Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 03-05 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes RegularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS HELD ON THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 1992, 5:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL MANAGER'S CONFERENCE ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman David Runyan, Robert Hale, and Charles Ingwalson MEMBERS ABSENT: Len Olson Rose Mary Utne STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker Jackie Hoogenakker I. NEW BUSINESS: B-92-7 Mark & Janet Condon 7137 Valley View Road Lot 1, Block 1, Muir Woods 2nd Addition Zoning: R-1 Request: A 54 foot lot width variance and a 7 foot frontage variance at the right of way to construct a new single family dwelling unit. Ms. Aaker presented her staff report noting the proponents have submitted application requesting variance approval to allow the construction of a single family home on Lot 1, block 1, within the Muir Wood's 2nd Addition Subdivision. The Muir Woods 2nd Addition Subdivision received final plat approval in 1977 and conformed to all applicable ordinances at that time. Ms. Aaker explained the applicants are proposing to locate a single family home near the northwest corner of the lot, with access to the property via the "neck" portion of the lot that connects with Valley View Road. Ms. Aaker asked the Board to note that a variance hearing for an identical request was heard before the board on December 7, 1987. The board unanimously approved that request. Ms. Aaker pointed out the variance approval became null and void however, 1 because a home was not constructed on the site within a years time after approval. Ms. Aaker concluded that staff recommends approval of the request as submitted. The proponent, Mrs. Condon was present along with her architects, Laurie Meyer and Kyle Hunt. Interested neighbors were present. Mr. Hale questioned in a situation such as this, what is the front yard, and how is the setback determined. Ms. Aaker explained that staff has determined that a front yard setback of 31 feet is required. Mr. Runyan pointed out in theory in a situation such as this one can choose their front yard. Mr. Ingwalson said that the topography of the lot is steep and expressed concern over the grade of the proposed road, and potential drainage problems. Mr. Hunt explained they recognize the topography is steep, and there intention is to construct the home "in the hill" becoming an aspect of retainage. Continuing, Mr. Hunt noted the proponents desire to retain as must vegetation as possible, which would afford them privacy. Mr. Hunt concluded that maintaining the vegetation, and adding additional screening along the westerly line of the site will accommodate the proponents desire to keep the property as densely vegetated as possible. Mr. Buddy Howell, 7135 Valley View Road expressed concern regarding the construction of the driveway, and the possible erosion problems that could occur as a result of its construction. Mr. Howell explained that his property is directly impacted by this proposal. A number of neighbors expressed concern over this proposal, and the fear that further subdivision may occur within the area. Their concerns were that the water run-off as a result of house construction, and the additional hard surfaces could damage. The driveway into the site is long, and steep, and also could cause run-off, and erosion into their rear yards. Finally the removal of existing vegetation will impact the neighborhood. A lengthy discussion ensued with Ms. Meyer and Mr. Hunt assuring the neighboring property owners that everything that can be done to prevent water run-off problems will be incorporated during construction, and into the site. All trees will be saved, except for those located where hard surfaces and building pads will be constructed. Board Members indicated they have a concern with this proposal. They recognized this lot is a legally platted lot, and suggested if this proposal were to be approved conditions would have to be implemented on this site to ensure compatible development. Board Members stated they specifically want this site 2 to remain as natural as possible. Mr. Hale moved approval subject to staff conditions and the additional conditions that 1) the westerly property line be designated as the front yard for setback purposes, 2) the driveway is to be constructed at a width of 12 feet, 3) the city engineer is to review, and approve drainage plans, 4) a 30 foot conservation easement is to be placed along the perimeter of the property, this conservation easement is to exclude the driveway, building pads, and the area of construction disturbance is excluded. Mr. Ingwalson seconded the motion. Mr. Ingwalson told the interested neighbors that the timing for this proposal is unfortunate, he added he realizes their concern because within a few months the Peper and Peyton properties have been developed, and many changes are occurring. All voted aye. Motion carried. B-92-8 Stephen and Kathleen Gaetner 5008 Arden Avenue zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Request: A 2.49 foot sideyard setback variance for building height exceeding 15 feet Ms. Aaker presented her staff reporting noting the property is a single family home with an attached two stall garage, setback 19.6 feet from the front building wall of the home. The applicants are requesting a 2.49 foot sideyard setback variance for building height to allow the construction of a master bedroom above a new garage to be located in front of the existing two car garage. Ms. Aaker concluded staff is supportive of improvements to the home and acknowledge the limitations of the lot. Variance approval, however, should be contingent on limiting approval to the plans submitted and provided similar materials are used to match all existing exposed areas. Mr. Gaetner told the Board the addition will provide for their family more interior space while respecting the character of the house and the neighborhood. Mr. Runyan asked Mr. Gaetner how deep the garage is. Mr. Gaetner said the garage is 23 feet deep. Mr. Hale told board members he believes this proposal has been done with sensitivity, and will be a good addition to the house, and neighborhood. Mr. Ingwalson agreed, stating he believes this plan has been well thought out. 3 Mr. Hale moved approval. Mr. Ingwalson seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B-92-9 James A. Bernklau Yorktown Mall 3301-3535 Hazelton Road Lots 1,2, and 3, Block 6, Yorktown Addition Zoning: PCD -3 Request: Variance to allow a loading berth to be located along the side of a building which faces a residential zoning district. Ms. Aaker informed the Board the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a loading berth to be added to the south side of the Yorktown Mall building. The applicant is requesting the loading berth to accommodate the needs of a new tenant. The new tenant will be a 25,957 square foot Filene's Basement Retail Store. Ms. Aaker pointed out the Edina City Zoning Ordinance number 825, Section 9, states that no loading berths shall be located on the side of a building which faces a residential district. The proposed loading area would be located along the south building wall which is adjacent to the York Condominium property to the south. Ms. Aaker concluded staff could support the request based on the following findings 1. The location of the loading dock along the south building wall is consistent with the building's original design and location of all other loading areas of the building. 2. The loading dock will be completely enclosed and screened, unlike all other existing loading areas along the south building wall. 3. The door to the loading dock will face east, so that it will not be directly visible from the residential properties to the south. 4 4. All new exposed building wall will be finished in matching materials. Mr. John Bernklau was present representing Yorktown Mall. Mr. Hale stated that although he believes an anchor tenant is needed on this site the landscaping on site is less than adequate. Mr. Hale asked who the landscaping belongs to along the berm abutting the condominium. Ms. Aaker explained that the landscaping along the berm was planted by the condominium association, and is located on condominium property. Ms. Aaker agreed that additional landscaping is needed on Yorktown property. Mr. Hale also noted that the dumpsters are exposed, and stated if approved a condition of approval should be that the dumpsters are screened. Concluding Mr. Hale questioned if due to construction of the dock, and the resulting loss of parking spaces, will the site still contain the appropriate amount of parking spaces. Ms. Aaker responded that our parking ordinance requirements will be met according to the information we have received. Mr. Bernklau explained to board members that the management of Yorktown is excited about an anchor of this size. He explained that the mall will be renovated, and it is their intent to screen the dumpsters and plant additional vegetation. Mr. Hale questioned if a semi would be able to maneuver the turn into the loading dock. Mr. Bernklau explained with the removal of parking stalls a semi will be able to maneuver into the dock. Mr. Bernklau noted that even with the removal of parking spaces in that location the site will still meet ordinance requirements for parking. Ms. Aaker explained that she believes that is true, but staff does not have an up to date parking plan. Mr. Ingwalson commented that the parking areas should be re - stripped, which is needed on site. Continuing, Mr. Ingwalson stated upgrading the mall is necessary to remain competitive, and will be good for the center, and the area on the whole. He pointed out the use, and activity will not change, and can support the addition of the loading bay with conditions. Mr. Ingwalson moved approved' subject to staff conditions, and the additional conditions that the dumpsters are to be screened; additional landscaping is to be planted along the south property line subject to staff approval; and the additional condition that a plan is to be drawn illustrating the existing parking spaces, and the parking spaces that are to be removed to accommodate the proposed loading dock, and vehicle clearance. Mr. Ingwalson asked that the parking plan also note the parking spaces required per ordinance standards. Mr. Hale seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. 5 Mr. Hale inquired where snow would be stored on site. Mr. Bernklau stated excess snow would be trucked off site. II. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. rIA cie Hoogenak 2