HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 01/13/1983 i
APPROVED MINUTES
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
THURSDAY, JANUARY 13, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HALL
BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chairman James Wedlund, Rich rd
Lynch, Ron Krueger, Roger San vick,
and James Dickey
BOARD STAFF: Wayne Sanders, Building Official and
Lynda Diede, Recording Secretary
ROLL CALL: Sandvick and Krueger were absent.
I. MINUTES
A. Minutes of December 9, 1982.
MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Dickey, to approve the Minutes
of December 9, 1982. Motion carried unanimously.
II. VARIANCES
A. Request #82-32, submitted by S & S Land Development Company, for
propertylocated at 7575 Corporate Way. The request is for a
variance from Ordinance 11 30, Subdivision 3 c to allow office
space in an Industrial District to equal 77% of the total floor
• area.
Dave McCarthy, project manager of Trucker Sheehy Contractors,,
spoke to the request. He showed plans of the proposed facility.
Wedlund inquired if the building met all of. the requirements for
parking. Sanders replied yes, the total amount of building area
for the lot is appropriate. They are not exceeding the limits of
the ordinance.
Lynch inquired what they intend to do with the building. McCarthy
stated that they own the building. Two companies will occupy the
facility. The nature of their business is food brokerage; office
and warehouse.
Dickey asked if there would be a dock. McCarthy said it would be
a drive-in loading situation. They would drive in to a pit and it
would be made of asphalt. i
Dickey showed concern regarding drainage problems. The asphalt
could become cracked. If the land shifts and goes into the creek,
the City could be responsible to dig it out. McCarthy stated that
they would use fabric, sitting on footings.
Sanders inquired as to the depth of the bad soil . McCarthy stated
that there is a contour line of 824 elevation that runs in the
middle of the property.
-2-
soard of Appeals and Adjustments January 13, 1983
i
MOTION: Dickey made a motion to approve Variance Request'
#82-32, submitted by S & S Land Development Company.
It is in accordance with the City and our desire to
put a nice structure there. The soil engineer must
conduct frequent inspections in that area based on
the heavy truck traffic coming around the south end
of the building, to the north, to that dock pick-up
point; allowing for proper drainage and some type
of proper manning, whatever is required to inspect
soil conditions. Wedlund seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously. They have one year
to exercise the petition.
B. Request #82-36, submitted by Marty Hellman, for property located
at 6921 Beach Road 1 ) Request for a variance from City_ Code,
Chapter 11 , Subdivision 6, to allow enclosing of_ a swimming pool
to a point approximately 62' from the water instead of the re
guired 100' 2) Request for a variance from City Code, Chapter
11 , to allow a 22' x 24' boat house to be built at shoreline.
(Elev. 852.01 )
Jack Smuckler and Steve Jensen, architects with the Smuckler
Corporation, spoke to the request.
Jensen stated that there were two main concerns they had to
address:
• 1 ) How it would affect the water quality.
2) How it would affect the potential for visual crowding on
the lakeshore.
In the case of the water quality, the main concern with water
pollution is getting phosphates and road salts into the lake.
In discussion with the DNR, they suggested planting beds and
terracing. The water would settle into rough grass and ground
cover and act as a filter.
Jensen pointed out that they propose to improve the visual crowding
situation by getting recreational activities enclosed in the boat-
house. They also plan on berming and landscaping.
Lynch inquired if they had spoken with the Watershed District.
Jensen said yes, they were told to discuss it with the DNR and
then see that the concerns were met. Surface drainage into the
lake would appear to be minimal .
Wedlund stated that this could set a precedence for a boathouse
at water's edge.
Alfred Harrison, next door neighbor, pointed out that the pool
enclosure would cut down on their view of the lake. He would
• like to see no development at the lakeshore edge as their view
would be obstructed.
-3-
Board of Appeals and Adjustments January 13, 1983
Dickey inquired if this was a 38% variance. Sanders replied, y s.
iMarty Hellman stated that by placing the boathouse into the ground,
he could eliminate the two boat lifts that he has. He doesn't feel
that the boathouse would obstruct his neighbor's v#ew of the lake.
i
Lynch showed concern that no fence has been built around the pool .
Sanders stated that there should be a fence around an open pool .
MOTION: Lynch made a motion to approve Variance #82-36, sub-
mitted by Marty Hellman, with the following findings :
1 ) That the enclosure for the pool be that as
presented by the architects, including the
landscaping, and that the boathouse be a
structure that would serve no other purpose
than storage. (No railing or paraphernalia
for other purposes. )
2) That it is subject to approval by the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources and the Watershed
District.
DICUSSION: Sanders read from Chapter 10, Section 10.03 of the
City Code regarding swimming pool regulations , Sub-
division 2, (A) :
• "All outdoor swimming pools existing and here-
after constructed, shall be completely encl sed
by a security fence or wall at least 4' , but not
more than 6' high, and located at least 4' from
the end of the pool . The bottom of the fence or
wall shall be no more than 4" above the surface
of the ground. Fence openings or points of entry
to the pool area shall be equipped with self-
closing and self-latching lockable gates. "
Subdivision 2,(C) :
"All persons owning or operating an outdoor swim-
ming pool shall comply with this Section within
90 days from the date of publication."
Lynch added that approval of the variance may set a precedence !for
boathouses on Bryant Lake. The caliber of this project is such; that
the precedent is positive.
Wedlund seconded the motion. Motion carried with Dickey voting "nay".
They have one year to exercise the petition.
III. OTHER BUSINESS
• None
4-
Board of Appeals and Adjustments January 13, 1983
• IV. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Wedlund moved, seconded by Dickey, to adjourn the meeting
at 8:40 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
i
•
i
I