Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 11-16 Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Regular1NA, MINUTES , Regular Meeting of the Edina Zoning Board Ow e tA Thursday, November 16, 2006, 5:30 PM Cn Edina City Hall Council Chambers HSA, �,0 4801 West 50th Street 1668 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair John Lonsbury, Steve Brown, Bill Skallerud, Rod Hardy and Jim Nelson STAFF PRESENT: Kris Aaker and Jackie Hoogenakker I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The minutes of the September 21, 2006, meeting were filed as submitted. II. NEW BUSINESS: B-06-72 Dr. Bill and JoAnne Lindsay 7424 Shannon Circle Request: 38.5 sq ft addition to the home within the 50 ft setback required from a pond Ms. Aaker told the Board the subject property is located on the south side of Shannon Circle consisting of a walk -out rambler with an attached three car garage. The property owners are in the midst of remodeling and adding on to their home with an office and expanded kitchen the only additions planned to the foot print. The additions are on the main floor and will be supported on posts. The additions are along the back side of the home and will not be visible from the front street. Ms. Aaker concluded the required 50 foot setback from the pond is a hardship that has not bee self imposed by the applicant. The Zoning Ordinance was changed in the early 1990's causing portions of the existing structure to be non -conforming. The addition is minimal in scale and impact and would be farther from the pond than the existing portions of the house. Staff supports the request as submitted. The proponents, Mr. and Mrs. Lindsay were present. Mr. Brown said he struggles with hardship. He pointed out the applicants recently purchased the home and the Code was in place. Ms. Aaker responded that in her opinion regardless of who owns the property or when the property was purchased the Code changed after the house was constructed. The hardship was not self imposed. Chair Lonsbury commented that he appreciates the struggle to find hardship; adding one could argue the proponents are creating the hardship because they want to add on; however, almost every variance request could be viewed that way. Chair Lonsbury said in this instance the Code change created the hardship, at least in his opinion. Mr. Skallerud stated in his opinion this case meets the definition of hardship, adding he has no problem with the request as submitted. Continuing, Mr. Skallerud pointed out that the majority of the house is non -conforming and the proposed additions are actually farther from the pond than portions of the existing house. Mr. Nelson told the Board he has no problem with this request, especially since the additions encroach less into the setback than portions of the existing house. Mr. Hardy said he agrees with Mr. Skallerud, adding that defining hardship is difficult at best and in this instance the change in Code was not created by the City, and not applied fairly to fully developed communities. Mr. Skallerud moved variance approval subject to the plan presented and the use of matching materials. Mr. Nelson seconded the motion. Approval is based on the fact that the setback requirements from water bodies was changed years after the house was constructed, noting the proposed additions are farther from the pond than portions of the existing house, and the proposed additions will not alter or negatively impact neighboring properties. All voted aye; motion carried. B-06-73 TCF National Bank Michael F. Kraft/Kendra Laettau, HTG Architects 333066 Ih St . PID# 29-028-24-24-0030 4 Request: A 45 stall parking variance and a 10 ft parking area setback variance. Ms. Aaker informed the Board the subject property is located at 3330 West 66th Street, just north of 66th St and east of Barrie Road. The property is known as the TCF Bank building site consisting of a two story brick building which includes a full basement and with surface parking that can accommodate 55 vehicles. The site has been improved with the TCF Bank for well over 30 years. The building is positioned towards the south end of the property providing a 42 ft front yard setback from the south lot line to the front face of the building with the parking area located behind the building to the north. The bank has a drive-through facility located off-site on property across Barrie Road on the east side; first floor of the 3400 West 66th Street building. TCF Bank's lease expires in the summer of 2007 with no option for renewal, so they will no longer have a drive-through to service their bank customers. The proposal is to relocate the drive-through to the bank property by removing 27 parking stalls on the north end of the subject site and replace the parking with a three lane drive-through. Ms. Aaker explained two variances are required to accomplish the proposed drive-through. One variance is needed to allow the parking area to be 10 ft from the westerly side street lot line along Barrie Road instead of the required 20 ft. The second variance relates to the reduction in the number of parking stalls. The existing parking lot is nonconforming providing 55 parking stalls with substandard setbacks. The calculated gross square footage of all three floors of the building requires that the site provide 73 parking stalls. The existing site provides 55 parking stalls and is under -parked per ordinance by 18 stalls. The proposed drive-through would reduce the existing parking by 27 stalls to provide a total of 28 parking stalls. Ms. Aaker told the Board they should be aware that a Final Development Plan application for the property had been submitted to the City on August 9, 2006, for demolishing the existing 14,168 sq ft bank building to allow construction of a smaller, (4,350 sq ft), bank with a drive-through, north east of the new building with parking to be located on both the north and south sides of the building. The plan included a temporary bank in the parking lot of the property to the west, (3400 West 66th Street), until construction on the TCF site would be completed. The new construction required a number of variances to be considered as part of the Final Development Plan. The Final Development Plan proposal was heard by the Planning Commission on August 30, 2006 and was tabled. Minutes of the meeting are attached for reference. Construction of a new building requires review by the Planning Commission and City Council. The plan to tear down the existing building and re -build on the site has since been withdrawn. The Final Development Plan application never returned to the Planning Commission after it had been tabled so no action on the Final K Development Plan took place. The property owners are now hoping to simply modify the existing parking area to relocate the drive-through function with no alteration to the existing building. The applicant plans to retain the existing building and modify the parking lot to accommodate a drive-through. The site adjustments require variances for reduction in parking from 55 to 28 stalls and a proposed 10 ft parking area setback on the west side of the parking lot. Regarding parking setback, the existing parking lot is nonconforming from both the east and west lot lines. The easterly setback of the parking area is approximately 5 ft. The existing westerly setback of the parking area from Barrie Road right-of-way is approximately 6 ft. The required interior side yard setback for parking areas is 10 ft with the setback from a right-of-way required to be 20 ft. The proposed parking area will improve on both nonconforming setbacks with the easterly setback adjusted to conform and the westerly setback improved from a 6 ft setback to a 10 ft setback. A 10 ft parking area setback variance is requested from the westerly lot line resulting in an improvement of the existing setback by 4 ft. Parking setbacks are increased in the proposed plan and improve upon a nonconforming situation. Staff supports the 10 ft side street setback variance for parking area. The proposed drive-through conforms to the requirements for drive aisle/canopy setback and provides adequate stacking spaces and separate drive lanes from the general parking areas. Drive-through circulation is separated from parking areas and will not be shared with general parking areas. All aspects of the drive- through conform to City Code with the exception of the removal of existing parking spaces. Ms. Aaker said the applicant is proposing a reduction in parking from 55 parking stalls to 28 stalls. The required parking per Ordinance for the gross floor area of the building is 73 parking stalls. The site is currently nonconforming, however, the Ordinance does not differentiate between office or bank use. Parking requirements are the same for both uses. The applicant has indicated that actual demand for bank parking is less than required by ordinance with the advent of electronic banking. Banks are frequented by fewer and fewer customers given options now available that hadn't existed a few years ago. The parking ordinance has not changed and does not acknowledge a decrease in parking demand for bank uses. Ms. Aaker asked the Board to note the applicant has indicated that there are 12 retail staff employees working on the main floor servicing bank customers and 17 business bank employees occupying the mezzanine level on a part time basis. The basement has an employee break room, mechanical room, restrooms and two training rooms. The floor plan indicates that the training rooms will be "closed" so basement area will no longer be factored for parking. It has also been 4 indicated on the application that the 17 part time staff members occupying the mezzanine level would be relocated "if it becomes necessary" so mezzanine space has also been excluded from the proposed parking calculations. The parking requirement has been based on the 5,437 sq ft first floor area only; therefore a total of 28 spaces would be needed. The proposal would meet City Code with 28 spaces proposed if the first floor is the only area considered for parking demand. The application has mentioned that the bank leases 45 parking stalls from the property across Barrie Road, (3400 West 66th Street). The 45 stalls are available for employee parking. Leased spaces are not permanent so they are not considered in satisfying required parking. Ms. Aaker concluded staff supports the parking area setback variance. It will improve upon an existing nonconforming condition. Staff is comfortable with the proposed parking space reduction from 55 stalls to 28 stalls to relocate the bank's drive-through function on site, given the demonstrated decrease in demand for bank customer parking. Staff is only comfortable with the proposal if variances are tied to the bank function and are non -transferable to other uses. Staff can support the request as submitted subject to the following conditions: Per the City Engineer: - Watershed permit, Proper signatures of Civil Engineers, Architects, etc., Curb cut permit, Boulevard Sidewalk installed along Barrie Road. Per Planning: A recorded agreement drawn up by the City between the applicant and the City of Edina limiting use of the building to the proposed bank function, to include language controlling the upper and lower occupancies and requiring removal of the drive through and re-establishment of parking areas if other use(s) occupy the building, or if the demand for bank parking increases to an intolerable level. Mr. Michael Kraft, was present representing TCF Bank. Mr. Skallerud said he understands the banking business has changed and agreed parking demands at bank facilities are less, adding maybe staff should revisit the Code as it relates to banking establishments and required parking. Ms. Aaker said that while the banking business has changed to include more on- line banking, etc. resulting in less physical banking visits the zoning of the site triggers parking requirements. Continuing, Ms. Aaker said in speaking with the City Attorney he indicated it is not unreasonable to add as a condition of approval (if approved) that the use is tied strictly to banking functions. Mr. Skallerud said to the best of his knowledge he hasn't sat on many Boards where an applicant requested parking variances, adding in this instance the Board may be able to take comfort in the fact that the bank also has access to leased spaces to accommodate their employees. Ms. Aaker agreed the "leased spaces" are an added benefit; however, when reviewing the application staff only looks at the subject site and what is provided on that site. Mr. Skallerud said that is understood; however, if the Board were to approve this request the Board had the knowledge that lease options are available to the bank. 5 Mr. Brown said he struggles with this request. He stated in his opinion the hardship is the banking business and the need to add a drive-through component on site. Mr. Brown pointed out as he reviewed the proposal he didn't see any interim traffic strategies. Mr. Kraft said he understands the point about hardship; however, TCF Bank is only trying to maintain their business on their site. A site they have been located at for the past 30 years. Mr. Kraft pointed out leased spaces are available for employee use and they do exist. Mr. Kraft said the intent of TCF is for the building to function as a branch facility. Continuing, Mr. Kraft said the bank will request that their part-time employees (that work on the mezzanine level) work from their home thereby eliminating that square footage from the parking calculation. The only employees on site would be employees needed to operate a bank branch. Mr. Hardy asked Ms. Aaker if occupancy is reduced would fewer parking spaces be needed. Ms. Aaker explained parking is also based on "occupied" square footage. If the mezzanine level is unoccupied along with the lower level training rooms (no public use) the square footage of those spaces is not included when calculating parking spaces. Chair Lonsbury stated at least to him this is difficult at best. He added his concern is with the mezzanine level and how that could be policed to ensure no employees work in that area. Continuing, Chair Lonsbury acknowledged TCF has been at this location for a very long time, but it appears to him that much needs to be done to the interior of the bank to accommodate the loss of parking spaces due to the addition of the drive-through component. Chair Lonsbury pointed out any favorable action the Board takes on this request is permanent. Mr. Brown said in his opinion there is so much "going on" in the greater Southdale area, adding this request isn't an improvement. Mr. Brown said he is struggling with this request and how it will impact traffic and circulation in the Southdale area. Mr. Kraft said traffic shouldn't measurably increase as a result of this proposal. Mr. Kraft reiterated banks need drive-through components to operate. Mr. Kraft said the loss of the off site drive-through lease created the need to accommodate a drive-through component on the bank site. Chair Lonsbury said he is worried about granting this request and reiterated the result would be permanent. He added his concern is if the 45 leased spaces are removed from the equation the site is under -parked. Continuing, Chair Lonsbury said reconfiguring the interior is difficult and at the end of the day the site would still be under parked. C.1 Mr. Skallerud said he agrees with comments from the Chair that if the Board were to approve this variance it would be permanent. Continuing, Mr. Skallerud acknowledged TCF has been operating at this location for a number of years, and the complexion of banking has changed; however taking that into consideration if the Board were to approve this request a condition of approval should be that the use remain a bank facility and the site can't be converted into another type of office use unless changes are implemented to bring the site back into compliance. Mr. Brown commented the drive through across the street isn't moving. It will remain. TCF is adding a drive-through to their site - so if approved there will be two drive-through facilities across from each other. That could impact traffic. Chair Lonsbury said in considering this application from the viewpoint that two drive-through facilities will be in close proximity to each other creates a concern with regard to traffic. Chair Lonsbury questioned Mr. Kraft if he knows the volume of vehicles that currently use the drive-through facility. Mr. Kraft said at this time he doesn't know that exact number. Chair Lonsbury told Mr. Kraft that information would have been helpful. Chair Lonsbury pointed out traffic has become an important issue in the greater Southdale area. Continuing, Chair Lonsbury asked if the Traffic Commission has reviewed this application. Ms. Aaker responded the City Engineer has weighed in on the project and finds no problem with the request if the recommended changes are implemented. Chair Lonsbury said at least at this time without additional traffic and volume information he feels uncomfortable making a decision on this proposal. Mr. Brown said he agrees with comments from the Chair, adding that he would also like to see more information on traffic and on the volume of cars that use the drive-through facility. A discussion ensued between Board Members on area traffic and the changes that are occurring in the greater Southdale area. Mr. Skallerud stated he is able to make a decision on this request. He said all pertinent City staff has reviewed the proposal and if certain conditions are met (as laid out in the staff report) he can support the request as submitted. Mr. Hardy stated in his opinion there has been too much discussion on issues that aren't before this Board. Mr. Hardy pointed out the applicant is requesting setback and parking variances. Mr. Hardy said he is very aware of the "Greater Southdale Area Study" and that traffic in this area is a concern, but on this issue he will not second guess staff, and staff has indicated their support for the project subject to certain conditions. Mr. Hardy said it is common knowledge that the banking industry has changed and banks no longer require the same number of parking spaces as they did in the past. Concluding, Mr. 7 Hardy stated if the Board were to approve this request subject to the conditions put forth by staff in the staff report the proposal would work. Chair Lonsbury asked Ms. Aaker if staff reviewed the variance request with the knowledge that the drive-through facility currently used by TCF would remain across the street. Ms. Aaker responded staff was aware the drive- through would probably remain. Mr. Hardy moved variance approval subject to Planning and Engineering conditions, and subject to the following condition: that an agreement is entered into and recorded between the City and TCF stipulating that if the property ceases to be used as a bank the drive-through components will be removed and the parking area restriped according to Code. Mr. Skallerud seconded the motion and asked Mr. Hardy if he would accept an amendment to the motion to include that an agreement (City and TCF) be entered into stipulating that the mezzanine area of the bank will no longer be used for occupancy and that the basement area is used only by employees of the bank. Mr. Hardy said he accepts the amendment. Chair Lonsbury asked the Board to note that Mr. Nelson will abstain from the vote. Chair Lonsbury called for the vote. Ayes; Hardy, Skallerud. Nays; Brown, Lonsbury. Abstain, Nelson. Motion failed. Chair Lonsbury told the applicant the motion failed for lack of a majority, adding they have the right to appeal the Board's decision to the City Council. III. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 6:30 PM lk W-7:,? 1ft-ed by __ N,