Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 11/09/1993 APPROVED MINUTES • BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1993 7:30 P.M. , CITY CENTER PRAIRIE ROOMS A&B 8080 MITCHELL ROAD BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS PRESENT: WILRUS, (Chairman) , ANDERSON, MOELLER, VASALY, WEEKS STAFF PRESENT: JEAN JOHNSON , PLANNING DEPT. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: DYE, LYNCH I. CALL TO ORDER -- ROLL CALL -- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Wilkus called the meeting to order at 7: 35 p.m. Roll call was taken as noted above. The Pledge of Allegiance was omitted, as there was no flag in the meeting room. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • Anderson moved and Weeks seconded that the agenda be approved as submitted. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. III. SWEARING IN OF NEW MEMBER RONALD L. MOELLER Ronald Moeller stated the oath of office. This was witnessed by Vasaly and Williams. He was welcomed to the Board by all members present. IV. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1993 MEETING A correction was made noting that Vasaly was absent and Weeks was present. MOTION: Anderson moved and Vasaly seconded to approve the minutes as corrected above. The motion carried unanimously 5-0. V. VARIANCE A. Request #93-45 by Matthew J. Bryan of 16213 Valley View Road for approval to divide the property into two lots. • one having 15,120 square feet and the other having 19,824 square feet. Code requires a minimum of 22,000 square feet. Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 • Matthew Bryan gave background information to the Board. He has been a resident of Eden Prairie for seven years, two years at the above site. Mr.Bryan would like to subdivide his current lot into two properties; building a new residence with attached two car garage on the new parcel, and selling the existing parcel and residence. During the Valley View Road expansion the proposed divided parcel was stubbed for water/sewer and driveway access. Jean Johnson then reviewed the history of the neighborhood. Surrounding land uses are R1-22 zoned lots. Residential property east of this proposed land division are the Treanor Addition and Thompson Addition. Both of these two lot subdivisions included similar lot size variances. The upgrading of Valley View Road a few years ago included utility stubs for water/sewer and a driveway access for proposed Parcel 2. Because the driveway accesses to a busy collector road, (Valley View Road) Staff recommends a T-Design driveway so cars can enter Valley View Road without backing onto the road. Sharon Roe Anderson asked to clarify the hardship granted for variances of the nearby Additions. Jean stated that these were in part financial because the City had assessed the property for sewer/water/utilities. Also, the right of way required with the Valley View Road expansion reduced the lot size. The Planning Commission decided at that time not . to rezone the area and reduce the lot size, but will review each case through the variance process. Vasaly asked if the neighbors had been contacted? Yes, Mr. Bryan had visited all his neighbors, the neighbor to the East was present, there was no opposition to his plans. Vasaly also asked if he felt a T- driveway was feasible? Mr. Bryan stated that he had cut in a T-driveway for his current residence and wanted the same for the new variance. The proposed residence would be in the $100-110 MM price range. Wilkus asked what the requirements for an attached, tuck under garage were - 15 foot setback on each side. Scott McMann, 16195 Valley View Road, (neighbor to Mr. Bryan) asked where on the proposed lot did he intend to place the house. His concern is to protect the line of evergreens on the East side and is there a hearing held when a building permit is requested? No hearing is required for a building permit. Mr. Bryan stated he would make every effort to maintain this line of evergreens to maintain privacy. Weeks noted that the size of the proposed house was 1,000 to 2,700 feet. The character of the neighborhood is quite varied. Moeller stated that the lot size to the east and west were both about • 19, 000 feet. Anderson asked what percentage of variances had been given in the past? Who oversees the process of design and landscape? Would Bryan submit 2 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 • his plans to his immediate neighbors? Bryan was in agreement with this suggestion. Johnson responded at least four variances had been given (about 10 lots down) . Also stated that the backyard would need to be reserved for drainage so the house could not sit back too far on property. MOTION: Having no further comments or questions, Weeks moved to approve the variance request to divide the property into two parcels, the hardship being: installation of utilities and the Valley View Road improvements increased the City's right-of-way. Approval being contingent on (1) the (City) be the facilitator and oversee the building plans, (2) in addition Mr. Bryan involve his neighbors in the design and placement of the new structure, (3) right-of-way and drainage easements be provided at the time of division, and (4) a T-driveway be installed. Anderson seconded the motion, the motion carried 6-0. B. Request #93-46 by the Pemtom Company for approval of the following Shoreland variances: • 1. Windfield 3rd Addition Lot 1, Block 6, 115 feet rather than the required 150 feet, a 35 foot variance. 2. Windfield 3rd Addition, Lot 3. Block S. 135 feet rather than the required 150 feet, a 15 foot variance. 3. Windfield 4th Addition Lot 3. Block 1, 140 feet rather than the required 150 feet, a 10 foot variance. 4. Windfield 4th Addition Lot 7, Block 1, 135 feet rather than the required 150 feet, a 15 foot variance. 5. Windfilld 4th Addition Lot S. Block 1. 140 feet rather than the required 150 feet, a 10 foot variance. 6. Windfield 4th Addition Lot 9, Block 1, 75 feet rather than the required 150 foot variance. These lots are on the proposed streets of Seneca Pointe, Erin Bay, Magenta Bay and Firthorn Pointe. Mr. Dan Herbst, President, The Pemtom Land Company, presented background information to the Board. Windfield, a single family community, was previously approved by the city of Eden Prairie as a development • consisting of 220 Lots. This community consists of three neighborhoods, Windfield Lake, Windfield Meadows and Windfield North. After studying the area, with the intent to create a more aesthetic neighborhood, to reduce tree loss and limit the necessary variances, Windfield was r 3 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 designed with 201 Lots (with a total loss of 19 Lots) , 19 acres were dedicated to the City around the lake. During the later part of the construction phase of Windfield it became apparent that the plans based on the topographic information received from Horizons Aerial Photography were incorrect. Pemtom then commissioned a new topographic survey to be produced by an independent company. This survey revealed major discrepancies and corrections were made to the final grading plans. However because of these topographic differences the location of the Ordinary High Water Mark established by the DNR at 877 feet moved by as much as 120 feet towards the lots. This in turn put the building pads which were approved beyond the Setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark inside the Ordinary High Water Mark Setback and necessitated our request for variances on 6 lots. To reduce the building pads within the 150 foot setback of the Ordinary High Water Mark would place a severe financial hardship on this property. All of the utilities, curbs and blacktop are in. By granting the variance the character of the neighborhood is maintained. Otherwise, in some instances, much smaller homes will be built among the larger homes, and one lot would be lost. Jean Johnson reviewed the Staff Report information. The Rice Marsh Lake • project (now called Windfield) was reviewed and approved in 1991-1992. Shoreland variances were granted on the project in 1991. Final plats have been reviewed and approved on parts of the project. Rice Marsh Lake is a Natural Environment Waters requiring a 150 foot setback. The plat of the overall project includes 29 acres granted to the City. These acres create a 100-400 foot buffer between Rice Marsh Lake and the rear lot lines of many of the lots around the lake. Because the homes will be a considerable distance from the lake, the intent of the Shoreland code appears to be met. The neighbors seem more concerned with the walkways, they want the character of the neighborhood preserved and do not want the size of the lots downsized. There have been no letters of opposition to this project. The DNR has reviewed Pemtom's plans and feel it exceeds their requirements. Mary Vasaly clarified that the error in the topographical maps was discovered about one month ago. She had some concern regarding lot 9, would the drainage be affected by the NURP pond down and behind the lot? Herbst said the lots have already been constructed and lot 9 is 8 feet above the Ordinary High Water Mark Setback. Drainage from driveways and front lawns will flow into the storm sewer system. There will be a minimum loss of trees. Sharon Roe Anderson expressed concern that the topographic maps are not being checked. • Mike Wilkus stated that some of the building pads are 25-30 feet above the High Water Mark Setback. 4 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 Bill Bonner, representing James R. Hill, Inc. - planner, engineers, surveyors responsible for the new topographicals, explained that this project attempts to meet the spirit of the law, even though the letter of the law in not intact. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Anderson moved to approve the Shoreland variances as requested, the hardship being the original topographic maps as provided were incorrect and there does not seem to be any other working alternative. Moeller seconded the motion, the motion carried unanimously 6-0. C. Regmest #93-47 by Dale and Ruth Bachman for 6761 Beach Road for approval to construct a part of a new home 89 feet from Bryant Lake's High Water Level. The Code contains a minimum setback of 100 feet. Dale Bachman presented background information to the Board. He was accompanied by Keith Waters, his designer and contractor. Mr. Bachman would like to construct a new home on an existing lot where an existing • home built in 1968 has been removed. This will require an 11 foot variance. The hardship is that the original topo was manipulated to a shed with a bridge. No wetlands would be disturbed. Jean Johnson gave the Staff report. The homes in this area were built in the 19601s, and there has been artificial tampering with the grading on this lot (and others in the area) . This lot abuts Bryant Lake, a Recreational Development Waters requiring a 100 foot setback by the Shoreland Code. The homes along this side of the lake have setbacks from the lake ranging from 70-100+ feet. There still remains a storage shed and a bridge on this lot, approximately 50 feet from the lakes High Water Level. During a lot survey, it was discovered that the lake's Ordinary High Water Level (852. 6) protrudes into the lot and creates a hardship for the setback. The majority of the proposed home meets the 100 foot setback, approximately 10% of the structure (a deck and a room) protrudes 11 feet into the setback. The proposed house location sets into the existing topography thus minimizing grading and tree loss. The proposed house location is 180 feet from the lake's edge, it is not uncharacteristic of other homes in the area, and is impacted by the Ordinary High Water Level protruding into the lot -the intent of the Shoreland Code appears to be met. The proposed house would sit in well with the neighborhood, if the house were moved closer to Beach Road the view would be altered and additional grading and tree removal would be required. Should the Board choose to approve the variance, Staff recommends the shed and bridge be removed during the home construction. The DNR doesn't object and there has been no opposition from the neighbors. Two neighbors called to support the variance, one neighbor called with concern over the position of the house but was appeased by the setback. 5 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 • Moeller questioned if there would be grading to move the drainage back to the shed area? Also wanted to know if they would be allowed to grade? Wilkus advised that the City would review this. MOTION: Moeller moved to grant the variance to construct a part of a new home 89 feet from Bryant Lakes High Water Level, contingent on removal of the existing shed and bridge. Weeks suggested an amendment that there exists a physical hardship with the site, and it is similar in location of the neighboring houses. Anderson seconded the amended motion, the motion carried 6-0. D. Request #93-48 by Glenn Bragg and Linda R. Wallenberg Bragg of 15481 West Sunrise Circle for approval to divide the property into two lots, one having 21.587 square feet. code minimum lot size is 22,000 square feet. Glenn Bragg presented background information to the Board. He would like to subdivide his property into two lots. He wishes to sell parcel A with the existing home and build a new home for himself on parcel B. • Parcel A will meet all R1-22 zoning requirements for lot size and structure setbacks, Parcel B will meet the R1-22 zoning requirements except for lot size. Jean Johnson presented the Staff report. Several similar two lot subdivisions have occurred in the area, therefore this request would not be out of character for the neighborhood. Sunrise Circle was upgraded to a bituminous surface several years ago. At this time City sewer and water were installed in anticipation of a lot subdivision for this one acre lot. There have been no calls from the public regarding this variance. Anderson asked if Mr. Bragg had talked with any of his neighbors. He had spoken with them, they saw no problems and he had their signatures to proceed with the subdivision of the property. Weeks inquired if there would be any injury to trees? Bragg wanted to keep this at a minimum, effecting Parcel A only he would need to cut down two apple trees. Moeller wanted to know if grading would be necessary. Bragg responded no, this is a natural walkout lot. Weeks asked if he had paid assessment charges? Yes, when Bragg applies for Parcel B the charges will be rolled into his mortgage and the price • of the lot. 6 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals November 9, 1993 MOTION: Anderson moved to approve the variance to divide the property into two lots. The hardship being variance of code is insignificant, unusual circumstances, similar variances have been granted in the past and the financial hardship of special assessments to the neighborhood. Anderson seconded the motion. The motion carried 6-0. VI. OLD BUSINESS Retaining wall construction on Promontory Drive was briefly discussed. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. There are three possible new variances for the December meeting: 1. Tower height for U.S. West. 2. Challenge Printing - a driveway setback. 3. Accessory garage setback. VIII.ADJOURNMENT • MOTION: Anderson moved and Wilkus seconded to adjourn at 8:55 p.m. Motion carried Unanimously 6-0. Respectfully Submitted, Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator • 7