HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Adjustments and Appeals - 08/13/1987 APPROVED MINUTES
BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS
THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 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, Dwight Harvey
BOARD STAFF: Assistant Planner, Jean Johnson and
Recording Secretary, Lynda Diede
ROLL CALL: Sandvick and Dean were absent.
I. MINUTES
A. Minutes of July 9, 1987.
MOTION: Harvey moved, seconded by Arockiasamy, to approve the
minutes of July 9, 1987. Motion carried unanimously.
II. VARIANCES
A. Request #87-37, submitted by John P. McSwiggan and Nancy McSwiggan
. for property located at 7270 Divinity Lane, 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 deck with a front yard
setback of 20 City Code requires 30'
This variance request was continued from the July 9, 1987 meeting.
John McSwiggan, 7270 Divinity Lane, presented his request to the
Board.
Photos were displayed.
McSwiggan said that there were no trees on his property. He proposes
to build a deck to take advantage of some shade that is given off of
the house.
McSwiggan stated that they moved to Eden Prairie three years ago. A
corner lot was purchased because of theadditional land on the side.
They did not realize that the City had a 30' setback on both sides of
the house.
McSwiggan said that they have control of 11% of the 10,000 square feet
on their property. The City has control of the rest. A large percentage
of the 910 square feet available to McSwiggan is covered with a patio.
. McSwiggan said that they are actually asking for 8' not 10' , if measured
to the posts. This amounts to a very small percentage.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 2 - August 13, 1987
McSwiggan stated that often a deck is determined to be a permanent
• structure with the assumption that it might become a three season
porch. McSwiggan has no intentions of building a three season porch.
Krueger inquired about an alternative location for the deck. McSwiggan
said that the Staff Report was absurd. The alternative suggested in
the Staff Report would cover the walk-out sliding glass door. It is
not an alternative for McSwiggan.
McSwiggan said that when they landscaped the lot, they did so with- the
deck in mired. They filled the area with rock and poured footings.
Letters were received by several neighbors in favor of the request.
(Exhibits A, B, C, D and E)
McSwiggan believed approval of his deck would conform with five of
the eleven objectives listed by the City. McSwiggan read from the
City Code, Chapter 11 , Land Use Regualtions (Zoning) , Section 11 .01 .
Objectives: . . .2) to foster a harmonious, convenient workable re-
lationship among land uses; 3) to promote the stability of existing
land uses that conform with the Guide Plan and to protect them from
inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions; 4) to insure that
public and private lands ultimately are used for the purposes which
are most appropriate and most beneficial from the standpoint of the
City as a whole;. . . 10) to protect and enhance real property values;
and, 11) to safeguard and enchance the appearance of the City, in-
cluding natural amenities of hills, woods, lakes, and ponds.
• Longman asked if an entrance exists from the house to a future deck
area. McSwiggan said no. The steps are on the outside.
Krueger inquired if there would be an access to the first floor.
McSwiggan said no.
McSwiggan read from the City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .45, Subd. 7,
Variance Standards: A. Variances. Variances from the strict
language of this Section may be granted by the Council only when
1 ) Such variance is determined to be in the public interest.
McSwiggan said that the house is 42' from the curb. Krueger said
that the setbacks are measured from the property line.
Harvey inquired about the 30' setback. Jean Johnson said that it is
required to create a uniform design down the street for open space
and safety.
McSwiggan said that it doesn't apply to him. His house is in line
with the street.
McSwiggan stated that there is no reason that the variance request
can't be approved other than the Board doesn't want to change the
laws.
• Krueger said that it must be judged whether it is a hardship or not.
McSwiggan said that it was in the public interest.
McSwiggan said that the deck will improve the aesthetics of the house.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 3 - August 13, 1987
Arockiasamy. inquired if it was possible to minimize the amount of
• the variance by reducing the deck. McSwiggan said that he would be
open to other possibilities. However, it would make for a small
deck.
Longamn asked about the footings . McSwiggan said that they were set
out 8' .
Harvey said trees could be purchased. The alternative of constructing
a deck behind the house would then meet the owners desire of ,shade.
Harvey noted that a 33% variance from the Code is being asked.
Crystal Roemmich, 13435 Caramel Trail , stated that the McSwiggan
house looked unfinished. The deck would give a finished look to
the house.
Arockiasamy said that it was an extreme variance. He felt that
there are alternatives.
McSwiggan said that he would be happy to compromise if it was feasible
to work with the landscaping.
Longman asked what the cost would be for the additional deck. McSwiggan
said that it would be $1500. He would do a lot of the work himself.
Longman said that he knew reputable tree moving firms that could plant
a 16-18' tree for less than 1/3 the cost of the proposed deck.
• Harvey said that there was no undue hardship.
Harvey read from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .01 , Objectives:
5) to prevent excessive population densities and over-crowding of
the land with structures . McSwiggan said that none of those conditions
exist in his case.
MOTION: Longman made a motion to deny Variance Request #87-37,
submitted by John P. McSwiggan and Nancy McSwiggan with the
following findings:
1 ) A viable alternative deck location exists.
2) A precedent may be set.
Harvey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
Johnson stated that an appeal may be made to the City Council.
•
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 4 - August 13, 1987
B. Request #87-47, submitted by Jeffrey J. and Judy A. Busch for
• property located at 9345 Garrison Way, Eden Prairie, Minnesota.
The request is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section
11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit installation of an in-ground
swimming pool 5' from the rear lot line (City Code requires a
minimum rear yard setback of 10' .
Jefffrey Busch, 9345 Garrison Way, reviewed his request with the Board.
When Busch purchased the home in April of 1987, he intended to make
improvements to the property. There is a large paved loading area
for trucks, supplying the Preserve Shopping Center, behind the house.
Installing an in-ground swimming pool was cheaper than some of the
landscaping ideas proposed.
Busch received approval from the Preserve to install the swimming pool .
When it came time to stake out the pool , Busch found out that they
were short. They had contracted for an 18' x 36' oval , but decided on
a 16' x 32' , which is a standard size pool . Busch cannot move the pool
closer to the house because a minimum setback of 4' is required.
Krueger stated that the variance would not interfere with. the 5' utility
and drainage easement which parallels the rear lot line.
• Harvey had no problem with the variance request as there is a berm
separating the shopping center and the lot.
Busch stated that neighbors on either side have-been sppken to and have
no objections to the request.
Longman noted that the request does not have a negative impact on
anyone.
MOTION: Harvey made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-47,
submitted by Jeffrey J. and Judy A. Busch, with the following
findings:
1 ) The pool setback does not adversely impact another residential
property.
2) The pool does not encroach into a utility easement.
3) The pool backs up to property zoned Commercial
4) This variance request must be utilized within one year.
Arockiasamy seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
C. Request # 87-48, submitted by Robert L. Harrington for property located
• at 16931 South Manor Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for
a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision 3, C,
to permit construction of a garage addition 16' from the front lot line
City Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 54' as per the average
front yard setback for the block
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 5 - August 13, 1987
Krueger stated that the proponent was unable to be present at the
meeting.
Johnson said that the plat included two "eyebrows" as public right-of-
way. An actual road bed has never been installed in the eyebrows and
according to the Director of Engineering, a road bed will not be
needed.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Anderson made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-48,
submitted by Robert L. Harrington with the following findings:
1 ) This variance request must be utilized within one year.
Krueger seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
D. Request #87-49, submitted by Lou and Noreen DeSotel for property located
at 13690 Theresa Place, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a
variance from City Code, Chapter 11 Section 11 .03, Subdivision 3 C,
to permit a garage addition 33 from the front property line City Code
requires a minimum front yard setback of 37' as per the average front
yard setback for the block).
Lou DeSotel, proponent, presented his request to the Board.
DeSotel proposes to convert a portion of the existing two car garage into
a family room and laundry room area. A similar two car garage will be con-
structed.
The proposed garage addition will be setback 33' from the front property
line. Approximately 50 square feet on the southwest corner of the garage
encroaches in the required average front yard setback.
DeSotel said alternatives were looked at. The proposed design was the
least disruptive. The alternative would destroy mature trees.
Krueger asked what type of trees were in the yard. DeSotel said that
there was one flowering crab and an ironwood.
Longman added that there is no other structure on the street that they
need to line up with.
There were no comments from the audience.
Noreen DeSotel said that neighbors have been spoken to and they have no
objections. (Exhibit F)
MOTION: Anderson made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-49,
submitted by Lou and Noreen DeSotel , with the following findings:
1 ) This variance request must be utilized within one year.
' Longman seconded the motion. Motion carried 4-0-1 . Krueger
abstained.
Board of Appeals and Adjustments - 6 - August 13, 1987
E. Request #87-50, submitted by Mark Seawall Homes for property located
at 10510 West Riverview Drive, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request
Is is for a variance from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision
2, B, to permit platting of proposed Lot 1 with a lot width at the street
of 50.65' (City Code requires 90' and proposed Lot 2 with a lot width
at the street of 36 City Code requires 90' .
Mark Seavall , proponent, requested by letter, dated August 13, 1987, a
continuance of Variance Request #87-50 until December 10, 1987.
MOTION: Krueger moved, seconded by Arockiasamy, to continue
Variance Request #87-50 until December 10, 1987. Motion
carried unanimously.
F. Request #87-51 , submitted by David Hoel for property located at 17707
West 62nd Street, Eden Prairie, Minnesota. The request is for a variance
from City Code, Chapter 11 , Section 11 .03, Subdivision 2, B, to permit
platting of proposed Edenbrook plat with the following lot size variances:
Lot 4 Block 1 , at 10,800 square feet, Lot 5 Block 1 , at 10,925 square
feet (City Code requires 13,500 square feet per lot).
David Hoel , 17707 W. 62nd Street, reviewed the request with the Board.
Hoel said that a portion of the property will be dedicated to the City.
It is located within the flood plain.
The average lot size for the development is 15,244 square feet.
The variances are created by the creation of Outlot A, which was requested
by the City and will be dedicated to the City.
Hoel stated that the flood plain should be preserved whenever possible.
Longman said that there should be no other front yard, side yard or rear
yard setback variance requests.
MOTION: Longman made a motion to approve Variance Request #87-51 ,
submitted by David Hoel with the following findings:
1 ) Staff would not support any front yard, side yard or rear yard
setback variances based on a plan showing house pads meeting
Code.
2) This variance request must be utilized within one year.
Harvey seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
III. OLD BUSINESS
None
IV. NEW BUSINESS
' None
Board of Appeals and Adjustments 7 August 13, 1987
V. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Krueger moved, seconded by Longman, to adjourn the meeting at
8:30 PM. Motion carried unanimously.
•
•
EXHIBIT A
--- %?�lz
4 Piz
e .__!n+ /' s< yam•.
ooe
- �� � a.t�.a-tea o� .�� - .�,,,r.�' .�/Q,•.c, ,�, ..ca�,�z r.<<.�o�...s" -A
- - --
EXHIBIT B r2ccElVtlo -(0-87
L,jce a� n S'7 -3 7
�J
I
G�GrI-Lc GL C-7 1
YLc -2— --4; J �C'^�lL wl, ,71C LL�CyL.L,vi t; ��L"E //'-ilC/u C':,E�C.•' .. .0 .
c-��, .:.�. -4.o
SL �C2-,t m-`
L/
•
EXHIBIT C
76 ca
-9 ,?7-3 7
7
�.� L<.nSL .r vJ�-L'-'L� y Q.C.�'o'Zu-L-v�Q �6-f�-r�✓ fc.v�,O�.
ljYyULY.R�(..P�, �..O.u✓ �.�-�1.- LG¢/ /1.%E-a-wrc-('�o�.-, '�-`„" //� '�J
ay
s
EXHIBIT D
� �e�. cam.—S`L•�,,a�----� �.-_, ��---
�,.� - slt
V
EXHIBIT E
City of Eden Prairie
• hoard of AdjustmentsandAppeals
7600 Executive Drive
Eiden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Sir(s) :
I am writting to voice our views on the request for variance .submitted
by our neighbors, ,John and Nancy McSwiggan . The variance (087-37)
assKs that they be allowed to build a decK the south side of their
home, As I understand it, the city requires a thirty-foot gap
between the city easement and any PERMANENT structure. Does the city
consider a decK to be a PERMANENT structure? I feel it is unfair
that they McSwiggans have to follow the guideline twice ,.just because
their lot sits on a corner. If it is a matter of saftey, consider
this; a. deck built in the position they are requesting is protected
• from the east by a two to three foot retaining wall/planter and from
the west by the home and retraining wall behind them. The only way
someone on the decK could be in danger is if someone intentionally
came from the <.south + If this were the cassse, it would seem better
to have something block the vehicle ( like the decK or the footings)
before it reaches the occupants of the house.
It is up to you to accept or reject the request, ,all I asK-i s that you
taKe this information into consideration before you make your .judgement.
Thank YOU for your time.
Sincerely, � +
724:3 Divinity Lane_
Eden Prairie
• 937-•9279
EXHIBIT F
G r t'^n e
,62rfte
aCk —,T L n
rat- i�,• v- �
Sfe i1 Q c 10P K e` s et/L�C�� I c7 ��O 7 A,,
Doh + j).0 KLL
.4nde r3, L ��i� /3 ? .30
eyet
C�c[syr/pu idGtz � J aktc