPRAIS AND ADJUSTMENTS TBURSDAY February 14 , 1991 7:30 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 BOARD OF APPEAIS S: Dwight Harvey (Chairman), Arthur Weeks, Bill Arockiasamy, Scott Anderson, John Freemyer, Neil Akemann, Mike Bozonie STAFF Pam: ,.jean Johnson, Planning Sharon Storholm, Recording Secr'y BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Arockiasamy, Anderson, BozoniE I. CALL TO ORDER--ROLL CALL--PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Harvey called the meeting -to order at 7 : 30 PM. All present • recited the Pledge of Allegiance and roll call was taken as noted above. II . MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 10 , 1991 MEETING Harvey noted that on page 4, Mr Hales had asked about dock space and not Harvey. He added that Freemyer had asked about the letter referred to near the bottom of the page and not himself.On page 8 ; under the conditions for granting the variance, the words "soley based" should be inserted after the word granted. MOTION: Freemyermoved that the Board approve the minutes of the January 10th meeting as amended. Weeks seconded the motion and it passed 3-0 with Akemann abstaining. III . VARIANCES A. Request #91-004 submitted by Daniel L. Fennell for property located at 16512 Ashby Lane Eden Prairie Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code Chapter 11 Section 11. 03 , Subdivision 2B to permit an existing 4.21 from a side lot line. City Code requires a minimum 10 ' side yard setback one side with a total of 15' both sides. Mr Daniel Fennell appeared to present the variance request. He noted that the Board had the information in the packet that outlined the • reason for the request. He would like to add that he had recently had a meeting at his home with an attorney, the builder and owner of the next lot, a representative of the Building Inspections Dept, and a survey company representative. It was determined that the builder of his home was at fault, but he has filed for bankruptcy. 2 It is possible to purchase the property from the next lot, but for 5 the asking price is $10, 000 . This is not affordable for Fennell and so he is asking for the variance. Johnson said that on lot 5 , there has been a retaining wall con- structed. In these instances , Staff looks for options, but these do not always work out. She suggested thatif this were to be approved, the retaining wall should be removed from the adjoining_ lot and grading should be approved by the City. Harvey asked if the survey company had any reasons why the mistake had occurred. Fennell answered that they have not admitted to any. Johnson noted that the home to the north is under construction now. Fennell said that the excavation company, the survey company, the City Inspector, and the builder all have a percentage of the blame. But, legal costs mount up and it may not do any good to bring legal. action. There is no admittance of blame- but it seems to go back to the builder and it would be necessary to sue him. He has filed Chapter 7 . He has 5 . 8 ' of frontage on one side of the home that was to have been on the other. • Akemann asked about the grading plans . Johnson answered that there would be a drainage plan on file. It can be done many ways . She would like to review any action by the parties so separate/conflicting actions are not taken. Fennell said that the retaining wall extends out 7 ' towards the back. He would like to consult the new owner of the property if it would be necessary to remove it. It could be removed when weather permits. Akemann asked if the hardship in this instance would be the excessive price asked for the additional footage and the fact that the home was not positioned properly. Fennell answered that Akemann' s . statement was correct. Weeks asked when Fennell had noticed the problem. Fennell answered on November 30th he had noticed stakes right next to his garage. One and one half years previous, he had also noticed that the home on the other side was farther away than he had expected. Weeks asked if there had been a misconception on the lot line. • Fennell answered that there had been. He had invested over 3,000 dollars in a retaining wall that goes out 10 ' beyond his property. Weeks asked if this was an as built survey. 3 • Fennell answered that as built surveys were not required when his home was built. Harvey noted that the cable company had obviously made the same mistake. Lewis Colsom came forward and said that he had brought the problem up to Fennell. He felt that the builder would have discovered it-- the sod man should have discovered it also. This matter should have been taken care of before. He will need to grade so water goes away from his garage. If he puts up' a fence, the Fennell lot will look very narrow. The power boxes are on the lot line. He said if there is title insurance, it may help in this instance. Fennell answered that title insurance will not help in this instance. Colsom pointed out that there is an infringement of 5 ' nn city easement area. Is it possible to get clear title? Fennell said he is here to ask for a variance to remedy the problem. Colsom said he doubted that Fennell would have frost footings. Fennell s.?.id that he has 8-12" more footings now than needed. • Colsom said that the house he is building is for sale. The pitch will be very severe ( 1 to 1 pitch) . He said he is against the request. He had bought a wide lot so he could have a larger side yard set back. Harvey noted that there are not big side yard set backs in this area. Colsom said he had resurveyed his property or the problem would be even greater than it is now. He had moved the home farther north. If this had been brought up six months ago, things would have been different. He has tried to work on this and has called several times . This builder is broke now, but he could have paid damages earlier. The sod man would have realized the mistake and it could have been brought to him earlier. The home next door wp..s started in Decmeber. This will make his home harder to sell. Harvey answered that this situation is past 6 months ago or three and one half years ago. What can be -lone row? misom said that Fennell can buy some of his property. Freemyer noted that while 10 ' is normally the drainage easement, : it does not have to be. Colsom asked what about the retaining wall. • Freemyer said a variance cannot be granted for the retaining wall on someone else' s property. He asked if variances can be granted in publicly owned property. 4 • Johnson said that these matters are usually referred to the Engineering Dept to get a report on what the plans for this utility easement would be. Freemyer felt that usually it is intended for drainage purposes. Chances are that there is no utility there. Johnson said that this has been done. The City Council can handle it-- or--there can be vacation of th.e easement. Freemyer said that if the Board were to consider this, it should have the review of the City Attorney. Colsom said that he also has another lot on a hill that is narrow-- only 68 ' wide. Can he build now and get a variance later--is it that simple? Harvey said the Board cannot reply to that. Akemann noted thn-ee items: 1. Fennell has a non conforming structure and wants to have it exist legally. • 2 . The retaining wall is on the golsom property. 3 . Drainage is an issue, but, this is between the land owner and the City Engineering Dept. Fennell said that he is the original owner and had the home constructed. T`:e builder had been RannowContracting, Inc. (Kenneth Rannow) . Freemyer asked if City Inspectors do footing inspections. Johnson answered yes, they do, but not set backs. The stakes may not be there and it is often hard to tell in rough graded areas. Freemyer felt that there were extenuating circumstances in this instance. He felt that the Board needed to permit this non-conforming use with conditions--there are no other alternatives . Weeks asked when the retaining wall had been built. Fennell answered it was constructed less than one year after the home was constructed. That was four years ago this July. The grade in that area was steep and he had steps installed-and tiers. It can be moved. Harvey asked how many square feet C.olsom would be selling. • Fennell answered it would be a little more than 1, 000sq. ft-. Harvey asked if that 1, 000 square feet had a 10, 00.0 price. 5 Colosm said that the builder had insurance at the time. The 10, 000 dollar price includes filling in the dirt and resodding. He did not want to draw a plan he would be tied to and have expenses for. Akemann said that he took exception to item 1 under the conditions regarding removal of the retaining wall from the adjoining property. The next owner may not have a problem with the retaining wall. Colsom said that the grade will be changed and there may not be a retaining wall left. Freemyer said that the Board does not have the authority to set conditions on the retaining wall. MOTION: Freemyer moved that the Board approve variance request 91-004 citing the following hardships: 1. The existing home on lot 4 was built 4.2' from the side lot line inadvertently. 2. The homeowner did not create the variance. 3. ` The submitted survey indicated the appropriate R1-13.5 side yard setbacks. • 4. There are no utilities in the drainage easement. The approval is based on the following conditions : 1. An as built survey be provided. 2 . Applicant shall work with the City Engineering Dept on the grading plan to satisfactority drain lots 4 & 3 . The Board will make no determination as to the circumstances of the retaining wall. Akemana seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. B. Building moving request #91-005-M submitted by Scenic Heiahts Investments. The building is to be moved to 16087 Berger Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The building' s present location is at 8541 Red Oak Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota The type of buildins to be moved is a single family home. Bill silk of.Scenic Heights Investments appeared to present the variance request. He said that he has submitted a lot of information. The reason is that although the home on 8541 Red Oak Drive is a nice home, it is not nice enough for the lakeshore lots in the Red Rock Shore Project. The proposal is to :Hove it to another lot. This move will enhance the lakeshore property for future building. • Johnson said that there had been no comments or letters received. There are photos For revievi and includad is a photo of the lot the home is being moved on to. There have been problems in the past with other house movings in Eden Prairie. She would suggest a possible bond for a time frame allowed for placement on the new foundation. 6 • Gilk said that he understood Johnson ' s request. At this time, he has 15 open lots. In order to sell the other lots he owns, it is important to keep this area looking good. Harvey verified the proposed site for the placement of the home. Weeks asked if the house were to be moved, how would the vacant lot be prepared? Gilt said that the old basement would be removed and the septic tank would be filled in. The well would be capped and it would be sold as an empty lot. None of the lots have been graded because of the trees. The lot is automatically a lovely walk out lot. Weeks asked if trees needed to be removed in order to move the home. Gilk said that some were already gone because of the road. The garage will be cut off. Experienced house movers will do the work. The worst instance would be that one tree would need to be removed. Only the upper level of the home would be removed. The walk out ' level ( lower level) will be destroyed and removed. The home will not be a walk out at the new site. The moving can take place in late February or early March. The home is not very heavy so axel weight is not a problem. Akemann asked what the approximate value of the home would be without the log:. Gilk said it would be 125,000 on the new lot. The lot is priced at 40 , 000 . The home value could be about 85, 000 . There is 1500 finished sq. ft. on the upper level. He selected this home for this lot because of a little white home next to the new lot which was having effects on the values of surrounding properties. He explained how the addition would go on the home. Akemann said that this is the first step. The Board does not know what is to follow. The home does not seem to fit the character of the neighborhood. Gilk said the home next door is worth about 60, 000 . On Eden Prairie Road, a max. value for a house would be 150,000 . The Centex project homes run from 113 to 140 thousand dollars. There is a proposed church to be built in the area. Akemann asked if there would be a basement under the home at the new site. Gilk said there would be a basement with daylight windows on the new site. It will be a four bedroom home. • Akemann asked if the third garage stall is optional. Gilk said that many people want three stalls . 7 • Harvey asked if this was R1-22 district. Johnson answered yes, it was. There is 15 ' required on each sideyard. All the setbacks are satisfied. Harvey asked if the Board were to grant the request and add the condition that the third garage stall be added, would this be acceptable to Gilk,? Gilk answered that it was acceptable. In answer to a question from Freemyer, he said that he has a slzbstantial interest in the development. Freemyer asked if the bond would be acceptable. This does give the City some guarantees . Gilk asked what dollar figures were being considered for the bond. Freemyer asked if there were options that would not be a financial drain. Johnson suggested a cashiers check or a letter of credit. Gilk said teat he already has a letter of credit in place at this time. The release could possibly be held off. • Freemyer said that he felt a signed letter from Gilk would be adequate. Gilk said that this is a costly project. It will all be ready to go. Many of the aspects of the moving have already been partially handled by lining up the companies for these jobs. He added that he will not appeal the addition of the cond4.tion for the third garage stall. It is well worth it. Harvey asked if there had been reductions in the grading bonds. Gilk answered that there had not been--just the public utilities bond. Grading and tree bonds are in place now at the full ammounts . Harvey asked if a letter was provided stated that there would be no reduction in the grading letter of credit, would that be acceptable? Johnson said that uoually the building department requires 1-2 thousand dollars . It will be reviewed with the building dept if necessary for the move itself. She would like to see the amount open ended. Freemyer said that the Board should not be talking dollar ammounts. There should be some way to handle this without tying up more money. Nancy Nickla y came forward and said that she lived at 16001 Shore Drive. She was confused as this area was previously known as Strawberry Hill. . Over half of the beauty of the home in question is in the lower level. Thin is to be hauled away. There was a previous agreement that this would never be subdivided. The plans and reasons for the roads were valid and she and her grandfather had met with Mr. Dietz and agreed 8 • that the City would do all of the surveying, etc. She explained other conditions . Many of them have not been done. She lives in the area. Gilk knew that the moving of this home should have been done earlier before the road was put in. The home was listed at 215, 000 just last summer. All this trouble could have been avoided if the home was moved earlier. Further discuosion took place on the history of the property, roads, area, and second sewer hook up. Nicklay also discussed the issue of compensation/non compensation for her grandfather during the road construction. Harvey asked about the second sewer hook up. Gilk answered that the original plans did not have sewer hook ups placed in that property. Nickley said that she agreed with that--it had come through negotiation. Gilk said that after he had completed the sewer hook and all the equipment was gone, he was contacted to put in a new hook up. All the equipment was brought back in and he had to pay for the add-ons, but the City had absorbed it. The city got what they requested. This is not an issue this evening. . Harvey noted that Gilk has the right to take down the home as he is the owner of the property. This way, it is to be moved and will be used again. The Board cannot consider sentimental attachments. Nickley said that she has no sentimental attachments to the home. She quostioned why Gilk was waiting until now to move the home. If it had been done lbefore, the road would have gone on his property. Harvey said that the issue that needs to be dealt with is the moving of the home. Nicklay said the move will lower the value of the home. MOTION: Freemyer moved that the Board approve moving request 91-005 with the following conditions: 1 . The applicant agrees to build a 3rd stall on the garage similar to that shown on the certificate of survey. 2 . The applicant shall enter into a bond/financial agreement with the City of Eden Prairie giving a guarantee that this home will be moved expeditiously to the satisfaction of the building dept. Weeks seconded the motion with amendment #1 that the third • garage stall is to be compatible with the existing garage. 1 9 Akemann offered amendment #2 to state that the existing foundation be removed in a time frame acceptaale to Staff. Weeks seconded the additional amendment and the motion passed unanimously. C. Request 91-006 submitted by Peter Andrea Company for Property located north of Welters Wav, south of Sunnybrook Road and west of Olympia Drive, Eden Prairie Minnesota City Code requires 55 ' of frontage on a cul-de-sac, (2) to permit Lots 5 6 and 7 with front yard building setbacks of 25 ' City Code requires a front yard building setback of 301 . This item was continued to the Next meeting. MOTION: Akemann moved that request 91-006 be continued to the March meeting. Freemyer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. IV. OLD BUSINESS Harvey noted that the appeal of the variance on the 2 ' variance for a three season porch had been granted by the Council and the • Boards ' decision had once again been overturned. Johnson said that a written report has been requested, but none has been received yet. V. NEW BUSINESS Freemyer suggested that he would like to see Staff wri-t�e a letter to Board Member Scott Anderson asking for his resignation. His aosence has hurt the Board. Harvey noted that there could be a lack of desire to serve or conflicting circumstances. Freemyer asked if a letter should be drafted or if the item should be turned over to the City Council. Akemann noted that the Coucil appoints Board members--do they need to terminate their service on the Board also? Johnson suggested that possibly he would voluntarily resign. Other- wise, the action should be initiated here. Discussion took place on Anderson' s attendance and the overall . attendance at the last few meetings . Freemyer noted that some decisions are critical. (as in this house moving--because of the frost) and a quorum needs to be assured. 10 • Johnson felt that possibly Staff should call Anderson and get an indication of his feelings. Freemyer said that this may be his and Akemann' s last meeting. There should be good support/attendance from Board members . Harvey noted that Anderson has not often called in advance if absent. Freemyer noted that when in attendance, Anderson has been late. Johnson said that Staff will call Anderson. Akemann said that he felt the Board should ask Council for another appointment to fill the position that represents the city of Eden Prairie. Johnson noted that next month there are five variance requests. : Welter, Cub Food, power motor on Mitchell Lake, Timber Lake Towhhome Association, and one on a vegetable stand. Harvey asked if others had notices the vacant spaces in the • Prairie Village Mall signs . Freemyer felt that although the signs do look acceptable, they do not serve a useful purpose. Akemann felt that the Board needed direction from the City re- garding the Cub Food variance request. VI . ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Weeks moved that the Board adjourn. Freemyer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9 : 35 PM.