Loading...
1985 07 01BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MINUTES JULY 1, 1985 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Thomas Hamilton, Carol Watson and Willard Johnson. STAFF PRESENT Jo Ann Olsen, Asst. City Planner SIDE YARD SETBACK VARIANCE, 8000 and 8002 ERIE AVENUE, LESTER DEGENSTEIN, APPLICANT Olsen stated that the applicant is requesting a side yard variance to construct a 20' x 12.3' one car garage on the west side of his twin home. There are 15.3' between the home and side yard lot line. The proposed garage would be 3 feet from the lot line and require a 7 foot variance. She noted that the applicant has an existing 2 car garage and is not experiencing a hardship to warrant the variance. Planning staff recommends denial of the variance application. Watson stated this variance put the burden of maintaining the setback on the neighbor. Hamilton stated a decision cannot be made on what the neighbor can do. Degenstein stated that the 18 foot separation will be between the neighbor's garage and not his home. Watson stated she understood that and that the garage would be three feet from the lot line. Hamilton moved, seconded by Johnson to approve the variance request for a 7 foot side yard setback to build a one car garage. All voted in favor and the motion carried. VARIANCE REQUEST TO EXPAND OFFICE SPACE OF A NON-CONFORMING USE, BMT, INC., WILLIAM TURNER, APPLICANT Olsen stated that William Turner of BMT, Inc. is applying to expand his non-conforming use. The applicant wishes to expand only the office space and not the manufacturing part of the busi- ness. The proposal is for a 26' x 20' addition for offices to be located at the front of the building. She stated that the business is a legal non-conforming use and can be maintained as long as the non-conforming use is not enlarged. Although the proposed office space is not as intense Board of Adjustments and Appeals July 1, 1985 Page 2 of a use as the manufacturing part of the business, it is still considered part of the non-conforming use. The Zoning Ordinance does not allow for the expansion of a non-conforming use and therefore staff must recommend denial of the proposed expansion. Johnson stated that the judge specifically stated that the non- conforming use can continue as long as it is not expanded. Hamilton stated that the Zoning Ordinance specifically states that no non-conforming use can be expanded. Turner stated they could only try and that the building will look better. Hamilton stated they sympathize with his situation but must follow the ordinance. Swearingen stated they are BMT's closest neighbor and that he has improved the property and is not a nuisance. Watson and Johnson stated they understand but cannot allow him to expand. Hamilton moved, seconded by Watson to deny the request. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. VARIANCES TO ORDINANCE NO. 47, SECTION 14.04, RECREATIONAL BEACHLOT ORDINANCE, PLOCHER/GESKE, APPLICANTS Olsen stated that the applicants are proposing an 18 unit townhouse development on Lake Minnewashta. Part of this proposal is a recreational beachlot. The applicants are proposing one slip for each townhouse. As stated in the background, the City Council has initiated investigation of alternative recreational beachlot provisions. Staff advised the applicant that the attor- ney's office was preparing revisions to the ordinance and that the Council would have to initiate an ordinance amendment pro- cess. In the interest of time, staff advised the applicant to apply for variances to the present ordinance. The applicants are requesting the following variances to the Recreational Beachlot Ordinance No. 47-AB, Section 14.04: 2b. To allow member vehicles ingress and egress to launch and remove their watercraft from the lake; and the Homeowners Association to set and remove docks. 2d. To allow for overnight storage, overnight mooring, and overnight docking of up to a combination of 18 boat slips and moorings. Board of Adjustments and Appeals July 1, 1985 Page 3 2e. To allow for member boat trailers on the recrational beachlot and to launch boats or other watercraft by use of motor vehicles, trailers, and/or wheeled dolly. 2g. To allow for a maximum of a 100 foot dock length. Hamilton clarified the request in that they want up to 18 boat slips/moorings. Watson asked how they decide on how many docks (slips/moorings) you need before townhomes are built and moved into. Plocher explained the beachlot will be governed by the asso- ciations's board of directors. He stated that the docks would not be built until residences are filled. The docks are not year round and will be removed each winter. He stated that only the number of slips needed would be installed. Johnson asked if friends could use the docks. Plocher stated that it will be in the homeowners association's by laws that no friends' boats can be on the beachlot. He stated there will be a gate to stop others from using the beachlot. Hamilton moved, seconded by Johnson to recommend the City Council approve the following: 2b. To allow member vehicles ingress and egress to launch and remove their watercraft from the lake; and the Homeowners Association to set and remove docks. 2e. To allow for member boat trailers on the recrational beachlot and to launch boats or other watercraft by use of motor vehicles, trailers, and/or wheeled dolly. with the condition that no parking be allowed on the beachlot. The Board moved to pass 2d. and 2g. onto the the City Council for further discussion and their approval or denial. All voted in favor and the motion carried. Sosin stated he was against this action, that the current ordi- nance was reasonable and we should not change the ordinance for just one development. The current ordinance took a lot of work and is a good ordinance. Hamilton stated that times change and that ordinances must be amended. He stated that the beachlot ordinance has been challenged continuously. Wing stated he was pleased with the current beachlot ordinance and that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals was ignoring the Board of Adjustments and Appeals July 1, 1985 Page 4 Planning commission. If the ordinance is changed, then that is fine, but we should wait until then and stick with the ordinance. Watson moved, seconded by Hamilton to adjourn the meeting. Ail voted in favor and the motion carried. Prepared by Jo Ann Olsen July 11, 1985