Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 06/09/1983 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HALL BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chairman Ron Krueger, Richard Lynch, James Dickey, Roger Sandvick, and Hanley Anderson BOARD STAFF: Jean Johnson, Zoning Administrator, and Lynda Diede, Recording Secretary ROLL CALL: Anderson was absent. I. Minutes of May 10, 1983. MOTION: Lynch moved, seconded by Krueger, to approve the minutes of May 10, 1983. Motion carried unanimously. II. VARIANCES A. Request #83-14, submitted by Associated Investments, Inc. for property located at Lot 1 , Block 3, Lorence Addition. The re- quest is for a variance frog Cit Code, Sec. '1 .03, Subd. 2, 1to permit construction of 7 parking stalls Within 10 feet of the lot line instead of the required 30 feet._ Thomas Robertson, President of Associated Investments, Inc. , displayed a site plan of the proposed parking lot. Robertson pointed out that normally on a residential site the actual curve of the street is a setback of up to 441 . When the City pur- chased the property, they lapped over a small piece of land. Krueger inquired if it was a right of way, Johnson stated that it was an easement. Krueger remarked that visually it appears farther away than it is. Robertson said yes, because of the abnormal amount of right of way. Krueger inquired if they plan to screen the parking stalls. Robertson replied yes, the Planning Department had recommended berming and screening. MOTION: Dickey made a motion to approve Variance Request #83-14, submitted by Associated Investments, Inc. with the following findings: 1 ) Subject to approval of the Planning Staff as far as the screening and berming of the parking stalls is concerned. 2) It is in the best interests of the City of Eden Prairie. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 2 - June 9, 1983 S,andvick seconded the motion. Motion carried . unanimously. They have one year to exercise the petition. B. Request #83-15, submitted by Appleside Orchards & Markets, for property located at the Northeast corner of Co. Rd. #4 & T.H. #5, the southwest corner of Co. Rd. #1 and Co. Rd. #49 and the North quadrant of US 169 and Co. Rd #1 . The request is for a variance_ from Sec 11 70, Subd. 3 to permit construction of 3 temporary non-accessory signs at the locations described. James Wall , Director of Marketing for Appleside Orchards, outlined his request to the Board. Wall remarked that when going through surveys they had taken, the number one complaint was that Appleside Orchards were hard to find. Wall added that they are a seasonal business; they have five months to make their livelihood, June through October. They are asking for three signs: two 4'x5' signs, located on County Road #1 and Highway #169 and County Roads #4 and #1 , and an 8'xl6' sign on the Gonyea property at County Road #4 and Highway #5. Wall commented that the signs are first rate, consisting of a wood frame on top with routed out wood. Krueger expressed concern that the Highway Department will not allow signs on #169. Johnson stated that she had spoken with the State Highway Department of Golden Valley, District #5. No signs are permitted on state highways unless the state has issued a permit. Permits are only issued on Industrial or Commercial properties. Wall indicated that he had talked with Golden Valley. Sandvick inquired if the signs Were permanent. Wall replied, no. Krueger noted that they were of a permanent nature, but they would come down after the season is over. Krueger stated that he had no objection to well done signs , however, this may be a precedent setter, Krueger inquired what the alternatives would be if no sign could be put up. Wall said word of mouth. Dick Young, President of Appleside, suggested that they be allowed to have the signs for a period of five years to establish their business. Lynch felt that from the precedent standpoint, their situation was not unique. Dickey inquired how large the sign was on the property. Young replied 6'x8' . Wall added that even three years would be a key for a successful • season. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 4 - Me 9, 1983 Sorensen presented the survey, pointing out that the court will not • be visible from the lake. All of the marsh is within the property line. The proposed tennis court is 230' from the open water of Bryant Lake. Sorensen commented that no current existing owners have any objections to the sideyard variance. This particular piece of property has five owners. Sorensen outlined the nature of his proposal : 1 ) There will be no lights. 2) There will be no bug killers. 3) There will be electricity on the site. 4) The court will be constructed of a pervious surface. 5) Fencing will beof a dark green vinyl . 6) A landscape plan will be submitted to the City for approval . 15'-20' trees have been brought into the site already. 7) Three sides of the tennis courts will be 10' high; the other 4'3". Finley added that the court will have a surface of 6" hand graded aggregate which will allow moisture to pass through. It does compact and is rolled. When it rains, there will be minimal surface erosion. Sorensen noted that there will be a sprinkling system. Finley stated • that it will maintain its own water content. Sprinkling will be done once a week for a period of one hour in the evening. Finlcv rnmmcntorl that nn fanro nn(zts will he set in concrete footines.__ _ Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 3 - June 9, 1983 Lynch suggested that there were other options to use such as : bill- boards, newspaper ads with maps, etc. Wall stated that they had tried that route with no luck. Sandvick asked if the signs were on any street right of way. 'Johnson replied no. MOTION: Lynch made a motion to deny Variance Request #83-15, submitted by Appleside Orchards with the following findings: 1 ) The request does not meet the sign ordinance requirements. 2) The request could set a precedent that we have not experienced in Eden Prairie in terms of directional signs. 3) There are other options to use for giving directions for a business. DISCUSSION: Sandvick asked what the dates would be for the temp- orary signs. Wall stated that they would be put up June 15, and taken down on October 31 . Sandvick stated that that exceeds our 30 day temporary sign ordinance. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 5 - Junq 9, 1983 1) There are no objections to the variance. 2) It is not a hazard to the health and welfare of the citizens of Eden Prairie. 3) No lights be constructed around or on the court. 4) Erosion control measures depicted on the plan be installed prior to any construction work and remain in place until the area is re- stablized with vegetation. 5) Court be constructed of a pervious surface so as not to appreciable increase run off. 6) The applicant shall submit a landscaping plan for approval to the City which helps blend the fencing and courts in with the surrounding landscape. 7) Fencing along the sides of the court shall be a dark green vinyl cyclone fence as proposed. DISCUSSION: Krueger added that all of the questions and problems have been taken care of to the satisfaction of the Staff. • Dickey seconded the motion. Motion carried unan- imously. They have one year to exercise the petition. D. Request #83-17, submitted by Hipps Construction, for property located at Lot 7, Block 3, Edenvale 14th Addition. The request is for a variance from Sec. 11 .03, Subd. 2, to permit placement of a duplex 25 feet from the front property line instead of the required 30 feet Purpose is to preserve a large white oak tree. Richard Hipp, Hipp's Construction Company, presented his proposal to the Board. Krueger inquired if this met the existing ordinance as far as the sideyard setback for 10' on the side. Johnson replied, yes. Krueger asked if there were any buildings next to the tree. Hipp said yes, on the right. Johnson stated that the City Forester did look at the tree. The 5' difference in the frontyard setback will make a 1 ' or 2' difference at the tree root system. Part of the tree has been damaged by having dirt piled around. Steps would have to be taken to save the tree such as: trimming the crown and restoration of the root system. Dickey commented that most oaks show their damage in 4-5 years. Krueger noted that the house to the right was 30' away. Board of Appeals and Adjustments 6 - Jurpe 9, 1983 Hipp stated that he could go back 30' with the house, then they would be 21 ' to the tree. Krueger pointed out that he was legal at a 10' sideyard. Hipp noted that he was not legal as far as the square footage of the property was concerned. Krueger stated that he would rather see a variance given for the square footage of the unit. Lynch agreed; he felt that the success ratio for trees was not'great. Johnson suggested that the frontyard setback request be withdrawn or be continued. The lot size variance could be published for the next meeting. Lynch was in agreement, he recommended that Hipp come back in one month and get a variance for a lot size. III. OLD BUSINESS None IV. NEW BUSINESS None V. ADJOURNMENT Sandvick moved, seconded by Krueger, to adjourn the meeting at 8:45 PM. Motion carried unanimously.