10/28/1996 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 28, 1996 Council Member Kuether asked for clarification as to how the building came to be 1-1/2 feet from the property line. Mrs. Sullivan explained that the building actually stands approximately 16 feet from the curb. Ms. Wyland clarified that the curb does not represent the property line. Mrs. Sullivan added that she conducted considerable investigation to determine what type of restriction might exist at her property location. She said she was assured there was none. She was told that a building could be placed 30 feet from the center of the street; however, later that information was retracted because consideration had not been given to the property being a corner lot. The term "setback" was not discussed. Ms. Sullivan maintains her appeal for consideration of the variance, as hardship to the land exists. She also pointed out that the Sullivan's building does not impair view, nor does it conflict with the neighborhood. Council Member Lyden asked how close the building is from the 30 -feet -from -center -of -the - street measurement. Mrs. Sullivan explained approximately 1-1/2 feet. Council Member Lyden moved that the Sullivan variance of 28-1/2 feet based upon drainage easement, unusual shape of the lot, and absence of a suitable alternate site be approved. Council Member Neal seconded the motion. Council Member Bergeson, having visited the site, expressed his agreement that characteristics of the lot may warrant the requested variance. He suggested that there is an ordinance which allows for a 5 -foot variance for a non -corner lot, and the Sullivan's situation comes very close to meeting that criterion. However, he expressed concern that a dangerous precedent could be set by allowing for this variance. Justification for this departure from the standard variance distance must be in place. Council Member Lyden asked what the costs are to the property owners for the variance. Mrs. Sullivan indicated that there was a $200 deposit and $50 filing fee for the variance. Motion carried unanimously. Consideration of MUSA Expansion on Lilac Street and Marvy Street - Ms. Wyland explained that the City received a petition from six property owners on Lilac Street requesting that their property be included in the Metropolitan Urban Service Area boundary (MUSA). The subject properties are located on the north side of Lilac between the Behm's Century Farm development and 4th Avenue. Two of the six property owners are currently having problems with their septic systems and would like to connect to municipal utilities which are available on Lilac Street. The other property owners have indicated an interest in connecting but are not experiencing immediate difficulty with their existing systems. The utilities were originally extended past these parcels to serve the Behm's Century Farm Development. Ms. Wyland added that the properties are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and indicated as residential on the City's Land Use Map. They are not, however, currently located within the City's MUSA boundary and must be included in that designation to be allowed access to the sewer system. The City must prepare a Minor Comprehensive Plan Amendment in order to extend MUSA to these properties. Staff has been advised by the Metropolitan Council that this extension is reasonable considering the eminent health hazard of the failed systems. With respect to the property located at 74 Marvy Street, Ms. Wyland explained that the owners are also experiencing difficulty with the existing septic system. A replacement system would be very costly and questionable as to its effectiveness due to poor soils. Sewer is available to the rear of this property on Apollo Drive where there is MUSA designation. However, the dwelling