Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 04/17/1990 S E APP809ID M I NUg5 • BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 1990 7:30 P.M. City Hall Council. Chambers, 7600 Executive Dr., Eden Prairie, MN 55344 BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS Dwight Harvey (Chairman), Arthur Weeks, Bill Arockiasamy, Scott Anderoon, John Freemyer, Neil Akemann, riike Bozonie STAFF PRESENT: Steve Durham-Planning, Sharon Storholm,Sec'y BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Weeks, Bozonie, Anderson 1. CALL TO ORDER-ROLL CALL- Chairman Harvey called the meeting to order at 7:30. Roll call was taken as noted above. II. MINUTES OF MARCH 8, 1990 MOTION: Arockiasamy moved that the Board approve the minutes of the March 8th meeting as submitted.Freemyer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. III. VARIANCES A. Request W-11, submitted by Target Stores for property located at 8225 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie Minnesota legally described as Lot 2 Block 1 Eden Prairie Center, 4th Addition. The rectuest is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11, Section 11. 03 , Subdivision 2B, to permit (1) A Base Araea Ratio (BAR) at 25 City Code maximum BAR is 20 (2) To permit a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) at .25. City Code maximum FAR is 20 Forrest Russell and Michael Norman came forward to present the variance request for Target. They displayed the plans for the proposed addition and explained that the volume in the store had exceeded their expectations. They would like to increase the stocking area. The only possible place for this expansion was where the garden center had been. Parking spaces will be adequate for the site due to parking agreements. Norman defined the area of expansion as from the front sidewalk to the compactor area, which consists of approximately 7,000 square feet. The addition will be constructed of the same brick and detailing. Although the building will be slightly longer, the same brick and detailing will be used as well as the same color mortar. The sidewalk, landscaping and planting areas will be extended. The addition will shield trucks at the loading dock from view. All the existing requirements will be maintained. Requirements of the fire marshal and building inspector have been met. Roof top units will be screened. Durham noted that normally these items go through the Planning Commission and • City Council, but it was not necessary this time as this was not even 8% expansion of the building. Since BAR and FAR are not creating additional variances, 2 a • it was not a major concern. The addition would still keep the store well within the floor area ratio for this site. Akemann asked if any variances had been granted for the original building - and what plans were pending for the future. Durham answered that variances had been granted when the original building was constructed in 1983. Norman said that at this time, there were no plans for the future regarding expansion. He felt the site was being utilized at close to maximum now. Russell said that some executives at Target had been skeptical in 1983 about putting Target into the center. It had been a good decision. Ten years ago, discounters were unwelcome in centers, however, it has been proven that they can be super additions to malls. Target has become a major player in regional centers. Arockiasamy asked how the wall panels performed. Norman answered that U.S. Wall makes the panels. The brick used is called Hanley brick. The panels perform excellently and can be prefabricated in any weather. The cracking has been minimal. • Harvey and Freemyer had no questions. The Building Manager from First Bank Building and Suburban Place, both located across the street from Target, noted that he was satisfied with the proposed addition plans. Akemann had a question concerning the overhead doors facing 169 and Norman explained the exact location of the doors in question. MOTION: Arockiasamy moved that the Board approve Variance Request 90-11 with the following finding and conditions: The FAR and BPS of .25 does not generate additional variances such as buildingproposed addition setback lances. The tba k or parking var will better screen the loading facility from Highway 169. All existing and new rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened with metal panels that shall match existing panels.A bond for mechanical equipment screening is required prior to building permit issuance. Akemann seconded the motion and it passed 3-0 with Freemyer abstaining. B. Recruest #90-12 , submitted by Peter G. Smith for Guv Schoenecker for property located at 9450 Lakeland Terrace Eden Prairie Minnesota.- legally described as RLS 82 Tracts D and E. The rectuest is for a variance from City Code Chapter 11 Section 11 50 Subdivision 6B (1) to hermit construction of a room addition 75 feet from the • Ordinary High Water Mark City Code requires a loot setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark (2) Subdivision 12A,, to permit expansion of a non-conforming use ' 3 Peter Smith spoke on behalf of Guy and Judy Schoenecker. Their home is located on the south side of Lake Riley. When the home was built the set back requirement was 75", which was conformed to in constructing the home. The owners would like two additions: a greenhouse addition and a two story addition. They plan to remove the existing deck and construct a two story addition on that spot which also will have a deck. A lean-to greenhouse would have a fieldstone base. Presently, the set back requirements have been increased to 100' . The new additions would be at the same set back as the existing home. The DNR has no problem with the plans. At present, there is no high water mark for Lake Riley. The 100 year mark is 866' above sea level on Lake Riley. This would be 9Z' above that. The owners will be using the -same basic shapes in the -additions as in the -existing home, -so the character will be maintained. Smith summarized the request as follows: They are requesting that the existing setback of 75' be allowed to remain for the additions & that the additions be 92' above the 100 year high water mark. He said that the additions will tie with the home for a uniform look. Durham said that the DNR still maintains 75' set back, but the City is more restrictive at 1001 . Freemyer and Arockiasamy had no questions. Akemann noted that the presentation was very well given by Smith. • Harvey said that the home was built before the shoreland management ordinance had been passed. There is no other place for the homeowners to expand. The elevations are over 9' above the 100 year high water mark. Arockiasamy noted that the hardship is that there is no practical way of expanding without asking for this variance request, and it is the right of the homeowner to expand the house. MOTION: Freemyer moved that the Board approve Variance Request 90-12 with the following findings: The additions are not any closer to the lake than the existing structure. The existing interior floor plan has all living space on-the lakeside of the property. The additions shall be in the same styling as the existing structure. Arockiasamy seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. IV. OLD BUSINESS Durham noted that the Nelson variance was granted and the deck was allowed with a 10' setback and plant material. The reason for the decision had been that the Nelson's did not create the problem, the builder had. Akemann said the builder is the responsible party for creating the problem. Arockiasamy said that when the City allows this deck to be built, the builder gets protected from responsibility. If it had not be allowed, the Nelson's would have gone after the builder for compensation. Builders need to be educated and expected to build homes in certain ways and places. This needs to be checked on building plans. 4 Freemyer asked Durham if there had been any feedback regarding the overturned decisions that were originally made by the Board and later overturned by the Council. He said some Council members feel' they have a different latitude to work with when making these overturns. Durham said he had received no feedback. Harvey said that the City Attorney can insist that the Council provide hardship when making these decisions. Arockiasamy felt that the only thing that would improve this is if the Council has to substantiate the decisions. He felt the Board should keep trying to get reasons for the overturns. V. NE4 BUSINESS Durham stated that next month items on the agenda are: 1. House moving on Beach Road 2. McDonalds parking setback 3. Sign variance for Prairie Village Mall. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Akemann moved that the Board adjourn. Freemyer seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. • Meeting adjourned at 8:31 P.M. •