Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 01/09/1992 APPROVED MINT185 BOARD OF APPEALS AMID An110STMENTS TMjRSDAy January 9 , 1992 7:30 P.M. City Hall Council Chambers, 7600 Executive Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 BOARD OF APPFAI.S S: Harvey (chairman)., Freemyer, Wilkus, Akemann, "Anderson, Weeks, Arockiasamy STAFF PRESENT: Jean Johnson, Planning Sharon Storholm, Recording Secr'y BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None I. CALL TO ORDER--:iOLL CALL--PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7 :30 F.M. Roll call was taken as noted above. All present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. • II .MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 12, _1992 MEETING Harvey noted that on page three, the motion on the sign approval should reflect that the requirements apply to future as well as existing tenants. MOTION: Anderson moved that the minutes of the December 12, 1991 meeting be approved as amended. Akemann seconded the motion and it passed unanimously with Wilkus abstaining. III VARIANCES A. RRquest M-001 submitted by Natural Green for pro dy located at 15195 Martin Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11,03 Subdivision 3 1. to allow outside storage of motor vehicles in excess of 3/4 ton capacity in the parking lot area. David Luse came forward to present the variance request. He explained that he is the president of Natural Green and with him was Paul Seeling, the vice president of Sales and Marketing. Their business is landscape architecture and they are located in Chanhassen and Chaska. They do large scale commercial projects and have facilities in other locations. They had intended to construct the administrative offices at Chaska, but the Corps of Engineers and the County both • had projects in the future in that area,which put the status of the property in question as to the suitability for a building site. 2 He had spoken with Mike Franzen and had told him of his intent to then build on land in Eden Prairie. Luse said/he would like to be a good corporate citizen. Truck storage on the site could present a problem, so he came to the Board tonight to verify if that would be acceptable. Paul Seeling came forward and showed the Board three drawings. The first one displayed the topography and berms. It may be amended to allow a wider driveway. Parking spaces for eight vehicles plus employee parking will be needed. The second drawing showed the landscaping and screening buffers that will be planted . The existing berms are 8 ' high on Martin Drive . The third sheet shows the proposed areas for employee and client parking. This building would be the corporate headquarters for the company. He had a floor plan on how the building would be laid out inside for the Board' s review if necessary. Johnson said that the Staff report reviewed the background of the site. This property was brought before the Board of Appeals in 1986. A variance was granted for depth and width as well as size . The plant material has been on lot 2 since 1986. City code for I-2 and I-5 does not allow vehicles over 3/4 ton to be stored outside . In this case, however, there are mitigating factors . : 1 .A small portion of the lot is involved, 2 . There are undeveloped lots in the area, 3. The construction of 212 , 4 . Five year time frame, 5 . The screening ,will be adequate. . Notices have been mailed to all property owners within 500' , but has gotten no responses . It is recommended that the following items become part of any approval if granted: 1 . Only the equipment specified in the letter be allowed, 2 .Only the areas in the plan be allowed for parking of vehicles, 3. A five year time frame be attached to the variance, 4. Plant material should be installed as quickly as possible. Two years will be allowed to complete the landscaping. Arockiasamy asked about the material on lot 2. Luse answered that it is not their material . Lot two is used by another company. This material may be removed. This land is valuable and had been intended to be developed soon. Arockiasamy asked if there were any conditions on the variances granted in 1986. Johnson answered that no plant material was to be within 50' of the front yard setback. There was to be a berm along Martin Drive. Luse said that the equipment is often gone all day long from the site in the summer. In the winter, it will be. there most of the time. They have been in business for 17 years and it is not their goal • to double in size. In fact, the company is smaller now than in 1988. 3 Arockiasamy asked if there was growth in the company, where would more trucks be stored if they were needed? Seeling answered that now they have two trucks and two men. One must become more innovative with the current marketplace . The desire is not there to grow larger. Freemyer asked where the hardship was in this situation. Luse answered that economics was an obvious one. A seasonal business takes lots of teamwork. The trucks should be in the same location. Security is a problem if the trucks cannot be brought back to the site at night . Maintenance of the trucks is easier. He had already spoken with the neighbors and they agreed it would enhance the site. Johnson noted that a hardship should be due to circumstances that are unique to the property. Freemyer said the circumstances need to be unique and not created by the landowner or proponent . Arockiasamy felt that time limits should be considered for the variance . Wilkus abstained from the discussion. • Anderson asked if some of the trucks could be stored inside e the Luse answered that there was room for 2 or 3 inside . Seeling noted that there are evergreens south of the building for screening, even in winter. The planted trees will be 10-12 ' iit height =--at initial planting. Anderson felt it' should be stated that "comparable vehicles may be stored on the site" instead of listing specific vehicles. Luse said that four people (a partnership) own lot 2 . This lot could be developed if they choose. Akemann said he had concerns regarding backhoes, bobcats , front end loaders,etc and the storage of such vehicles. Luse said he has six bobcats which are stored inside . There are semi trailers stored at the Chaska location. Akemann asked Luse if he was comfortable with a five year limit on the request . Luse said that was acceptable with him. Akemann said he did not see anything unique about this ro ert and did not see a trade off. : p p y i Luse felt that extensive screening was a trade off versus no screening which could have been the case with other applicants. JOhnson said that the property is in a transitional state and that this is a unique circumstance. Harvey felt that this plan would be an improvement to the property. All parking would be screened. He felt there was a trade off in that an improvement was being made town existing property which is not that appealing. This will be a substantial investment. Luse said they will be moving in on February 1st . Johnson noted the setbacks as 50'in the front yard, 201in the side yard, and 25 ' in the rear yard. There would be room on all sides. Freemyer said the intent of the ordinance is to get the vehicles out of sight . Screening does this and the intent could be followed in this way. Harvey said he would want the south and southwest screening done before the end of 1992. Luse said that this would be no problem. It could be done by the end of September. Arockiasamy said that there will be more and more of this in of . the code. A well screened parking area is better than other options. Eden Prairie and the Board will need to look at the intent MOTION: Akemann moved that the Board approve the Variance request 92-001 citing the following hardships: 1 . It is a transitional area 2. The property will be improved. 3. Extensive screening is a trade off 4. It is not inconsistent with the surrounding property. 5 . Off site storage creates a hardship. . The following conditions should apply: 1 . A five year time limit 2. Two year phase in of landscaping. South and southwest to be done in 1992--East in 1993. 3. Storage of vehicles shall be as noted on the plan and shall not exceed eight vehicles over 3/4 tons. Anderson seconded the motion and added that the variance is limited to the Natural Green Company. Motion passed unanimously with Wilkus abstaining. B. OLD BUSINESS • Johnson noted that Touch o 21st of January. Staff istoCgive aireportttottheCCouncil. the 5 C. NEW BUSINESS Johnson noted a tentative date of April 7 for a joint meeting between the Council and the Board. It will be a 6 PM meeting with a dinner. D. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Akemann moved that the Board adjourn. Wilkus seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8: 55 P.M. I •