12-17-96 BZA Minutes
I
I
I
1469
Minutes of a Regular Meeting of the
Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
The regular meeting of the Golden Valley Board of Zoning Appeals was held Tuesday,
December 17, 1996, in the Golden Valley City Hall, Council Conference Room, 7800
Golden Valley Road, Golden Valley, MN. Chair Herb Polachek called the meeting to order
at 7pm.
Those present were: Chair Herb Polachek; Members Mike Sell, Robert Shaffer, and
Mahlon Swedberg; and Planning Commission Representative Paula Pentel. Also present
were Staff Liaison Mark Grimes and Recording Secretary Eve Lomaistro.
I. Approval of Minutes - November 26, 1996
MOVED by Swedberg, seconded by Sell, and motion carried unanimously to approve the
minutes of November 26, 1996, as submitted.
II.
The Petitions are --
5828 Olson Memorial Highway (96-12-44)
FluiDyne Engineering Corporation
Request:
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Front Yard Setback -- 10 feet off
the required 35 feet to a distance of 25 feet. Variance is for the lack
of green space on Zane Avenue North for both the building and
parking areas; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(1) Side Yard Setback - 72 feet
off the required 100 feet to a distance of 28 feet for the proposed
building on the east side; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Side Yard Setback -- 34 feet
off the required 50 feet to a distance of 16 feet for the proposed
parking area at its closest point on the east side of the lot.
Purpose:
To allow for the construction of an office/warehouse building on the
lot.
Staff Liaison Mark Grimes gave a brief summary regarding the zoning of the property
located at 5828 Olson Memorial Highway. He noted that City Code states that those uses
allowed in the Light Industrial District (office/warehouse) are also permitted in the
Industrial District; the property at 5828 Olson Memorial Highway is zoned Industrial. Mr.
Grimes continued saying that the property was rezoned from Open Development to
Industrial on March 21,1989 allowing FluiDyne, who in 1989 owned the building across
1.470
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 2
the street at 5900 Olson Memorial Highway, to use the lot for parking. The proposed I
property was never used as a parking lot.
Staff Liaison Grimes commented that the proposed piece of property is very narrow,
making it difficult to meet side and street setback requirements. The entire lot is 44,202
sq.ft. in area or 1.01 acres. The proposed building would consist of office/warehouse
space totalling 10,075 sq.ft. Staff believe that the only way a building could be situated on
this lot is by allowing an applicant to seek certain variances.
Member Swedberg asked how the four adjacent houses are zoned and Staff Liaison
Grimes answered residential. Mr. Grimes added that the area between Zane Avenue and
TH 100, north ofTH 55, has the greatest mix of zoning in the City. He also commented
that the homes predate the businesses and are now surrounded by office/industrial and
light industrial uses. The area where the four homes are located are designated on the
Land Use Plan Map for Industrial use.
Leonard Frame, President of FluiDyne, and Ken Quass, architect for FluiDyne, were in
attendance. Mr. Frame commented that FluiDyne has been located in Golden Valley for
40 years and are willing to do what is best for the community. Mr. Frame distributed a
drawing of the proposed building, pointing out that the ground slopes down from the
residential lots and the roof of the building is lower than those lots. He continued by
saying that although some trees will be removed, the plan is to replace some of them.
Also, the mechanical equipment for heating, air conditioning, and ventilation will be inside
the building rather than on the roof. In this way, the view of the homeowners to the west
will not be impaired. He emphasized that this lot is not buildable without variances.
I
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked about grading and whether or not the
slope will be different than it is currently. She also inquired about trees. Mr. Frame
answered that the slope would be graded somewhat if the parking variance was granted,
and FluiDyne would plant some trees.
Member Swedberg asked what entered into the decision of FluiDyne to use the 65 foot
deep by 155 foot wide dimensions for the proposed building. Mr. Frame answered that a
narrower building doesn't offer the maximum usage of the space. As the width of the
structure is reduced, the building becomes less efficient from a structural point of view.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if the building would be used by
FluiDyne. Mr. Frame said yes, that his company currently occupies space in the building
across the street, which FluiDyne sold to Photo Lab last year.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel also asked if there would be any signage on I
Highway 55; Mr. Frame answered no, signage is not critical to their business.
I
I
I
:1471
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 3
Member Swedberg asked where the truck bays would be located. Mr. Quass answered
the trucks that service FluiDyne are street trucks, not over-the-road trucks. Mr. Frame
elaborated that semi's might load at the dock three or four times a year; otherwise, there
would be only city trucks making deliveries.
Member Swedberg asked for more information about what the company does. Mr. Frame
explained the company specializes in "high temperature heat equipment". They process
approximately nine or ten orders a year. He continued by saying that only five or six go
out on semi's. Mr. Frame also commented on the semi-tractor trailer traffic that currently
exists on Zane Avenue.
Member Swedberg asked if the truck bays would be on the north side of the building. Mr.
Frame answered probably.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked staff how the number of parking
places were determined. Staff Liaison Grimes answered that parking spaces were
determined by the amount of square footage of proposed office and warehouse. Mr.
Frame added that 28 parking spaces are required and 30 are planned; there will be only
15 employees on the site.
Chair Polachek asked about the decibel level needed in checking the equipment and/or
product and Mr. Frame answered that there is no noise.
Member Swedberg asked if any noxious fumes would be present. Mr. Frame answered
that in the 40 years that FluiDyne has been in the community it has not caused any
disturbance or nuisance of any kind.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if the company has looked anywhere
else for a location. Mr. Frame commented that because they already own the proposed
property, it is their desire to build on it. He also noted that the adjoining piece of property
is for sale, but the building on it is not structurally useful.
Chair Polachek asked if anyone present wanted to speak regarding this proposal.
Jim Trettel asked about noise being vented out. Mr. Frame explained that the only vents,
going to the outside of the building, are for sewer and that the air velocity needed for this
equipment is very low. Mr. Trettel talked about the slope of the hill and the proposed roof
line. He also informed the Board that he has lived at 5802 Olson Memorial Highway for
seven years. He talked about the problems he has had with the existing businesses in the
area, Le. smell from the Printed Media Service building, noise in the area, exhaust from
1472
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 4
mechanicals on roof tops, and debris blowing into his yard during snow removal from other I
lots. Mr. Trettel said he is concerned with idling semi's and snow removal if the variances
are granted for this site. He questioned what would happen to his property value if the
proposal goes through.
Don Edson, 5804 Olson Memorial Highway, commented that the request for the east side-
yard variance for 72 feet would cause the value of the homes to go down, because the
woods and wildlife, currently visible by the residents, is an important part of the value of
the homes. He continued by saying that it has been suggested to him, that sometime in
the future, some business might offer him $200,000 for his parcel, and suggested that
perhaps FluiDyne would be interested in the home sites now. Mr. Edson's wife has owned
the house and lived there for three years; Mr. Edson has lived there for three months.
Vickie Trettel, 5802 Olson Memorial Highway, stated that currently Zane Avenue is lined
with parked cars during working hours and asked if there is enough parking space for the
new building. She added that in the winter some of the existing Photo Lab parking lot is
filled with snow, allowing less cars to park in the lot. Mr. Frame stated that his 15
employees prefer to park in the lot, which is closer to the entrance than the street. He
added that the parking lot is arranged in such a way to plow all of it.
Mr. Frame commented that FluiDyne will not be using on-street parking, and because
there is only one shift, additional parking spaces would not be needed. Trucks arrive and
depart only in the day time. Lighting is planned on standards that are lower than the top of
the hill and shine down rather than out toward the houses. The neighbors stressed that
they would be looking out onto the roof and that at least five trees would need to be
removed.
I
Staff Liaison Grimes noted that a Landscape Plan is required and will be reviewed by the
Board of Building Review and must meet City requirements.
Jim Trettel stated that another neighbor, Georgia Goodman, was unable to attend the
meeting but had written a letter opposing the variances. Chair Polachek stated that the
Board received her letter in their agenda packets.
Member Swedberg asked the neighbors if their preference is that this lot remain empty
and they responded in the affirmative. Member Swedberg commented that this is a legal
lot and that eventually something will be built there. The neighbors emphasized that they
were present to try to convince the Board not approve any variances which would cause
their property values to plummet.
Member Swedberg asked the neighbors ifthey have had a comparative appraisal done I
and they said they have not. An appraisal costs about $150.00 and a comparative one
I
I
I
:1473
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 5
would be double that. The appraisal would estimate the value of the homes with and
without the proposed building. Member Swedberg reminded them that there are other
commercial buildings around them, to which the neighbors stated, that this reinforces their
statement that the approval of these variances, and yet another building in the
neighborhood, would cause their property values to decrease.
Member Swedberg asked Mr. Frame to explain in detail how FluiDyne will be a good
neighbor, how the area will look, and how the building will fit in with the neighborhood.
Mr. Frame answered that the roof line is planned to be residential looking. The heating
and air conditioning units, usually on the roof, will be inside the building. The outside
lighting would be lower than the residential lots and the lighting would shine downward.
There will be no external noise from the proposed building. They will be adding trees after
removing some during construction. There will be 30 parking spaces, when only 28 are
required, and there are only 15 employees and few visitors. He wants the building to be
nice looking and will entertain suggestions to make it even more compatible.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel stated that although the roof is residential
looking, it is still a mansard roof. Staff Liaison Grimes noted that one of the requests was
that the roof be free of equipment.
Member Shaffer asked if any relief fans or vents were planned and Mr. Frame answered
that they are all inside. Mr. Quass added that there will probably be a gas vent and sewer
vent on the roof. A neighbor added that a stack would be needed for the furnace.
Member Swedberg asked how large a hot water tank would be needed versus a
residential water tank and the architect answered that at this stage it would be no larger
than residential size.
Member Shaffer asked if FluiDyne had discussed with the neighbors what would make this
more workable for them. Mr. Frame answered that before people can come to a positive
discussion, all must feel the need. At this point there is no basis for discussion until the
variances are approved.
Vickie Trettel asked if their current occupied location would be vacated and Mr. Frame
answered yes.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel questioned who is currently parking on the
street, and noted that in 1989 a variance was requested for a parking lot, on the proposed
site, but is not being used. Mr. Frame stated that a few years ago FluiDyne employed 150
people and needed more parking spaces. FluiDyne sold a substantial interest of the
company to an organization in St. Paul who took 135 employees and FluiDyne kept 15.
1474
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 6
None of the current employees are parking on the street because they use the existing I
parking lot which is closer to the building than parking on the street. He added that some
Photo Lab employees park on the street.
Member Swedberg asked Mark Grimes how this building ranks in size to other
industrial/office buildings. Mr. Grimes answered that it is 10,075 square feet which is
small. Currently, a 20,000 sq.ft. building is under construction in Golden Valley, and it is
considered to be small. Staff Liaison Grimes commented that the biggest problem is the
shape of the lot. Member Swedberg asked if the size of the lot limits activity if that building
is sold. Mr. Grimes answered that it is limited to the zoning which is Industrial.
Member Swedberg asked the neighbors how they know that their property values would
decline if they have no comparative appraisals. Staff Liaison Grimes stated that the
Board's job is to deal with zoning, not property values. Chair Polachek commented that if
someone came in to buy all four houses the owners would probably get more than the
current value.
Member Swedberg stated his concern about how to deal with the hill and asked if the hill
would remain as it is. Mr. Frame answered that the slope will be naturally retained, no
stone or block would be used.
I
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked how semi's would maneuver in the
space available and believes the space looks tight. Member Sell answered that there is
100 feet available and a 40 foot truck could go in and out easily with no problem. He
continued by saying that a 45 foot rig has twice the needed space and that this is one of
the best plans he has seen.
Member Shaffer suggested that the issue could be held over to allow a meeting between
FluiDyne and the neighbors to clear up any conflicts. Planning Commission
Representative Pentel stated that in the two years she has sat on the BZA, the Board has
taken a hard stance when someone buys property knowing the setbacks and then tries to
push the envelope. Currently four families border the proposed lot and they must be
respected. Pentel indicated that holding over this item may not resolve any issues.
Member Sell stated that the property is zoned Industrial and the Industrial District allows
for a building not to exceed 45 feet (an approximate 3-story building). He continued by
saying that this owner has paid taxes for many years. The Board must look at the zoning
and try to get the best building they can on the proposed site.
Member Shaffer asked Staff Liaison Grimes who owned the property prior to the 1989
rezoning. Grimes stated that FluiDyne owned the property when it was rezoned from
I
I
I
I
:1.t175
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 7
Open Development to Industrial in 1989. After the rezoning, FluiDyne did not proceed
with the parking lot plans, and therefore, a variance request was never brought before the
Board.
Member Shaffer stated that although it is a small lot, it was rezoned for parking use, not
for a building; parking is different. He stated that he sees a hardship for the neighbors but
not for the property.
MOVED by Shaffer, seconded by Pentel and motion carried to deny the requests.
Member Swedberg stated that the lot has been legal for Industrial use since 1989. Mr.
Frame has proposed a small building but due to the small size it will be limited in use in
the future. Mr. Frame has a sympathetic ear for the neighbors. Despite the extent of the
variances requested, Mr. Swedberg said he was in favor of allowing them because
another building could be much worse.
Member Sell stated that this is a small building, there is plenty of access for semi's, that
tractor trailers would only be there five to 10 times a year and there should be no problem
getting them in and out. FluiDyne has been in Golden Valley for 40 years and is
interested in being in Golden Valley in the future. This is the best building the City is likely
to get on this property. FluiDyne has owned the property since 1969 as shown on legal
records of ownership.
Member Polachek stated he is torn between a good building solution and the large
variances requested.
Hearing no further discussion Chair Polachek asked for a roll call vote on the motion to
deny the requests. The results were Swedberg nay, Pentel yea, Polachek yea, Sell nay,
and Shaffer yea, totaling three yea and two nay. The motion carried and the variances
were denied.
Mr. Frame thanked the Board for their time.
701-705 Pennsylvania Avenue South and
870 Louisiana Avenue South (96-12-45)
Liberty Carton Company
Request:
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 5, Building Height -- 1.5 feet from the
required 45 feet to a height of 46.5 feet for the proposed addition; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Front Yard Setback -- 35 feet
from the required 35 feet to a distance of 0 feet, at its closest point on
the northeast side, for the lack of green space; and
1.~1:76
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 8
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements -- 8.5 feet I
off the required 10 feet of landscaped area to a distance of 1.5 feet, at
its closest point on the southeast side of the lot; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 7(A and B) Loading and Parking
Requirements -- 419 parking spaces off the required 774 parking
spaces to a minimum of 355 parking spaces; and
Waiver of Section 11.36, Subd. 9(0) Landscaping and Screening -- .
Variance request would allow semi-trailers on-site without required
screening; and
Waiver of Section 11.70, Subd. 7(C) Design Standards -- To eliminate
the required curb and gutter on the lot (at this time) and allow for the
placement of concrete parking blocks instead.
Purpose:
To make the lot legally nonconforming and to allow for the construc-
tion of a three-story addition onto the east side of the building.
Staff Liaison Mark Grimes provided a history of the property and information on a previous
variance request. Staff have met with the applicant on two occasions reviewing a site plan
and a landscape plan. City Engineer Fred Salsbury and Planning staff have visited the
site to gather additional information.
I
Staff Liaison Grimes reviewed the following information with the Board. The initial building
permit was issued 12/8/65 at which time it appeared that the 35 feet of required landscap-
ing on Laurel and Pennsylvania was met. The north side of the building was 75 feet from
the street. On 5/8/73 Liberty Carton requested a variance in order to construct a 400' x
400' addition onto the east side of the existing building. The company was not able to
meet the required parking and requested a variance for 329 parking spaces off the
required number of 682 parking spaces. The Board approved the variance with the
following conditions:
1. Creation of a permanent landscaped area all along the North side of the site.
2. Enclosure of the railroad loading docks.
3. Establishment of a 35' green area along Pennsylvania Avenue.
4. Removal of the cyclone unit from the roof of the structure.
5. Review of all structural and landscape plans by the Building Board of Review
and compliance with requirements thereof.
6. If future use requires more parking space, a parking ramp could be constructed.
On 9/4/74 Liberty Carton posted a 2-year Landscape Performance Bond. In July of 1980, I
former Director of Inspections and Community Services, Lloyd Becker released the bond.
I
I
I
1477
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 9
Staff is unable to determine from information in the file if landscape requirements were
ever met. Grimes continued his review of the property noting that on 11/9/76 Liberty
Carton approached the Board with another variance request which would allow the inside
docking and loading area to be eliminated and outside docking facilities to be established.
The Board denied this request. Liberty Carton appealed to the City Council who also
denied the request on December 6, 1976. It is unclear to staff exactly when Liberty Carton
converted their indoor loading docks to outdoor ones. On 9/11/79, the applicants
appeared before the Board to request 10 feet off the required 10 feet for green area along
the south lot line. This variance was granted.
Staff Liaison Grimes reviewed the current request commenting that the applicant is
installing an ADA-compliant elevator, along with related enhancements the entry area; this
increases the building footprint by 800 square feet. Grimes continued by saying that the
applicant is also proposing a 40' x 60' 3-floor addition on the east side of the building
which would increase the footprint by another 2,400 sq. ft. and would add 7,200 sq. ft.
more in usable space. These first two components of the proposal would not make the
building footprint nonconforming, but would reduce the amount of available parking which
is already below the standard code requirement due to the variance that was granted in
1973. Finally the applicant proposes to extend the production area mezzanine inside of
the existing building; while it would not affect the building footprint, this would add yet
another 3,300 sq. ft. of usable interior space. In total, the three components of the
applicant's proposal would raise the on-site parking requirement to 774 spaces.
Mr. Grimes said that there is some justification for the smaller parking lot. The variance
actually allows for enough parking for all the employees, including the shift changes. Staff
have requested Liberty Carton to reduce the number of semi-trailers on the site. Staff
believe that Liberty Carton has already implemented this change. Grimes told the Board
that the Landscape Plan, which will be reviewed by the Board of Building Review, should
be reviewed again by the City Engineer in order to insure that no trees are planted over, or
too near, City sewer and water lines.
Member Swedberg asked about the screening of the semi-trailers on the lot. Staff liaison
Grimes answered that they should be screened because they are considered equipment.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if the 1973 variances were met. Mr.
Grimes answered that some were met and some were not because Laurel Avenue wasn't
constructed at that time. Pentel further asked how the outside docking happened when it
was denied by the BZA in 1976. Staff is unclear on how this happened.
Abner George, Assistant General Manager for Liberty Carton, stated that the first
variance, for 1.5 feet off the maximum 45 foot height, can be eliminated as it is not an
architectural requirement. Mr. George stated that the City approved the request to move
1.478
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 10
the dock outside in 1981 and construction began in 1982. Mr. Grimes noted that a
building permit had to be issued but it must have been issued without BZA approval.
I
Mike Fiterman, President and Owner of Liberty Carton, commented that they definitely had
a building permit for the 1981 project, and that it was a substantial project. He reminded
the Board of the energy crisis during the years 1978-1981 and that by moving the docks
outside, his company saved thousands of gallons of oil. Staff Liaison Grimes stated that
there was something in the files regarding energy savings, but no City action was taken
investigating energy savings.
Member Swedberg stated that he is concerned that there was no BZA involvement in this
issue. If it came before the City Council then it's okay but something should be in the file.
Mr. George said that the zero green space along the railroad tracks is planned to be rock
but could be changed to grass. Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked what
part needs to be green and Mr. Grimes answered 35' from the property line; part of that
area includes the fire lane. Grimes said that because trees are near the water main, the
City Engineer would need to review the landscaping plan before it is approved by the
Board of Building Review.
Member Shaffer asked how many employees there are and Mr. George answered 400.
I
Planning Commission Representative Pentel said that there seems to be a discrepancy in
the parking. Mr. George stated that some of the trailer parking has already been
eliminated. Mr. Grimes added that space when the trailers are removed will be used for
cars. Pentel asked where the trailers went. Mr. George stated that they now load on two
shifts instead of one so they do not require the same number of trailers to be staged.
They have also moved some off-site.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if screening is needed and Mr.
George replied that the Landscape Plan covers the screening for the site. Mr. Grimes
asked for a Landscape Plan and Mr. George passed it out to the Board.
Member Shaffer asked if Liberty Carton has visitors and Mr. George stated that they have
some visitors with trucks that come to pick up. Mr. Grimes asked where these trucks park
and Mr. George said on both sides, mostly on the east side.
Staff Liaison Grimes stated that the landscaping is mostly on the east side of the property
and on Laurel Avenue.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel commented that she reviewed a drawing
which showed a future three-level parking ramp and asked if this is still being considered. I
I
I
I
1.479
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 11
Mr. George said no. Pentel asked if the Landscape Plan needs to be revised. Mr. Grimes
stated that when Liberty Carton goes before the Building Board of Review for approval the
City Engineer will review and make suggested revisions to the plan because of the
landscaping near the watermain and he will also want to review drainage issues on the
south side of the lot.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if the signage will change and Mr.
George stated that a sign will be on Laurel Avenue.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked which way the runoff flows. Staff
Liaison Grimes answered that there is some standing water due to the flat surface. Pentel
asked if snow is hauled off-site and Mr. Fiterman said that some is.
Member Swedberg asked how many trailers are stored on the property. Mr. George
stated that they come and go and some park there. Dennis Marsh, Assistant General
Manager of Liberty Carton, added that there could be 35. There had been 50 and 15 to
20 have been moved.
Member Sell asked if these are legal over-the-road trucks and Mr. Fiterman answered yes.
Member Swedberg stated that there is no space for storage and/or maneuvering. Mr.
Grimes reviewed the site plan. Member Swedberg asked if there are truck bays and if so,
where. Mr. George answered that there are 6 doors next to the parking lot on
Pennsylvania.
Planning Commission Representative Pentel asked if the Building Board of Review would
discuss the materials to be used. Mr. Grimes answered yes.
Member Swedberg asked if the two-story office space on the northwest was taken into
consideration when calculating needed parking and Mr. Grimes answered yes. He also
asked how much thought was given to a parking ramp and Mr. George answered that the
company has considered it.
Member Sell stated that they haven't needed additional parking due to the low number of
people who work there vs. the square footage of the building. If the building were to be
sold to a more employee-dense business, a parking ramp could be an option for more
parking.
Staff Liaison Grimes commented that the City could "no park" the streets, if parking
became a problem on Laurel Avenue. Also, the lack of parking could be a detriment to a
purchaser.
1.,180
Mr. Fiterman noted the Board's dedication to making the community a better place. He
has owned the property since 1965 and watched Golden Valley grow. He commented that
he is a third-generation owner and he and Liberty Carton care about the City, too. Mr.
Fiterman reviewed the remodeling plans for the building. The goal is to create a more
attractive building for the neighborhood and nicer space for their employees.
Member Swedberg asked the Chair if the variances will be voted on one at a time or all
together and the Chair answered all together in one motion.
Staff Liaison Grimes clarified the landscaping on the northeast corner where they propose
stone which may not be aesthetically pleasant. This can be referred to the BBR. Member
Shaffer asked if that is near the trash compactor and Grimes said yes. Mr. Fiterman I
added that there are federal regulations regarding railroad sidings such as "sound ground"
to walk on. They will check out these requirements.
Member Swedberg stated that the parking bothers him. He voted nay in the 70's because
of the parking and hasn't changed his mind. The company grew and now wants to
expand the space while reducing the parking spaces from 774 to 355. If Liberty Carton
moves out, it becomes an even bigger problem. He stated that he must vote nay due to
the parking.
Chair Polachek stated that he worked with a similar company in Wisconsin and
understands that the machinery is huge and requires only a few employees to run it. He
added that the parking is enough for now but the future could be a problem.
Member Shaffer asked about parking on the south side and Mr. Fiterman noted that it is a
fire lane along with parking.
MOVED by Pentel, seconded by Sell to approve the following waivers:
Section 11.36, Subd. 6(A) Front Yard Setback -- 35 feet from the required 35
feet to a distance of 0 feet, at its closest point on the northeast side, for the
lack of green space; and
I
I
I
I
1,181
Minutes of the Board of Zoning Appeals
December 17, 1996
Page 13
Section 11.36, Subd. 6(C)(4) Yard Requirements -- 8.5 feet off the required
10 feet of landscaped area to a distance of 1.5 feet, at its closest point on
the southeast side of the lot; and
Section 11.36, Subd. 7(A and B) Loading and Parking Requirements -- 419
parking spaces off the required 774 parking spaces to a minimum of 355
parking spaces; and
Section 11.36, Subd. 9(D) Landscaping and Screening -- Variance request
would allow semi-trailers on-site without required screening; and
Section 11.70, Subd. 7(C) Design Standards -- To eliminate the required
curb and gutter on the lot and allow for the placement of concrete parking
blocks instead. This particular variance is valid only until the City
deems it necessary to control surface water run-off in the area.
Note: The Landscape Plan will be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to
Board of Building Review.
Member Sell stated that requiring green space sometimes goes too far and gave the
example of the green space along Winnetka Avenue which has been replanted twice after
winter snow plowing and salt killed the plantings. Green space provides oxygen and can
be nice to look at but this green space isn't even attractive. Regarding the parking, he is
concerned about this big of a variance and the effect it could have in the future.
Mr. Fiterman stated that a ramp is still a viable option. A company with similar employee
density, such as a printing company, could purchase the property should it be put on the
market. He added that homes vCilued at a quarter million dollars were built in the
neighborhood after Liberty Carton was established and the value of these homes has
been retained.
The Chair called for a voice vote on the variances requested and it resulted in four yea
votes with Swedberg voting nay. MoHon passed.
III. Other Business
No other business was presented.
IV. Adjournment
Chair pO~k~he meeting at 9:10 PM.
---.
Herb Polachek, Chair. Mark Grimes, Staff Liaison