Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 09/12/1996 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1996 7:30 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS: Chair Kathy Nelson, Matthew Hansen, Delavan Dye, Tim Nelson, Cliff Dunham and Louis Giglio STAFF MEMBERS: Senior Planner Scott Kipp and City Recorder Barbara Anderson CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Board members Dye and Tim Nelson were absent. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Hansen moved, seconded by Dunham, to approve the Agenda as published. • Motion carried 5-0. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 1996 MEETING MOTION: Giglio moved, seconded by Hansen, to approve the Minutes of the August 8, 1996 meeting of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion carried 5-0. III. VARIANCES A. Request #96-14 by John Richmond for Lil' Red Store at 7447 Eden Prairie Road ford) Lot size of 1.01 acres in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District(Code requires 2 acres) and.(2) Front yard structure setback of 17 feet in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District(Code requires 35 feet) John Richmond, 2800 West 44th Street requested the variances because the right-of- way dedication creates the need for the variance by reducing the square footage on the property. Kipp reviewed the staff report and stated the variances are supported by staff because of the necessity of the right-of-way dedication. Staff is asking for an additional 10 feet of right-of-way to accommodate the planned intersection improvements. Staff recommended approval of the variances. Dunham commented that the survey showed the building is close to the eastern property line and Kipp responded that setback does meet Code requirements. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 2 Richmond stated that the building was built in 1982. Hansen inquired if the proponent had considered adding the pumps without the canopy and Richmond responded they believed the canopy was necessary in the present day as most gas stations have them and people will not frequent a station without one as much as one that provides shelter from precipitation. Kipp noted that the PDQ station on Valley View Road and Mitchell Road was granted a variance for a similar canopy. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. The Public Hearing was closed. Giglio stated he supported the variance request given the hardship of the right-of-way dedication. MOTION:Lynch moved, seconded by Giglio,to approve Request#96-14 by John Richmond for Lil'Red Store at 7447 Eden Prairie Road for(1)Lot size of 1.01 acres in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District (Code requires 2 acres) and, (2) Front yard structure setback of 17 feet in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District (Code requires 35 feet). Motion carried 5-0. B. Request #96-15 by Jasper Development Corporation of Waconia for St. Andrew's Bluff at Baker Road and St Andrew Drive for lot size ranging between 2.871 sq ft. and 3,226 sg ft. for 10 multi-fag&townhouses in the RM- 6 5 Zoning District(Code requires lots to be at least 6.500 sq, ft.). Jim Jasper,President of Jasper Development Corporation,reviewed the proposal and stated they are requesting the variance because of the type of development and the topography on the site does not allow them to utilize the entire site area. Lynch inquired if the proponents had considered building fewer units and Jasper responded they still would not meet the 6,500 sq. ft. requirement,noting the density is quite low for a project of this type. Nelson inquired if this would affect the drainage into the wetland and Jasper responded that the site run-off will drain into a treatment pond prior to flowing into the wetland. Kipp reviewed the staff report and noted that the Planning Commission and City Council had reviewed the proposal and recommended approval subject to approval • of the variances by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Staff recommended approval of the variances as requested. Nelson inquired about the height of the retaining walls and Kipp responded that they would be tiered with three walls approximately 3-4 feet in height. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 3 Hansen commented the density appeared to be high as there were ten units in a small space. Kipp stated this is a type of development called clustering which gives the impression of a higher density because the units are located on a small portion of the entire site. When the entire site area is included in the calculations,the density figure is relatively low. Dunham inquired if the project had been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and Police Department for emergency vehicle access and Kipp responded it had been reviewed and approved by both agencies. Giglio discussed the driveway and if it would be adequate to accommodate the residents vehicles and those of their guests. Kipp stated that it will be adequate because each unit has a two car garage. Jasper stated that no exterior storage of vehicles will be allowed under the restrictive covenants which will run with the property in perpetuity. Nelson inquired about the conservation easement and Kipp responded that it will be located just outside the wetland boundary. Nelson inquired if it would be appropriate to insist that the rest of the area remain undeveloped and in its natural state. Jasper stated that the whole concept of the town house type of development precludes this area from being sold off or developed in the future. It is designed with this space providing both privacy from adjacent development and open area for the homeowners in the development, and it would be self-defeating to sell it • or develop it. The topography would preclude any reasonable development of the outlot, and the variance also precludes any subdivision because the entire site area is included in the density calculations. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. The Public Hearing was closed. Lynch stated she supported granting the variance for the project as proposed and Giglio, Hansen and Dunham concurred. MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Dunham, to approve Variance Request#96- 15 by Jasper Development Corporation of Waconia for St. Andrew's Bluff at Baker Road and St. Andrew Drive for lot size ranging between 2,871 sq. ft. and 3,226 sq. ft. for 10 multi-family townhouses in the RM-6.5 Zoning District(Code requires lots to be at least 6,500 sq. ft.) with the hardship being the topography on the site and subject to the conditions in the staff report. Motion carried 5-0. is BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 4 C. Request#96-16 by Randel and Rhonda Saunders for 10380 Buckingham Drive for front yard structure setback of 15.8 feet for a garage addition in the R1-13.5 Zoning District(Code requires 30 feet). Bill Strong,Architect,representing Randel and Rhonda Saunders, stated the hardship for the property is a triple frontage which they did not realize existed when they purchased the lot. The neighbors are supportive of the variance and believe the addition would be an improvement to the property. Giglio asked about the ordinance requirements and Kipp responded the R1-13.5 District allows a 10 foot side yard setback on one side adding that the lot has three frontages, each requiring a 30 foot setback. Hansen inquired if there was a garage now and Strong responded it was very small and would barely accommodate two cars, and a third stall was needed for storage and a work area. Mr. Saunders owns a remodeling business and while he does not work at home, he needs the space for storage of his tools and equipment that he uses in his work. They are currently parking their vehicles in the driveway because the garage is not large enough to permit storage of the tools and equipment and the cars at the same time. They have made many improvements to the property,including a fence, new siding, etc. and do not wish to move away. Hansen requested clarification on what the third garage stall would be used for and Strong responded it would be used for storage of tools and equipment which would allow the owners to park both their vehicles inside the existing two car garage area. Hansen commented he believed the plan did not make sense as the other houses along Birmingham Drive were set back a long way. Discussion ensued regarding the neighborhood and other existing homes. Easements along Buckingham Drive were discussed and the location of the sidewalk in relation to the proposed garage addition. Strong stated the sidewalk is located a fair distance from the garage addition. Kipp reviewed the staff report stating the City Code permits home occupation, but there could be no external evidence of the business. The sidewalk is located 1 foot from the property line. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. The Public Hearing was closed. • Dunham stated he did not support the addition because it was basically used for a business storage purpose. Strong stated that the owners are not operating a business from the home but it is a small remodeling business which requires the owner to store tools and equipment on his property, since renting space would not be cost effective. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 5 Giglio stated he believed that the addition should be reduced in size thereby reducing the amount of the variance. He did not support the variance as requested. Hansen asked if the proponent could build a storage shed on the rear portion of the property. Strong stated that the proponents have a child who has a large play area in the rear yard and two dogs, and the entire area is fenced. It would not be desirable to have to hook up a trailer and maneuver around through a gate to reach a storage shed, unload the trailer, and then reverse the process when leaving for work the next day. It would detract from the aesthetic value of the house and the neighborhood if they are required to provide storage in this fashion. Kipp responded that a shed is permitted under the Code. However, he stated the ordinance forbids storage of equipment used for a home occupation, or use of an accessory structure in a home occupation,thereby precluding a storage shed as a solution. Lynch commented that if the addition were reduced in size she could support it as it will enhance the property. Also, she believed three frontages were a hardship and made it difficult to construct the garage addition. Nelson stated she believed the garage should be reduced to 10 feet or 12 feet and the style match the proportions of the house. The lot was unusual and perhaps the addition would enhance the property if it were stepped back. MOTION: Dunham moved, seconded by Lynch, to approve amended Variance Request#96-16 by Randel and Rhonda Saunders for 10380 Buckingham Drive for front yard structure setback of 18.8 feet for a I I'X 22'garage addition in the R 1-13.5 Zoning District. In addition,the garage addition must be setback 2 feet from the front face of the existing garage (Code requires 30 feet). Motion carried 4-1. Hansen voted"no". D. Req.uest #96-17 by Randall R. Noecker for Mitchell Bay Twin Homes. 168th block of Terry Pine Drive for (1) Shoreland lot size ranging from 11.340 sq. ft. to 22,450 sq, ft for Lots 1 through 4(Code requires 30,000 sq ft, in the RM-6.5 District,(2) Shoreland lot width at the building line ranging from 42 feet to 100 feet for Lots 1 through 4 (Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District), (3) Shoreland lot width at the Ordinary High Water Level ranging from 39 feet to 98 feet for Lots 1 through 4 Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District). (4) Shoreland structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level of 130 feet for Lots 3 and 4 (Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District), (5) Front yard structure setback of 27 feet for Lot 3 and 24 feet for Lot 4 (Code requires 30 feet in the RM-6 5 District), and(6) Side yard structure setback of 6.5 feet for Lot 2 and 6.6 feet for Lot 3 (Code requires a minimum of 10 feet in the RM-6.5 District). Randy Noecker reviewed the plans for the twin homes and the variances requested. The lots are substandard in size and existed prior to the shoreland ordinance being adopted. The Planning Commission had suggested reduction of one building and relocating one building to give a more pleasing appearance and allow for a better BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 6 alignment of the buildings on the side. They reduced the deck area on units 2 and 3 which will accomplish this. Nelson asked if the decks would be included in the plans and Noecker responded affirmatively unless they want to build a larger deck. Kipp reviewed the staff report and explained the property contains two different zoning districts and staff believed it would be beneficial to recommend approval of the variances as requested to allow for a more even development of the property. The Planning Commission recommended a conservation easement be placed over the lakeshore impact zone. Nelson asked about the units being moved closer to the lake than 130 feet and Kipp responded that only units 3 and 4 would be in this area. Units 1 and 2 meet ordinance requirements. Hansen inquired why the proposed development had three car garages when all the other town house units in this area have two car garages. Noecker responded that this will be an upper level development and the area will be developed in a manner reflecting this. This land cost more than the land used for the existing town home development and they want to develop it in a way which will enable them • to recover some of the expense. Hansen inquired what the guiding was on the property to the west and Kipp responded that it was guided for single family residential but it was unlikely that it would be developed with anything other than town houses because of the cost of the land in this area. Noecker commented he believed this development would fit in with the development of the rest of the area to the west as projected by landowners who have been in discussions with the City. Hansen inquired if the proponent had considered using a smaller floor plan which would reduce the size of the building and lessen the degree of the variances requested. Discussion ensued regarding possible alternatives and configurations which could be used on the lot. Dunham asked what would happen if the deck on Unit#4 were reduced to 10 feet and Noecker responded that even if#3 were reduced and the building turned, unit #4 would still require 12' and it would not change the amount of the variance needed. Dunham suggested that the size of the floor area of units 3 and 4 be reduced to allow them to be setback to eliminate the front yard variances. Noecker stated he understood that there would be problems with the roof line if this were done. It had been suggested by a Planning Commission member that the building be straightened out and this seemed to be the best plan scenario for the community and the area. Lynch stated she was bothered by the 40' side yard setback. She asked if they could . encroach into the drainage and utility easement area and Noecker responded that the State Highway Department would not allow that. The Public Hearing was opened. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 7 No one present wished to speak. The Public Hearing was closed. Lynch commented that the project appeared to make good use of the land and conformed to the rest of the development in the area. She was uncertain about what the hardship was for the easements and the setbacks from the lake. She inquired if there.were any alternatives or if this was the best way to develop the property. She noted that the front yard encroachment bothered her. Giglio asked about the conservation easement and Kipp responded that none was required at the time but it was suggested at the Planning Commission meeting. Giglio stated he believed a conservation easement should be required to avoid future requests from homeowners for larger decks. Dunham stated he believed units 3 and 4 should be reduced in size to lessen the impact. Hansen concurred with Dunham and stated he would have liked to see something more creative and that would fit within the area. Dunham inquired if the variances were denied would the proponent redesign the • project and Noecker responded that if they deleted the front yard would the Board consider adding that area to the back of the property. They have tried to squeeze the buildings down and reduced the area to make it fit as much as possible. Giglio stated he did not want to see the buildings moved any closer to the lake. Noecker stated they have already reduced the building from what was originally proposed by 5 feet. There was a problem in building lakeshore home property and getting the money out of the property required a certain amount of square footage. MOTION: Dunham moved to approve the variances requested except for the front yard setback for units 3 and 4. Motion failed for lack of a second. MOTION: Giglio moved, seconded by Lynch,to approve Variance Request#96-17 by Randall R. Noecker for Mitchell Bay Twin Homes, 168th block of Terry Pine Drive for(1) Shoreland lot size ranging from 11,340 sq. ft. to 22,450 sq. ft. for Lots l through 4 (Code requires 30,000 sq. ft. in the RM-6.5 District), (2) Shoreland lot width at the building line ranging from 42 feet to 100 feet for Lots 1 through 4 (Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District), (3) Shoreland lot width at the Ordinary High Water Level ranging from 39 feet to 98 feet for Lots 1 through 4 (Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District), (4) Shoreland structure setback from the Ordinary High Water Level of 130 feet for Lots 3 and 4 (Code requires 150 feet in the RM-6.5 District), (5) Front yard structure setback of 27 feet for Lot 3 and 24 feet for Lot 4 (Code requires 30 feet in the RM-6.5 District), and(6) Side yard structure setback of 6.5 feet for Lot 2 and 6.6 feet for Lot 3 (Code requires a minimum of 10 feet in the RM-6.5 District)with the hardship being the 40'drainage easement and necessitated a variance for lake and side yard and imposing a conservation easement over the land within 100' of the lake. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 8 Dunham stated that the building was squeezed into the site and the developer has not put much effort into designing something that could fit into the site without variances. Hansen commented he did not support the motion because of financial hardships the developer had inferred would be created by reduction of floor area in the buildings. Nelson commented the neighborhood appeared to be declining and this development may begin to revitalize this area. Giglio commented the hardship was the drainage easement and he felt it was important to preserve the lake as much as possible and with the conservation easement, sacrifice of 5'of the front yard was a small price to pay. Nelson inquired if the proponent would be amenable to a continuance to allow for a redesign of the project and Noecker responded he would prefer the Board to take action as they have a time schedule to adhere to. He noted that the Planning Commission and City Council were in favor of the proposal and he believed that the plans would work. Kipp stated that one option was to approve the variances with the negation of the front yard setback which would allow the proponent to decide whether to return to the City Council with a new design. Discussion ensued regarding the impact of the front yard setback when looking at the entire neighborhood. Ways of redesigning the units were discussed. • Giglio withdrew the portion of the motion regarding the stipulation of a conservation easement. Nelson stated she believed that a conservation easement should be placed on the lakeshore property to within 100' of the lakeshore to protect the lake. Kipp stated that grading would be permitted within 75'of the lake, and the Board could require that the natural vegetation be reestablished within the 25'which was permitted to be disturbed. MOTION: Nelson moved, seconded by Giglio, to amend the motion to require placement of a conservation easement over the land within 100' of the lakeshore, with natural vegetation to be reestablished within any areas disturbed by grading within this area. Motion carried 3-2. Hansen and Dunham voted"no". Nelson called for a vote on the main motion as amended. Motion carried 3-2. Hansen and Dunham voted"no". E. Request #96-18 by Property Resources Corporation for Metro RV and Mini- Storage at 6851 Flying Cloud Drive to permit the outside storage of up to 6 rental vehicles exceeding three-quarter ton in the I-2 Zoning District Code does not permit outside storage of vehicles in excess of three-quarter ton in the I-2 Zoning District). • Mike Seeland, 6851 Flying Cloud Drive,representing Metro RV,requested approval of the variance to permit storage of six vehicles outside the facility for their customers use. He illustrated the location in which the vehicles would be stored. He described the vehicles they propose to have on the site, and noted they are well-suited to this BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 9 use. He showed photographs illustrating the buildings and sight lines from adjacent properties to explain how the vehicles would be screened. They propose six conditions be attached to the approval of the variance. Lynch inquired what the capacity of the vehicles would be and Seeland responded the largest truck would be comparable to a small moving van in size. They are requesting this variance to provide convenience to their customers. Dunham asked if they would store recreational vehicles on the site. Seeland responded that they do have that ability but they do not plan to do this. They retained the same name as their facility in Bloomington, which does store RV's for purposes of easy identification as the same company. Dunham inquired how they arrived at the six vehicle number and Seeland responded that six was the number that made sense because they would fit within the area where they plan to store them now. Giglio asked if people would be renting these and moving all within one day and Seeland responded they have not had all six vehicles rented at once so far. Giglio asked what the hardship was and Seeland responded that it was the inability to provide the convenience to their customers. If customers have to drive somewhere, rent the vehicle, drive back to move their stuff in, and then drive again to return the vehicle, it creates unnecessary traffic trips and drives business away to their competitors who do have rental trucks available on-site. They had been doing this until they had been informed it was against the ordinance and required a variance. He stated that the vehicles are only on the site when they have been leased from Ryder. Kipp reviewed the staff report and noted that in the 1-2 Zoning District outside storage is not permitted. These vehicles would be on the site as a service to customers. Giglio asked in what district the ordinance permitted outside storage and Kipp responded that it was permitted in the I-GEN District if properly screened. Giglio commented that the trucks were almost completely screened in this case. Kipp noted that staff had received one letter from an adjacent property owner in opposition to the variance. Lynch inquired what length of time constituted "storage" and Kipp responded the ordinance did not specify that but it would be an ongoing situation. Seeland commented that the truck rentals would be heaviest at the end of the month when people were moving and least busy during the first part of the month. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. The Public Hearing was closed. Discussion ensued regarding whether the variance should be reviewed in one year if BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 10 granted, or extended for three years. Hansen commented he believed the variance could be approved for one year, and then extended for five years if there were no complaints during that time. He believed the vehicles should be screened if they were visible from off-site. Dunham concurred, but believed only 4 vehicles should be permitted on the site at one time, since there was screened area for four vehicles already. Nelson and Lynch concurred. MOTION: Hansen moved, seconded by Giglio to approve Variance Request#96-18 by Property Resources Corporation for Metro RV and Mini-Storage at 6851 Flying Cloud Drive to permit the outside storage of up to 4 rental vehicles exceeding three- quarter ton in the I-2 Zoning District (Code does not permit outside storage of vehicles in excess of three-quarter ton in the I-2 Zoning District) for the period of one year, at which time the variance is to be reviewed by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Motion carried 5-0. IV. OLD BUSINESS None. V. NEW BUSINESS Nelson expressed concern regarding the attendance of Board member Tim Nelson, who had only attended one of four meetings since he was appointed. Kipp stated that the Code stated that an appointee could be removed from office by the City Council with just cause. Nelson commented that continued absences could present a problem since the Board was the only body which made final decisions and not just recommendations to the City Council. Discussion ensued during which time it was suggested a letter be written to Mr. Nelson suggesting that if he was too busy to attend meetings regularly he should step down, and that Chair Nelson follow this up with a phone call. Kipp stated he would draft a letter for the Board to send, and Nelson stated she would call him later. MOTION: Dunham moved, seconded by Lynch, that a letter be written to Tim Nelson regarding the issue of regular attendance at Board Meetings and his commitment to the Board, followed by a phone call from Chair Nelson to determine his intentions. Motion carried 5-0. Kipp stated that the next meeting of the Board will be held in the Heritage Room II downstairs due to the Council Chambers being in use. There are two variances on the agenda for that meeting which are the Hills of Eden Prairie and the Eden Hills Townhome developments. • Nelson discussed putting conservation easements over areas which are designed as open space in town home developments to prevent their being sold or developed separately later on, and requested some input from staff regarding this issue. • BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS City of Eden Prairie September 12, 1996 Page 11 VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Dunham,to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. •