Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 12/08/1983 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1983 7:30 PM, CITY HALL BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chairman Ron Krueger, Richard Lynch, James Dickey, Roger Sandvick and Hanley Anderson BOARD STAFF: Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson, and Lynda Diede, Recording Secretary ROLL CALL: Krueger and Dickey were absent. I. MINUTES Vice Chairman. Lynch deferred action on the minutes as there was only one Board member present that attended the November 10, 1983 meeting. II. VARIANCES A. Request #83-42, submitted by Hipp's Construction Company for • property located at 15230 Buchanan Court. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subd. 2, to allow the division of a duplex lot into 2 lots, one of which will be 6,110 sq ft in lot size instead of the required 6,500 ss . ft. Richard Hipp, of Hipp's Construction Company presented his request to the Board. Lynch stated that the lot was an administrative division. Johnson added that Eugene Dietz, Director of Public Works, had sent the division to Hennepin County in August. At that time they didn't realize the need for a variance for the lot. Johnson noted a correction on the certificate of survey, under Parcel B. It should read "northeasterly" instead of "north- westerly. " Mark Huey, owner of the larger size parcel stated that the problem surfaced when he decided to sell his lot and the title search noted that the lot division was not accompanied by the proper variance approval . A form was presented, signed by the two lot owners, Hueys and John and Sue Rue indicating that they • desire the variance. Sandvick inquired if there was a house there now. Hipp stated that there was a duplex built. • Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 2 - December 8, 1983 Lynch inquired when it was built. Hipp replied that it was built in 1981 . Johnson commented that the home was built on a single lot. At the time that it was built, they didn 't care to divide the lot. MOTION: Anderson made a motion to approve Variance Request #83-42, submitted by Hipp's Construct- ion Company. Sandvick seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. They have one year to exercise the petition. B. Request #83-43, submitted by Richard W Anderson, Inc for property located at 10230 West 70th Street & 6968-7000 Shady Oak_ Road, legally described as the westerly 55' of Lot 1 , Block 11 Shady Oak Industrial Park Second Addition and the westerly 40' of Lot 2, Block 1 , Shady Oak Industrial Park Sixth Addition The re uest is for a variance from Cif Code, Chapter 11 , Sec. 11 .03, Subd. 3, H. , 5. , b to permit construction of parkin areas up to the lot line of the 2 above lots instead of main- taining a 10' setback; and d to allow the off street parkin to be located upon a parcel other than where the building is located. Richard W. Anderson, of Richard W. Anderson, Inc. , outlined his request to the Board. They will be preleasing their building to Precision Cosmet Company Inc. , manufacturers • of contact lenses. They have 500 employees in Minnetonka in the Opus II area. The Shady Oak Industrial Park provi-des sufficient parking +114 car parks if the lot line and the additional parking on the adjacent lot is utilized. Precision Cosmet Company Inc. will occupy /3 of the building. Fabri-Tek Inc. is located next door and has extra parking available. An open ditch exists between the two lots. Plans will be reviewed by the City showing placement of pipe and filling in the ditch so that parking stalls can be constructed over the ditch. Hanley Anderson inquired as to the location of Farmer's Insur- ance Company, Richard Anderson replied that they are the owners of the adjacent lot. They are leasing 21 ,000 feet from ADI. ADI has 10,000 feet. Between the two there isi 31 ,000 feet which could hold 114 cars. Johnson added that the landscape plan was a preliminary one, subject to City Approval . Hanley Anderson asked if they were intending to sell the land. Richard Anderson stated that after developing, they will sell to Farmer's Insurance and the tenants will lease it from them. It is a 10 year lease. A letter was received from Eden Prairie Development Company, • December 6, 1983, in favor of the variance. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 3 - December 8, 1983 MOTION: Sandvick made a motion to approve Variance Re- r quest #83-43, submitted by Richard W. Anderson 1 with the following findings : 1 ) Variance approval be based upon the plans dated 9/9/83, the letters of November 9, 21 , and 22nd, and the draft ground lease. 2) That the ditch piping and filling be as per the City Engineer's specifications. 3) Prior to building permit issuance, a signed ground lease be submitted to the Planning and Building Departments. 4) That landscape plans be submitted for: a) Building construction on Lot 2, including, but not limited to parking lot planters with the required bond. b) For the side lot areas of Lot 1 & 2 so that in the future if the parking is no longer needed that the asphalt surface be removed and • developed with sod and plantings. A bond of $10,000 as outlined on p. 5 of the November 21 , 1983 letter should be submitted. 5) That the above conditions be met and the variance utilized within one year of its approval . Richard W. Anderson is familar with the recom- mendations and they are satisfactory to his approval . Hanley Anderson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. They have one year to exercise the petition. III. OLD BUSINESS Sandvick stated that regarding the October 13, 1983 minutes, he would like comments added that were deleted. They refer to Variance Request #83-33, submitted by John Liepke. Liepke stated, "Wolfgang Penzel looked at the deck. He felt that regardless of the neighbors feelings, moving the deck back within 15' from the property line would be acceptable to the City. " Liepke added that if he was voted down by the Board of Appeals, he would • appeal to the City Council. Liepke commented that he would follow along with what the Mayor had advised him. Board of Appeals and Adjustments 4 - December 8, 1983 IV. NEW BUSINESS • Discussion ensued re ardin th 9 g e new meeting place for the Board of Appeals. General consensus was that the Lunch Room does not have much credibility. The School Board Room at the Adminis- tration Building is a possibility.V. ADJOURNMENT Sandvick moved, seconced by Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 PM. Motion carried unanimously.