Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 08/11/1994 i APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, AUGUST 11, 1994 7:30 P.M., CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 8080 MITCHELL ROAD EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344 BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: DELAVAN DYE, CORRINE LYNCH, ARTHUR WEEKS (Chairman), MARY VASALY, RONALD MOELLER, KATHY NELSON, CLIFF DUNHAM BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: MOELLER, WEEKS, LYNCH BOARD STAFF: ZONING ADMINISTRATOR JEAN JOHNSON RECORDING SECRETARY,SHARON STORHOLM I CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Acting Chairman Vasaly called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. Roll call was taken as noted above. II APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Nelson moved that the Board approve the Agenda as presented. Dunham seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. III MINUTES OF JULY 149 1994 MOTION: Dunham moved that the Board accept the Minutes of July 14, 1994 as submitted. Nelson seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. 1 r Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals • August 11, 1994 IV VARIANCES Vasaly explained the order of the Variance presentation process to those in attendance. A. Request #94-19 by Lee Garber of 15085 Ironwood Court for permission to construct a 9 foot garage addition to the existing garage. The proposed setback will be 1 foot from the side lot line (a 5 foot setback is required). Lee Garber of 15085 Ironwood Court came forward to present the Variance request. He said he had moved into his home 15 years ago and would like to add on to his garage. He is adding on now because his home was damaged by fire and needs reconstruction. This addition would extend 4' into the drainage and utility easement. The City representative has been out and reviewed the layout and said there should be no problem with the proposal. Extending the garage to the west is the best option - the east is not architecturally appealing and if it were placed in the back of the home it would need to be detached. Placing the addition on the west side is definitely the best option. He showed elevations of the site on the overhead projector. Garber pointed out the area under discussion (outlot), that lies between his home and a neighbors home. • Johnson said that this lot is located in the Edenvale PUD. Many of the homes have a 5' setback for garages in this area. This particular outlot has not been utilized by the Association. The request for increasing the size of this garage from a two stall to a three stall garage would place the garage partially in the utility easement. The City Engineering Dept. would be willing to vacate the outlot if the Board approves this request. There is an option: Build a detached garage in another part of the lot. This would still involve grading and tree removal. Johnson also noted that two letters have been received regarding this Variance request: one on August 8 from the Heckerts and a second on August 10 from the Andersons. If this request should be approved, staff suggests that it be on the conditions that no items be stored in the utility easement and that the approval be subject to the Engineering Department's vacating the utility easement. Dye asked if the tree would need to be removed. Garber said yes, but he would be willing to plant another tree (or trees) as the Board would stipulate. • 2 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals • August 11, 1994 Nelson asked about plantings on the side of the proposed garage. Garber said that if this is what the Board desires, he will install other plantings. There are lots of plantings at the present time on the outlot. Nelson said she has serious misgivings about the placing the garage in such a position that Garber will not be able to walk around it and still be on his own property. She asked what the hardship was. Garber replied that he would be able to walk around the garage as the land it will be placed on is pubic property. Anyone can walk around his garage. Johnson said that the possible vacating of the lot would be for the 5' utility easement only. Garber said that the hardship in his opinion is one that he has put upon himself. he has four children and they have a lot of items that need to be stored. Dye asked who maintains the outlot. . Garber answered that each property owner maintains half. Dunham questioned whether or not there was a hardship in this instance. He felt that storage could be gained by a smaller addition that would be placed within the proper area. Garber said that the size he would get if he added on as Dunham suggested (an additional 5') would not be sufficient. There are many things from the house and attic he would like to store in the new addition also. Dunham said the issue of the abandoned outlot is a 11 if" issue. If it should actually whaty be abandoned, it would give Garber the opportunity to add on. If someone else should purchase the property, it presents a problem. Dunham questioned whether or not there was a hardship in this situation and could not understand why Garber would trade the tree for 4' of storage. Garber said he will try to move the tree. If it should die, he will plant two trees half the size. Vasaly asked if the City has had experience with this type of situation in the past. If the Association is no longer active, who sells the land? • 3 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals • August 11, 1994 Johnson said that all the landowners have part ownership in the lot. There was another instance similar to this one, but they could not get the Association reactivated. More than likely, nothing would happen. Vasaly noted that the Heckerts had concerns regarding drainage. Garber said the roof line would pitch toward the street, not in the direction of the Heckerts home. Vasaly asked about gutters. Garber said the only place they would be necessary would be at the front of the addition. Vasaly opened the hearing the public. Tom Heckert, a neighbor on the west side, came forward and stated that he was unaware of the direction of the slope on the roof line on the proposed addition when he wrote the letter to the City. He had asked Garber if he would sign the letter and he had refused. He • felt that Garber would be pushing people towards his part of the commons. He has taken care of the commons for 16 years and is opposed to the proposal unless Garber agrees to sign the letter. Garber responded that if Heckert would show him what he proposes to build, that would be no problem. Vasaly closed the public hearing. Nelson said she had problems with placing a permanent building so close to the property line. She sympathizes, but a 6' addition would alleviate the problem. Vasaly said that part of the problem is that there is an illusionary property line. It is not known for sure what will happen in the future to this outlot. Dye said he knew of a similar situation where the property should have been given to the Condominium Association and it was not. Each property owner has a legal interest in the lot if the non-active Association owns it. If it is deeded to individuals, it will extend the property lines. Dye asked if the association had any comment. Johnson said that notice of this meeting was sent out to all those within 500' and also to • 4 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals • August 11, 1994 Edenvale Corporation. Dye said the Corporation can deed the lot to whomever they choose. Dye said that outlots are intended for the use of the developer - they could have an access road if they want that. He asked if the Homeowners Association or Edenvale Corporation is the present owner of the land. Johnson said the taxpayer and the fee title owner may not be the same. Vasaly said she was in favor of the request at this point because the property is an outlot. She felt the spirit of the setback ordinance would be maintained. She supported the conditions requested by Staff. Nelson said she had problems with a building that close to the property line. There is an ownership question which makes a decision more difficult. Vasaly said the proponent does not necessarily need the width he is requesting for the addition. Nelson said the entire house may be too small for the family. Garber said he has added much space to the home over the year. MOTION: Dunham moved that the Board deny Variance Request 94-19. Nelson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. V. OLD BUSINESS A. VARIANCES APPEALED TO COUNCIL Johnson noted that two recent Variance Requests have been appealed the City Council: A garage addition request on Holly Road nd the Tannen driveway request. The Tannen request may come back to the Board with an amended design. B. NECK LOTS Johnson said that there is a new issue regarding a driveway and two neck lots that is 5 Minutes Board of Adjustments & Appeals • August 11, 1994 not working out. In the future the Staff and Board may wish to be more specific in their actions. C. RESURRECTION LIFE ADVERTISEMENT Dunham asked if the wall sign on Resurrection Life Church has been removed. Johnson said a letter had been written to the church reminding them that they are beyond the 60 day period allowed for the sign. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. VARIANCES FOR SEPTEMBER Johnson noted that there are five Variances scheduled for the September meeting. Some of the issues are: lot width, fence height, porch and house addition, and a shoreland variance request. • VII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Dye moved that the Board adjourn. Nelson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 8:15 P. M. 6