HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 03/15/1995 APPROVED MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1995 7:30 P.M. CITY CENTER
8080 MITCHELL ROAD
EDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344
BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: ARTHUR WEEKS (CHAIR), CLIFF
DUNHAM, DELAVAN DYE,
MATTHEW HANSEN, CORRINE
LYNCH, KATHY NELSON, MARY
VASALY
STAFF PRESENT: JEAN JOHNSON, ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR; SCOTT KIPP,
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR; ELINDA
BAHLEY, RECORDING SECRETARY
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: MARY VASALY
CALL TO ORDER - ROLL CALL - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chairman Weeks called the meeting to order at 7:35 P.M. Vasaly was absent.
There was no pledge of allegiance because there was no flag present.
I. OATH OF OFFICE FOR: MATTHEW HANSEN
Chairman Weeks administered the oath of office to Mathew Hansen and
welcomed him to the Commission.
H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION:
Dye moved that the Board approve the Agenda as amended: add under New
Business D, set a schedule for election of officers. Dunham seconded the
motion and it passed unanimously.
III. MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 1995 MEETING
MOTION:
Dunham move that the Board accept the Minutes of January 12, 1995 as
• 1
amended: page 9, second paragraph from the bottom should read... Weeks
• asked if they have any projected timetable to implement Phase 3 which is the
proposed expansion to the north; page 13, third paragraph down, change flick
candle to foot candle; page 16, sixth paragraph down, revise the paragraph to
read... Weeks suggested getting input from the Planning Commission and Arts
Commission and the HPC on this request. Weeks initiated discussion about a
continuation on this item. No motion or approval was made by the Board on a
continuation. Dye seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
IV. VARIANCES
Weeks explained the order of the Variance presentation process to those in
attendance.
A. Request #95-08 by Birdies's Sports Park for the 8600 Block of
Columbine Road to permit develMment of a miniature golf course and
batting cage facility in the Commercial Zoning District with variances
from the permanent outdoor display regulations of the City Code. City
Code requires all items offered for sale, rental or lease and displayed
outside not exceed 6% of the building's base area ratio and to be screened
with a wall of the building.
Ty Ritter, reviewed his variance request with the Board. He noted that they
• are developing a family entertainment center outdoors with an 18 hole golf
course and a batting cage. It is situated just south of Highway 169 and
Fountain Place Road. Their building is only 660 square feet. City Code
requires all items offered for sale, rental or lease and displayed outside not to
exceed 6% of the buildings's base ratio and to be screened with a wall of the
building. Therefore, the hardship for the request for the permit would be that
they are offering batting cages and miniature golf outside. There are 48
parking spaces, and extensive landscaping with waterfalls. It is a very upscale
golf course.
Johnson referred the Board to the Staff Report. She noted that if the Board
approves the variance request, there are several conditions recommended on
page 2 of the Staff Report. The Board was referred to a letter from the
manager of the apartment building near this site, and the issues raised have to
do with the traffic, the lights and potential noise problems. All of those issues
were addressed at the Planning Commission, and they did not feel traffic
would be significant. In fact, it will be quite a bit less. There have been no
other comments other than this one letter. The Planning Commission and
Council have given approval to the request.
Dye asked if the adjacent property to the north of this site is commercial or
2
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
residential. Ritter replied that north towards the post office is zoned office,
and to the south it's zoned commercial.
Lynch asked if the conditions listed in the Staff Report would them from
developing this site. Ritter replied that most of those conditions were at his
suggestion. He noted that the mosquitoes get too bad to stay out past 10:00.
The music will just be background music to provide atmosphere.
Lynch expressed concern about the lights not shining on the apartment
complex. Ritter commented that the lights they have on the actual miniature
golf course and the parking lot are cutoff lights and they shine directly down.
They do not flood a whole area. The light illumination level is fairly minimal.
Right underneath the light is 30 foot-candle, and around the perimeter it'd
down to 10 foot-candle at the corner. He noted that they put deciduous trees
around the batting cages to shield the lights that are on the actual cages.
Lynch asked what their season is. Ritter replied that their typical business
season is from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but would be open weekends on
• nice days through October.
Lynch expressed concern about what the hardship is. Ritter commented that
without this permit they can't do business because their whole area is
outdoors. Therefore, it is unique in that situation. They have to have the
permit to do it or else they have severe hardship and can't open up. They
have looked at other properties but they were either too big or too small.
There is not a lot of commercial land left in Eden Prairie that fits what Staff
thought would be appropriate for their use.
Lynch inquired about the landscaping. Ritter explained the landscaping design
and where the trees will be located.
Dunham asked if there is any acceptable zoning for this type of amusement
facility without going through the variance process. Johnson replied that there
is no acceptable zoning in the City's commercial district, but the commercial
district has to cap on 6% for outdoor. Staff considers the miniature golf as the
lease type of operation because you rent time and equipment. It would not fit
under sale and rental.
Dunham asked how the music will be set up without loud speakers and
• 3
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
amplifiers. Ritter explained that they would like to put a small stereo speaker
on the light poles throughout the project. There would probably be three or
four speakers. His understanding is that there was a decimal rating that they
couldn't turn it up above a certain point to bother anyone.
Johnson noted that the City has adopted within the last six months L-10 and L-
50 with the noise standard. There is a certain limit right at the property line
that a business can generate.
Lynch suggested the recommendation to read that all loud speakers and
amplifiers must meet City noise standard.
Dunham asked if the sign indicated meets the Sign Ordinance. Johnson replied
that the maximum is 20 feet and their sign is 8 by 10.
Nelson asked if there would be any food sales. Ritter responded there will
only be candy and pop, and the candy bars are all prepackaged. There will be
receptacles for garbage.
Nelson and Hansen expressed concern that item #4 may not need to be a
condition since they are having music and must meet the noise standard.
Johnson commented that she agrees for it to be removed, that the code
regulations will have to be met, and item #3 will cover the paging system.
Weeks asked how they determine parking for this type of facility. Johnson
noted that Staff has contacted other communities that have similar sized
facilities and checked what they did. This site has about 10 or 15 more
parking spaces than some of the other facilities.
Weeks expressed concern about there not being a crosswalk marking in the
road for the children to cross to get to this facility.
Nelson expressed concern about the type of lighting that continues through the
night. Ritter replied that they have not determined if they are going to keep
their parking lot lights on all night. He doubts that they will. They just have
coach lights that they have on the front of the building that will be kept on all
night.
Dunham asked if there is any fencing. Ritter replied that there's a split rail
4
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
fence around the entire golf area, and there's a privacy fence around the
batting cages.
Weeks opened the public hearing.
Weeks closed the public hearing.
MOTION:
Dye moved that the Board approve variance request #95-08 subject to the
conditions in the variance review of the Planning Commission Staff Report,
and conditions
1-7 as so stated and revised by the Board: condition #4, loud speakers and
amplifier speakers must meet the City standard noise impact system as stated
by Staff, citing the condition as amended. The hardship being that the Board
does not see the necessity of an outdoor screening area for this facility. In
addition, that an outdoor display area is part of the business and is not a
building. Therefore, the 6% requirement is not applicable to this particular
• condition. Dunham seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
B. Request #95-09 by Christ Lutheran Church for 16900 Main Street to
permit exterior building material of 34.2% wood, metal, stucco, vinyl, or
plastic City Code does not permit more than 25% of the above listed
exterior building materials.
Wayne , architect, reviewed his variance request with the Board. He
noted that this request is to permit more than 25% of the exterior building
material to be wood. He wishes to construct only half of the proposed
building addition as a result of high costs to construct the new building. The
request is to permit wood on the east end of the new addition where brick was
proposed. Therefore, the brick would not have to be removed when the rest
of the building is completed in the future. Many of the homes adjacent to
their site are cedar type or wood type base construction, and this side of the
building would fit in very well. They are looking at brick as a permanent
facing in the future.
• 5
Minutes
. Board of Adjustments & Appeals '
March 15, 1995
Johnson commented that City Code does require that 75% of the building be
brick or glass, and 25% can be a trim material such as wood, stucco, metal or
vinyl. This request is for approximately 34% from the trim materials. Staff
has not received letters or calls from the neighborhood about this site. This
will be a temporary situation. The Board, in their approval, can have the
condition that at such time that the new addition is built beyond this one it
meets Code. Other churches have gotten variances in the past and this church
does have a location in a residential setting. It does seem to fit in well. Other
concerns that the Staff may have had on parking and other issues have already
been resolved with the expanded plan.
Dunham asked to see the site plan showing the expanded plans.
Dunham expressed concern about calling this temporary because five to ten
years is a long time.
Hansen asked if they were to put brick in the areas where they are proposing a
temporary surface, could it be salvaged in the future. Wayne replied no
• because all the walls they are proposing temporary are walls that will be
coming off in the future. All the walls they know are going to stay are brick.
Nelson expressed concern about the temporary materials being of adequate
quality to withstand 10 years. Wayne replied that it's wood siding and it will
be stained. He referred to the Church's east wall which is made of the same
materials. It has been up for 14 years and there is no peeling and it still looks
gam•
Weeks made reference to the letter written by Pastor Lenz about bids for the
project submitted being much higher than anticipated. He asked if the bids
were too high, or was the fundraiser to short. Wayne replied that it was a
little bit of both. The fundraiser was short of the promised money they
needed, and the bids came in high.
Weeks expressed concern that if the Board approves this how will it be
enforced 10 years from now when they complete the second phase. Johnson
replied that they would only be coming back if they weren't going to meet the
code for exterior materials with the future addition. If Staff sees a plan come
in with final additions and it's not meeting the City's material standard, it will
• 6
Minutes
Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
have to go through the variance process. All of the variances are out on a
database system.
Weeks opened the public hearing.
Weeks closed the public hearing.
MOTION:
Lynch moved that the Board approve variance request #95-09, and the
hardship being that this is a temporary condition and it would be an
economically undue hardship to require them to meet the standard. Dye
seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
C. Request #95-10 by L.A. Donnay for Prairie Court Shopping Center at
16352,16398 Wagner Way to permit construction of one 112 square foot
pylon sign to replace the existing ,_ vl� on sign. City Code allows one 80
square foot pylon and one 36 foot pylon on a double fronted commercial
lot.
Don Lynch, representing Mr. L.A. Donnay, owner of Prairie Court Center,
reviewed his variance request with the Board. He noted that he is asking for
approval to modify the existing pylon sign. They are allowed two pylon signs
because of the two street frontages. These signs have to be 300 feet apart.
The hardship is that 300 feet to the north puts it off the property line, and 300
feet going along Wagner to the east would put it way behind the apartment
building. It would not be visible. Because of the way the site sits and the
building is located, customers can't find the building because they can't see the
name on the building. They would like to just modify the existing sign which
was put up about a year ago, and add some tenants' name strips at the bottom.
Johnson noted that the variance request would be to add additional tenants'
names on the lower area of the existing sign. She made reference to other
shopping areas on County Road 4 and Highway 5, noting that some of those
businesses have two signs on their property. They were put in place and
approved prior to the 300 foot limitation. City Code permits one sign of 80
square feet and a second sign of 36 square feet. The proponent wishes to
forgo the second one and make the existing one larger than 80 square feet.
Staff sent notices out to the neighborhood and have received no comments
Minutes
Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
from the people surrounding the site.
Dye commented that he does not see this to be necessary because there is
vacant space there now.
Don Lynch noted that this is a one sided sign. There is nothing on the other
side.
Dunham suggested making the Minnesota Steakhouse sign a little smaller so
the additional names can fit. Don Lynch replied that they are the largest
tenant in the building and they do a lot of advertising, and that was their trade-
off with the Minnesota Steakhouse. It would be difficult now to ask them to
give up something that they already have gotten.
Dunham commented that the smaller tenants' signs are worthless because you
can't read them until you're right on top of them. To approve this would just
create more clutter. Nelson agreed with Dunham.
• Nelson asked if the new sign space would be used at all to advertise space
available. Don Lynch replied that they have not given that much thought. At
this point it's for tenants' needs. They are going to be full here pretty soon
and he has long term leases.
Dye commented that a bigger sign will provide the citizens of Eden Prairie a
better locator for what shops they have there to see, and the hardship would be
that they are going to conceivably help Eden Prairie out.
Weeks noted that he agrees that a bigger sign is better, but he also agrees with
Mr. Dunham that people don't look for words, they look for colors that direct
them into a shopping center.
Dye noted that the hardship here is to put up another sign would not benefit
them in any way.
Weeks asked who is paying for the sign. Don Lynch replied that they are and
there might be a rental charge in the future.
Weeks asked how high the existing sign is. Don Lynch replied 20 feet.
• 8
Minutes
Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
Dunham suggested a computer type sign because it's an eye catcher, and each
tenant can get to use it for a week or two weeks. Don Lynch replied that it's
very expensive advertising.
Weeks asked if he took a poll of what the tenants wanted. Don Lynch replied
that the tenants want to get on the pylon sign because people can't see their
building.
Hansen asked when this sign was built. Don Lynch replied August or
September of 1993 when the Minnesota Steakhouse opened.
Dunham asked if at some point in time could all these tenants' signs be
replaced with a changeable electronic board. Johnson replied that the City
Code does not allow the change and copy of an electronic board unless it's
time, temperature or a public message. It can not be used for advertising.
Weeks opened the public hearing.
Weeks closed the public hearing.
Nelson commented that the Board has turned down a lot of sign variances and
there is a fair degree of importance to stay consistent. She expressed concern
about setting a precedent. The hardship here would be that the property slopes
down into a hole which is the only possible reason to grant this variance.
MOTION:
Dye moved that the Board approve variance request #95-10 for the property
owner to list his additional tenants for 29.7 square feet, the hardship being that
an additional sign would not be of any benefit. Dunham seconded the motion
and it passed with one opposition by Nelson.
D. Request #95-11 by Centex Real Estate Corporation for approval to
construct a single family home with a 25 foot front yard setback
and a 5 foot minimum side yard setback to the east side lot line.
City Code requires a minimum of a 30 foot front and 10 foot side
yard setback.
9
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
Dan Blake, representing Centex Homes, reviewed his variance request with the
Board. He noted that they are asking for a reduction in the front yard and the
side yard setback, each by five feet on one lot. It was their understanding
when they originally planned this that the wetland line was further north than it
actually was found to be. They have enough room between the lines to build
the house. They have a problem with a very steep rear yard. They have since
replatted three lots. There are no houses on the street, but they have since
replatted the westerly three lots to try to slide the house over as much as they
could, which would help the backyard setback. They're asking for five more
feet to the side and five more to the front which will help to eliminate the
steep rear yard situation. Their concern is the long term impact as to how
someone would use that yard.
Kipp noted that Mr. Blake has already done some replatting on the property
and briefly explained the changes. It is Staff's understanding that if anything
were done with the plans of the backyard grade, you would have steeper
slopes that would exceed the City's limits of 3:1. As a condition of any
variance granted, proponent agrees to provide at least 20 feet between
. neighboring house to maintain visual continuity. There would not be
continuity in the front but there is not a lot adjacent to it. He also noted that
there are two letters that were submitted by residents having some concerns
about this.
Dye asked if this meets the wetland condition today for the building to be 100
feet from the existing wetland. Kipp replied that the requirement of 100 feet
has to do with the Shore Land Ordinance, and that's off Mitchell Lake.
Dunham asked if this particular lot is sold. Blake replied that it isn't.
Dunham asked if they know what the sight lines on the adjacent lot will be.
Blake replied that they don't know specifically. They haven't even opened this
street up for sale. They are willing to take on as a condition that the lot
adjacent be at least 15 feet.
Nelson asked where the neighbors live that wrote the letters. Blake replied
that they both are on the cul-de-sac.
Nelson questioned how large a square foot house would this be. Blake
responded that if they get the variance, the house they are proposing to build
10
• Minutes
Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
would be 2900 to 3000 square feet. If they don't get the variance, he doesn't
know. They don't have another house in this product line that's shallow
enough. They might have to design something custom to get a shallow house.
His guess is that it would probably be smaller.
Nelson made reference to a neighbor's letter who was concerned that the
homes would be getting smaller. She asked if these homes are significantly
smaller than the house next door. Blake replied that the homes on the lake
lots on the cul-de-sac are very high priced homes, about $500,000 to
$600,000. The homes they are proposing to build are $275,000 to $375,000.
Nelson asked if there was any discussion of combining lots #1 and #2 to build
a larger size house with a very expensive lot. Blake noted that they have not
discussed that. He said that lot #1 is already very wide, it's just not very
deep. It's 130 feet wide as compared to 95 and 100 on the rest of them.
Dye asked if they are going to regrade it for the backyard. Blake replied
slight regrading, not very much.
• Weeks asked to see a plan drawing to help answer his questions. He
expressed concern about the property yard setback. He would like to see how
big a house it would be without the variance given the hardships they have to
deal with.
Blake noted that there is no house yet. He doesn't know what somebody
might buy or want. Weeks commented that they want to see plans because
they want to make sure that they can build a house on this lot.
Dye expressed concern about the developer having knowledge of these issues
ahead of time and telling people they can plat it any way they want to, or just
ask for a variance later because they want to build a different size lot. He said
they should just put in the correct house that fits the setback if it's not platted
correctly. Blake noted that this is the first time Centex has ever asked for a
variance.
Lynch commented that she would like the Board to see a commitment on
what's being done there.
Hansen noted that this would be a perfect candidate for a setback variance just
• 11
• Minutes
Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
because there's only going to be a house on one side. He doesn't think a
normal person would notice 15 feet. He has no problem approving this, but
it's typical to look at house plans at the same time you're approving a setback
variance.
Blake commented that he would be willing to commit to the house plans,
before the Board, that they will build.
Dye asked what the width and depth are on the house. Blake replied that the
width is 70 feet and the depth is 32 feet.
Weeks opened the public hearing.
Weeks closed the public hearing.
MOTION:
Dunham moved that the Board deny this variance request based on lack of
. concise information and fitting in with the surroundings. Dye seconded the
motion.
Nelson expressed concern about a future variance because of the wetland, and
a deck encroaching over the wetland. Kipp replied that the City does not
allow structures in easements and there are no variances for that.
Weeks noted that he needs to know the square feet of the house. He wants to
know how big the house is going to be for a 30 foot setback and how they are
going to accommodate the usability of the back, etc.
Nelson commented that she needs to know what a reasonable one would look
like that they can actually build.
Dunham asked how soon do they expect this area to be actually developed.
Blake replied that they hope some time in the Spring. He expects the houses
will be built within a year.
• 12
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
Dunham rescinded his motion.
MOTION:
Nelson moved to amend variance request #95-11 to allow a 5 yard setback
with the revision that the next lot, lot #2, have a 15 foot yard setback on that
side, and if this lot is built prior to the other lot, that becomes a condition of
building on that lot. There will be no front yard setback allowed on this lot,
no variance on the front yard setback. Lynch seconded the motion and it
passed with one opposition by Dye.
V. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
VI. OLD BUSINESS
Tandem Properties requested City Council to review the Board's denial
decision of Variance Request #95-06.
The City Council has scheduled a review at the Tuesday, March 21, 1995 City
Council meeting.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Common Good/Common Ground Pamphlet.
Johnson noted that this is a conglomeration of churches that are getting
together at meetings to discuss housing and community issues.
Weeks asked if a representative from this Board should attend. Nelson
noted that she has signed up already and will attend.
B. Thank you memo from Pastor Rod Anderson of Saint Andrew Lutheran
Church.
C. The Zoning Brief.
Weeks commented that the Zoning Brief is a great idea.
13
i
Minutes
• Board of Adjustments & Appeals
March 15, 1995
D. Schedule for Election of Officers
The Board agreed to schedule the election of officers at a subsequent
meeting.
E. April Board of Appeals Meeting
Johnson noted that there are no items for the next meeting and it is
passed the deadline. If Staff gets requests for special meetings, she
will contact the members to have a special meeting.
VHI. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
Dunham moved that the Board adjourn. Lynch seconded the motion and it
passed unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.
14
STATE OF MIMVESOTA )
County of Hennepin ) SS
C. of Eden Prairie )
I, Matthew Hansen do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution
Of the United States and of the State of Minnesota, and faithfully discharge the duties of the office of
Board of Adjustments. & Appeals of the City of Eden Prairie in the County of Hennepin and State
of Minnesota, to the best of my judgment and ability. So help me God.
Matthew Hansen
Subscribed and sworn to before me on the 9th day of March , 1995.
Witn
r�
Witness
•