08-02-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ord 773 Report August 2, 2006 Page 3 4) Building permit requirement for any height retaining wall placed next to a primary structure *egress or safety exit *(ex. basement windows (the ones qualified as egress not the ranch flip ups), tuck-under garage next driveways, cellar/basement doors which are built down to provide egress, and any retaining wall which is more than four feet high and intended to keep back the earth for the explicit purpose of acting as a safety exit for the occupants of the building or home. Staff Response: The Minnesota State Building Code regulates what does and does not necessitate a building permit. The City cannot require a building permit for something that is not already outlined as such in the Minnesota code. The Code already requires that a building permit be obtained for retaining walls four feet or more in height, regardless of their location or their purpose. The City goes a step further by requiring a zoning permit for retaining walls two feet in height but not more than four feet. No permit is required for a wall less than two feet in height. 5) Also, as a suggestion, we suggest changing "no setback" to a 6 inch setback be required, since that eliminates the thought that a wall can be built directly on the line? I know the permit suggest not building a fence on the line, but why not use the ordinance to clarify that issue now. Staff Response: The Code as proposed already explicitly indicates that a fence or retaining wall may not be constructed on the lot line. It reads as follows: “A fence or retaining wall shall be installed on the applicant's property. The fence or retaining wall shall not be installed directly over the property line but shall not otherwise be subject to a setback requirement.” Staff feels this language adequately conveys the message that a fence or retaining wall may not be constructed or erected on a lot line. 6) The only other issue is has occurred over the last five years (first incident reviewed by Planning Commission was in 2001) is some home owners have built retaining walls between property line and a garage with the intent to park a vehicle on the space, I'm wondering if that specific situation should be restricted by a notice that such retaining wall landing shall be planted with grass within month and is prohibited from the parking of vehicles, recreational vehicles, trailers, accessory buildings and (other appropriate language consistent with setback requirements) of the city code. Staff Response: The construction of a retaining wall, in and of itself, would not trigger issuance of notices relating to other codes or requirements which may or may not apply. On the other hand, if it seems clear that the intent of the wall is to create a surface upon which vehicles could or would be parked (ie, alongside a garage) the applicant will be informed of the appropriate setback requirements. Likewise, if the retaining wall were to be constructed in association with a deck or patio, staff would inform the applicant about the setback, however the retaining wall in either case is not subject to the setback; the setback applies to the parking pad, deck or patio. Regarding the question of planting grass within a month, the City Code presently requires that disturbed areas be revegetated within six months after project completion, weather depending. One month, while desirable, may be too restrictive a time frame.