Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 06/12/1997 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS • THURSDAY,JUNE 12, 1997 7:30 P.M. CITY CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS 8080 MITCHELL ROAD BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chair Kathy Nelson, Cliff Dunham, Delavan Dye, William Ford, Louis Giglio, Matthew Hansen,Michael O'Leary STAFF LIAISON: Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson and City Recorder Barbara Anderson MEMBERS ABSENT: Louis Giglio CALL TO ORDER Chair Nelson called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Board member Giglio was absent. O'Leary arrived at the meeting at 7:50 p.m. I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA • MOTION: Dye moved, seconded by Ford, to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried 5-0. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -May 8. 1997 MOTION: Hansen moved, seconded by Dye,to approve the May 8, 1997 Minutes of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals as published. Motion carried 5-0. III. VARIANCES A. Request#97-08 by Radiator Warehouse West,Donald D. Tesch for 6390 Carlson Drive to extend variance 96-09: 1) Use of four portable metal storage units on the property for a period of one year(City Code does not permit outdoor storage in the I-2 District).,2)To place the storage units at a 0' (zero) setback from the south side lot line(City Code requires a 20' setback for structures in the I-2 District), and 3) To permit expansion of a non-conforming use (continued from May 8, 1997 Board of Adjustments & Appeals meeting). Mike Tesch was present representing his father, Donald Tesch. He requested an extension of the variance for one year to allow them to get things in order. They have three storage bins on the property presently as they removed two units from the site. • The first storage unit was removed last year and the second one was removed three months ago. They are trying to get everything to fit into the building so they are downsizing their inventory. They are still trying to purchase the property but the owner MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS June 12, 1997 • Page 2 has just returned from vacation and it's not been feasible to negotiate thus far. Dunham commented that there was a lawn mowing business storing equipment on the site and he asked if that was permitted. Johnson responded she had not been aware of this and it was not there when the site was inspected in May. Dunham asked if Mr. Tesch could document efforts to purchase the property and Tesch responded that he did not have any documents with him. Dye stated he wanted to see a definite date established by which time the site would be in compliance. Ford asked what they did with the gas tanks and Tesch responded that they clean and refurbish them for resale. They also have some that they have to dispose of because people do not want them. Ford inquired if the inventory was reduced could one additional storage unit be removed, and Tesch responded that was the plan. Nelson asked where the material they remove from the tanks went and Tesch responded that they wash out the tanks with soapy water and there was no material coming out because the gasoline was removed prior to the tanks being brought to the site. Nelson asked why it would take a complete year to get rid of the excess inventory and eliminate the outside storage and Tesch responded they have to work at inventory reduction in addition to doing their regular work, so it's taking longer to reduce that it would if they • could work at it full time. Nelson inquired if they had investigated alternative storage sites in case the variance extension was not approved and Tesch responded negatively. Johnson gave the staff report and noted that Hennepin County had been out to the site for a routine inspection. It was further reported a realtor had called regarding the variance, and stated this type of outdoor trailer storage makes it difficult to lease space in other buildings. Dunham noted that there were stipulations on the original approval which required no outside storage or additional equipment on the site, and both of these had been violated. O'Leary commented there were gas tanks sitting in between two of the sheds and the neighbors were storing their mulch and landscaping material on the site. He asked if the rust was ruining the tanks and Tesch responded they sandblast the tanks anyway and rust would not harm them. Nelson inquired if they had submitted any purchase offers in writing to the property owner since they had appeared before the Board last year and Tesch responded he did not know and would have to ask his father. The Public Hearing was opened. No one present wished to speak. • The Public Hearing was closed. O'Leary commented it did not appear the proponent's were making a strong effort to live MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS June 12, 1997 Page 3 up to the stipulations of the previous approval. Ford stated the variance had actually expired and Johnson responded that because the proponents had applied for an extension of the variance in April the City considers it to be "in process" and allows it to go through the process. Ford discussed the storage on the site of the gas tanks, mulch, flowers and the storage sheds. He inquired what would be done with the gas tanks and Tesch responded that they will have to store them inside or get rid of them. Tesch inquired if they could put up a fence for screening and if so, would that be sufficient for the tanks and landscape material. Johnson responded that the variance as published did not include the request for landacape material outside, and that would have to be addressed at another time. Dye commented he believed the Board should halt this process of variances and get the business owner and the landlord together to move the process of purchasing the property forward. As long as the business owner has a variance the landlord gets his rent; once that stops,perhaps the landlord will be more willing in discussing the sale of the property to the business owners. Who could then possibly expand the building for storage room. O'Leary stated he did not support granting the variance extension. Dunham stated the Board had some compassion last year when they granted the variance due to existing • circumstances at that time, which allowed them to stay in business during the past year. However, he did not see an effort being made to meet the requirements set forth in the last variance approval and they have not researched any options or alternatives and he did not support extending the variance any longer. Nelson stated the variance was granted on the assumption they could eliminate the non-conforming use and while they have made some progress, the use still remains, and they violated the previous variance approval by storing more material outside.. Also, she had difficulty determining what the hardship would be because they have had a year to work things out and there is no hardship that is unique to this property. She could not justify an extension of this variance. Ford stated he could support the request given the location and the condition of the surrounding properties and since this site is better maintained than most in this vicinity. He felt that the gas tanks and landscape material should be moved out and allow the proponent time to get things in order. It could take a long time to recover from a loss and it was difficult to determine how this has impacted this family. The hardship is they may have to shut down the business while they remove inventory from the site. Nelson stated there are storage places where they could rent storage for their excess inventory. The cost factor is not a reason for granting a variance. There is a small wetland area very close to the storage units which could be adversely impacted by this storage. Discussion ensued regarding all the things stored on the site and the differences between zoning districts. Allowing outside storage in I-2 could be precedent setting. • Johnson noted staff does handle similar I-2 storage problems through out the City. Each site has to be researched to determine grandfathering issues, code compliance and violation problems. Staff does handle similar issues in this industrial park. c O MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS June 12, 1997 Page 4 MOTION:Dunham moved, seconded by O'Leary to deny request #97-08 by Radiator Warehouse West, Donald D. Tesch for 6390 Carlson Drive to extend variance 96-09: 1) Use of four portable metal storage units on the property for a period of one year(City Code does not permit outdoor storage in the I-2 District)., 2) To place the storage units at a 0' (zero) setback from the south side lot line (City Code requires a 20' setback for structures in the 1-2 District), and 3)To permit expansion of a non-conforming use based on the finding that there is no hardship and the proponent has had adequate time to meet the code requirements. The proponent must meet the zoning code requirements within 60 days from 6/12/97. Motion carried 5-1. Ford voted"nay". IV. OLD BUSINESS V. NEW BUSINESS O'Leary asked if staff could arrange to have the old vehicles on the property to the north cleaned out. Nelson inquired if any Board members would have a problem starting the meetings at 7:00 p.m. instead of 7:30 and O'Leary responded that he would probably be late as he could not get here • by 7:00 p.m. The Board decided to leave the meetings set at 7:30 p.m. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Dunham moved, seconded by Nelson to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 6-0. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. •