Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 06/11/1987 APPROVED MINUTES BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS THURSDAY, JUNE 11 , 1987 7:30 PM, CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7600 EXECUTIVE DRIVE BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS: Chairman Ron Krueger, Hanley Anderson, Roger Sandvick, William Arockiasamy, Lyn Dean, Steve Longman, and Dwight Harvey BOARD STAFF: Assistant Planner, Steve Durham and Recording Secretary, Lynda Diede ROLL CALL: Krueger and Arockiasamy were absent. I. MINUTES A. Minutes of January 8, 1987. MOTION: Sandvick moved, seconded by Dean, to approve the minutes of January 8, 1987. Motion carried 4-0-1 . Harvey abstained. B. Minutes of May 14, 1987. MOTION: Harvey moved, seconded by Dean, to approve the minutes of • May 14, 1987. Motion carried unanimously. II. VARIANCES A. Request #87-20, submitted by Don and Rita Anderson and H.J. Nyhammer for property located at 7427 and 7447 Eden Prairie Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for variances from City Code, Chapter 11 , Subdivision 11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, 1 To permit platting of a lot 1 .28 acres in the C-Com District (City Code requires a 5 acre min- imum lot size, 2 To permit platting of a lot with a width of 266 feet Cit Code re uires a lot width of 300 feet 3 To permit plattingof a lot with a de th of 200 feet (City Code re uires a lot depth of 300 feet), 4 Subdivision 3, J, 2, to permit out- side display area exceeding 10% of the ground floor area of the building housing the principle use City Code maximum outside dis- play area is 10% of the ground floor area of the building housing the principle use), 5 Subdivision 3, K, to permit 75% of exterior building material to be castle block and lass City Code requires 75% exterior building material to be brick, stone, or glass , 6 City Code Chapter 12, Subdivision 12, A, to permit platting of proposed Lot 2, Jarrett Estates without frontage on a publicly dedicated street (City Code requires all lots to have frontage on a publicly dedicated street Fred Hoisington, represented Don Anderson and H.J. lyyjammer. Hoisington • noted that the request is a joint application by the Lil Red Store and the proposed Anderson Garden Shoppe. The garden shop will be a family owned and operated business. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 2 - June 11 , 1987 Site plans were displayed. • Hoisington stated that the business will be compatible with the neighborhood. It will be a one story building, done in a residen- tial style. Hoisington said that the garden shop is a speciality shop selling flowering plants, gift items and interior and exterior plant materials of all kinds. Hoisington stated that it is a seasonal business. Ten months of the year, the shop is a botique, serving about 20 patrons a day. For two months, they are a _garden shop. May is the peak month, averaging approximately 25 patrons a day. Ninety percent of the clientele are Eden Prairie residents. Hoisington said that the garden shop does not stock volume so there will be no heavy equipment or bulk produce in the area. There will be an outdoor display area with shrubs and landscape scenes in the 3200square feet behind the building. Of the 3200 square feet,_ 1200 square feet would be used- as an area for selling growing plants. Durham noted that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the proposed garden shop with the findings that the commercial use was not appropriate for the site. First Reading of the City Council is scheduled for June 16, 1987. • Harvey inquired about the City Council vote. Hoisington said that the City Council has given a preliminary approval with four votes. One of the members was absent at the last meeting. Harvey inquired about the residential driveway easements. Hoisington said that it would be a common easement. A new 16' easement across Lot l to Westgate Lane is intended to provide for a residential orientation while allowing for replacement of the easement across the Lil Red site. The Reverend Eugene Grover, 16390 Westgate Drive, opposed the variance request. He has strong feelings regarding the traffic situation. Grover was promised that the area would be residential when he moved in. He does not want his privacy taken away. Reverend Grover stated that he has a peony hedge within 18" of the boundary line. Trees and shrubs from the proposed shop would wipe out the peonies. Grover would put up his own fence if need be. Anderson asked about the Guide Plan. Durham said that the property is zoned R1-22, Residential . The Guide Plan is currently designated for Low Density Residential . There would have to be a Guide Plan change and rezoning for the garden shop use. Durham stated that the City Council 's posture is that the proposed • garden shop is an appropriate use for the site. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 3 - June 11 , 1987 A letter, written May 5, 1987, was received at City Hall from Donald Warner, 16221 Westgate Lane, in opposition of the request. • (Exhibit A) Mrs. Eugene Grover, read the Planning Commission Staff Report dated April 10, 1987: "This site as the current comprehensive Guide Plan designation- of Low Density Residential has been relied upon by surrounding residential owners for years as a reasonable use of the property and is consistent with surrounding land uses and represents the highest and best use of the site." Mrs. Grover stated that the Planning Commission voted 7-0 against the rezoning. The City Council had one member that voted nay. H.J. Nyhammer, 7447 Eden Prairie Road, stated that his property adjoins Andersons. An error was made on the Lil Red survey and rezoning. The zoning line goes through his front door. Eighty feet should be extended south to the Anderson's property for proper zoning of Lil Red. Nyhammer felt that the garden shop would be a low key operation. There should not be much extra traffic. The two entrances have wide driveways. Sandvick asked when Nyhammer's property was zoned Commercial . Durham said that it was zoned Community Commercial in 1978. • Sandvick inquired if there was any opposition to the rezoning at the time of the hearing. Nyhammer said no. Sandvick commented that Lil Red was zoned C-Com because the use already existed on the site and this was the proper zoning at that time. Hoisington stated that the amount of traffic that will be generated by the garden shop is generally less than any other acceptable alter- native use of the site. It- is a transitional use in its own right. Hoisington said that Lil Red generates 2,000 vehicle trips per day. The garden shop will generate in its peak month, 200 vehicle trips per day. It will add 1% additional traffic to the area. The peak traffic hours will be from 10:00-AM-3:00 PM. It is one of the few uses that would not have additional peak traffic. Hoisington said that a landscape plan was developed for the area adjacent to the Grovers. It included 'a 6' tall fence and several 18' tall conifers. This will effectively screen the parking lot from the Grover's house. Hoisington said that a feasibility study was done on the R1 _ Residential use. The number of units that could be put on was maximized. There was a total of 7 lots. Two of the lots were for the Nyhammer property and the other five for the Anderson property. . In order for the Andersons to break even, the lots would be sold for $40,000 apiece.with an additional $120,000 on improvements per lot. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 4 - June 11 , 1987 A developer would pay $32,000 per lot to develop the land. Anderson would be better off to divide two lots which requires • no cul-de-sac.extension. R1 is not feasible. Harvey asked if Anderson was the owner of the property. Hoisington said yes. Hoisington stated that the City Council felt that the garden shop was the best use of the site because of its transitional character- istics. The Developer's Agreement has been written to the satis- faction of the Staff and Council . Longman asked what Grover would consider adequate screening. Grover said that an 8' fence would give privacy and shut off some of the traffic noise. However, there is a high point on Anderson's property and a 6' fence would be a 3' fence at that point. Reverend Grover wondered what would happen if Anderson sold his property and another commercial use came in. Sandvick and Longman both had empathy for Grover. Sandvick stated that he would not vote for the request. Durham noted that the City Council has not had 1st Reading. Before a final approval of a project, there are 'two readings. For the 1st Reading, the proponent explains his proposal . The 2nd Reading is on the Consent Calendar with no discussion. A positive vote of four • members of the City Council is required. Anderson said that he did not feel that there was a hardship. Durham noted that the options were .to continue the items, approve the request or deny the request. Harvey inquired about the restrictive covenants. Durham said that they have to be filed with the property. Longman felt that there were three negatives: the problem of the residential property abutting it, some variance requests are quite dramatic, and the strong message from the City Council . Harvey felt that the garden shop was not appropriate use for the land. The neighbors have a right to rely on the Guide Plan. Hoisington said that the City Council has given direction as to the course of the project. Hoisington had concern as to the time - table of the project. He wanted the Board to deny the request and appeal it to the Council . MOTION: Sandvick made a motion to deny Variance Request #87-20, submitted by Don and Rita Anderson and H.J. Nyhammer with the following findings: • 1 ) The zoning is R1-22 and the current Guide Plan designates Low Density Residential use. Recommendation from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 5 - June 11 , 1987 Planning Commission was for denial . • 2) The action of the City Council was for approval . 3) Based on testimony by the Reverend and Mrs. Eugene Grover. 4) The lot size variance is extreme and not in keeping with the surrounding R1-22 characteristics. Anderson added that the variances have not been addressed and the zoning hasn't been completed. Harvey stated that the outside display area was out of proportion to what is permitted. Harvey seconded the motion.. Motion carried unanimously. Don Anderson, proponent, commented that it was unfortunate that the Board based its decision on rezoning. B. Variance request#87-28, submitted by Elvin Safety, Inc. for property located at 7300 Washington Avenue, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11.03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit a total floor area ratio (after building addition) of 0.35, City Code maximum floor area ratio in the I-2 Zoning District is 0.30 _. This variance request has been withdrawn. • C. Variance Request #87-29, submitted by LeGran Homes, Inc. for property located at 111019 Jackson Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11.03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit construction of a house 6' from a side lot line. (City Code requires a minimum side yard setback of 10' in the R1-13.5 zoning district. John Schulttes, president of LeGran Homes, Inc. reviewed the request with the Board. Schulites submitted a survey to the City and was issued a building permit. A variance was applied for when it was discovered that the setback should be 10' instead of 61 . Foundation work had already begun. Schulties bought the lot next door for $55,000. He proposes to design a home for that lot and maintain a 20' setback between the structures. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harvey made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-29, submitted by LeGran Homes, Inc. , with the following findings: 1 ) The building sideyard setback on the west lot line of Lot 5, Block 4, Bluestem Hills 2nd Addition be 14 2) This variance request must be utilized within one year. • Dean seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 6 June 11 , 1987 D. Variance Request #87-30-M, submitted by Association for Retarded Citizens • of Hennepin County. The request is to move a' building to 6350 Indian Chief Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Paul Fjare, Brauer and Associates, presented the request to the Board. Site plans were displayed. The 100 year old Holasek home, which is 2,700 square feet, will be used for administrative offices and a caretakers residence.at 'the Edenwood Camp. The home must be off the present location in Minnetonka by July 15, 1987. Sandvick asked if a bond would be put up for moving the house. Durham said that in the City Code, Chapter 10, a bond of $1000 is required. Sandvick said that the Association for Retarded Citizens of Hennepin County would be responsible for any property damage done along the way. Harvey inquired about the zoning. Durham said that the current Public Zoning District does not permit permanent or periodic residential use. It will have to be amended or a new zoning instituted. Fjare stated that the land belongs to the City. If Edenwood would cease to function, the City would have full authority to take over the structure and the site. • There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Sandvick made a motion to approve Variance 'Request #87-30-M, submitted by the Association for Retarded Citizens of Hennepin County, with the following findings: 1 ) The home may be utilized for administrative offices only until such time that a new zoning district is created, or an amendment to the Public Zoning District is accomplished which will permit residential use. 2) All requirements for house moving procedures established in Chapter 10 apply. 3) This variance request must be utilized within one year. Anderson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. E. Variance Request #87-31 , submitted by Willard L. Olsen and Barbara J. Olsen for property located at 9503 Highview Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit new construction of a house with a minimum side yard setback of 10' on the east and west side lot lines and a total of 20 feet for both sides City Code re- quires a minimum side yard setback of 15' with a total of 30' both • sides). Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 7 June 11 , 1987 Willard, Olsen, proponent, reviewed the request with the Board. • They propose to build a home on a lot that is 70' wide and 80' long on the south shore of Lake Riley. The proposed home is 50' wide and 40' deep. The two car garage is creating the need for a variance. One of the stalls, approximately 10' in width, extends past the house on the east side. Neighbors have been spoken to and there were no objections. Harvey asked if the septic system would be in the front of the home. Olsen said yes. Harvey inquired if someone had reviewed the septic system. Olsen said that someone would be coming out June 15, 1987, to review and bore holes for the septic system. Durham noted that no comments were received from neighbors at City Hall . Sandvick asked if the plans for the home were obtained first. Olsen said that the lot was found first. Longman inquired if the possibilities of using a designer or architect had been explored. Olsen said that he will call a designer or an archi- tect if the house doesn't fit. Durham said that the lot was platted in 1957. At that time, the property was zoned Rural and no minimum subdivision requirements existed. The • property was zoned R1-22 in 1969 and became a legal non-conforming lot. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Dean made a motion. to approve Variance Request #87-31 , submitted by Willard L. Olsen and Barbara J. Olsen with the following findings: 1 ) This variance request must be utilized within one year. Sandvick added that there was no opposition. Harvey added that the property is a very narrow piece of property and is unique. Anderson seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. F. Variance Request #87-32, submitted by Karl Gabel , Allstate Insurance Company for Northbrook P & C for property located at 965 Prairie Center Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .70, Subdivision 4, D, to permit a free- standing sign at 75 square feet, (City Code maximum size sign is 50 square feet in the Office Zoning District.) Karl Gobel , representing Allstate Insurance Company, presented the • request to the Board. There is an existing sign consisting of 43.3 square feet on Prairie Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 8 - June 11 , 1987 Center Drive. • Northbrook Property leases office space from Allstate. They would like to have an existing sign on the existing monument sign. Sandvick stated that Allstate Insurance is asking for a 50% increase in the variance. Gabel felt that it was not an unreasonable request. It would not create an eyesore. Sandvick inquired how far up the sign would be. Gabel said that it would be 24" high. Harvey said that an alternative would be to wall mount the sign on the building. Gabel said that he was not aware of that alternative. Gabel would have to go to the owner of the building, Opus Corporation, if anything was done to the building. Gabel would prefer to have Northbrook on the sign. Harvey asked what the offices were used for. Gabel said that the Allstate office is a district sales office for Minnesota and North and South Dakota for property and casualty life. The Northbrook office is a district sales office for Minnesota for commercial use only. • Harvey did not want to see a sign variance of 50%. Sandvick felt that 50% was substantial and that a precedent could be set. There are alternatives. Anderson inquired what the sign was made of. Gabel said that it was a brick face with a metal ramp. Adjusting the face would incur substantial expense. The Northbrook logos is approximately 15" square. The lettering would be 4" high. Anderson felt that the hardship must be determined. Gabel said that Allstate is not creating any more signage, but is moving it on the sign to a more aesthetically pleasing view. Harvey noted that the Northbrook office is not attracting the general public. Gabel said that their sales are through an agency staff that comes into the office. The proposed sign is being provided for them and for exposure to the public. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Anderson made a motion to deny Variance Request #87-32, submitted by Karl Gabel , Allstate Insurance Company with the following findings: • 1 ) A hardship has not been demonstrated. Sandvick seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 9 - June 11 , 1987 G. Variance Request #87-33, submitted by Dirlam Development for property located north of Highway #5 and south of Eileen Street, and west of • Kilmer Avenue, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance from City Code, Cha ter'.11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, to Rermit platting of a-lot in the new subdivision having an 80 j depth Cit Code requires a minimum lot depth of 100 feet. Dennis Dirlam, representing Dirlam Development, reviewed the request with the Board, Site plans were displayed. The subdivision proposal was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on May 12, 1987. The City Council approved lst Reading for zoning and replatting of the property on June 2, 1987. The site in the proposed Ridge 3rd Addition contains 24.09 acres, of which 6.36 acres are to be developed into 13' single family lots. Proposed Lot 2, Block 1 , of the Ridge 3rd Addition, will have a min- imum south side lot line of 32' instead of the required 100' . The variance is created by the location of a proposed cul-de-sac serving the 13 lots. Lot 2 will consist of approximately 17,OOO square feet. The westerly portion of the development slopes dramatically to the Kerber slough. It is not feasible to have lot depth to meet the ordinances at this point in the subdivision, • Dean felt that the slope would be' a hardship. Dirlam stated that it was a hardship because of the topography. There were no comments from the audience. MOTION: Harvey made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-33, submitted by Dirlam Development,with the following findings: 1 ) The variance request is created by topography constraints of the site dictating location of the street. No design alternatives exist to eliminate the variance request, 2) Lot 2, Block 1, shows a house pad which meets R1-13.5 zoning setback requirements, The Board of Appeals and Adjustments would not support structure setback variances for this lot. 3) This variance request must be utilized within one year, Sandvick seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously, H. Variance Request #87-34, submitted by Allen Brenna for property located at 9376 Amsden Way, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a var- iance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit construction of a house addition 28 feet from the front property • line City Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet . A1•len Brenna, proponent, presented the request to the Board. Site plans were displayed. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 10 - June 11 , 1987 Brenna proposes to add a 2' addition to the front of the home. Due to the roof design, water run-off collects adjacent to the front door and seeps into the basement. Brenna said that there were no objections from the surrounding neighbors. Brenna would also like to add a room addition over the garage. It would have a layered effect that would add some dimension to a rather flat exterior. Durham stated that the room addition did not need a variance. Brenna said that by adding a foundation in front of the front door, it will bring the entrance out and support an overhang that will have a rain gutter on it. The size of the foyer will be increased and they will be able to open the front door without hitting the stairs that gb up to the second floor. Brenna is concerned about getting water seepage again. He has calked around the front door on the outside and painted the inside walls of the basement before putting up studs and insulation. Longman asked when the home was built. Brenna replied that the home was built in 1981 . Harvey said that there are alternatives. Putting a roof on would not require a variance. Durham said that an overhang is not considered part of the structure. Sandvick inquired if an architect would be hired. Brenna said yes. Robert Vigeland, 9381 Amsden Way, felt that the request was the best solution aesthetically. Longman stated that he was in favor of the request. The same brick, shakes or shingles could be used on the structure. It will not make an impact on the neighbors. Durham said that no calls were received at City Hall . One letter was received in favor of the request from Charles T. Millberg, 9350 Talus Circle. MOTION: Sandvick made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-34, submitted by Allen Brenna with the following findings: 1 ) 28' requested on the property line and a front yard setback of 30' will not be a high impact on the neighbors. 2) There were no objections from the neighbors. 3) This variance request must be utilized within one year. Anderson seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-1-0. Harvey voted nay. Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 11 - June 11 , 1987 I. Variance Request #87-35, submitted by Craig and Kate Halverson for • property located at 10280 County Road #18, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is to have the Board of Appeals and Adjustments grant again Variance Request#86-10 permitting wood siding as a primary exterior building material on the existing structure and 'accessory structure for a time period of one year, after which time 60%_ _ acceptable masonry material and 40% woad would be required. Kate Halverson, proponent, submitted the request to the Board. Halverson requested a variance of 100% wood and glass as an exterior building material and from Variance Request Final Order #86-10 which allowed 60% acceptable masonry and 40% wood exterior building material at the May 14, 1987 meeting. The Board was not in favor of the request, so Halverson withdrew the requests and asked for a one year extension to comply with MOTION: Anderson made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-35, submitted by Craig and Kate Halverson, with the following findings: 1 ) This variance request must be utilized within one year. Harvey seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0-1 . iSandvick abstained. III. OLD BUSINESS • A petition to the City Council , to review the decision made by the Board of Appeals and Adjusments, regarding the SuperAmerica variance request was denied at the June 2, 1987 City Council meeting. IV. NEW BUSINESS None V. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Anderson moved, seconded by Sandvick, to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 PM. Motion carried unanimously. • EXHIBIT A • May 5 , 1987 Board of Appeals and Adjustments City of Eden Prairie Council Chambers 7600 Executive Drive Eden Prairie City Hall Eden Prairie , Minnesota 55344 Dear Board of Appeals , I am writing to express strong opposition to Variance Request #87-20. I live on Westgate Lane which is a cul-de-sac street with many children and very private . To have further commer- cial development adjacent to residential lots on the street would significantly harm property values and the quiet , private • nature of Westgate Lane . The development would also remove many trees from the development site which help block the view and noise of County Road 4 from Westgate Lane . I ask that you deny this variance . Thank you for your attention to this matter . S ' cerely , . onald A . Warner DAW/lag