Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006.10.12 BOZA MinutesMINUTES HUGO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS October 12, 2006 Chairperson Schumann called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. PRESENT: Brunotte, Puleo, Schumann ABSENT: None ALSO PRESENT: Bryan Bear, Community Development Director (CDD) Michele Lindau, Community Development Assistant Minutes of July 27, 2006 Schumann made motion, Brunotte seconded, to recommend approval of the minutes of July 27, 2006 as submitted. Ayes: Brunotte, Schumann Abstain: Puleo Motion carried. Variance for Jason Schwieger for Garage Addition The Board considered the request of Jason Schwieger, 6061 144th Street North, for a variance for a garage addition to be constructed six feet from the side property line where ten feet was required by ordinance. The property was located in Rice Lake Meadows 3rd Addition and had a house with an attached two -stall 440 square foot garage. The applicant wanted to add a third stall to the garage measuring 9 X 22 feet. The addition would reduce the setback to six feet. Hugo City Code, Chapter 320, Section 1060-050.1 requires a ten foot setback. Chairman Schumann turned the gavel over to Puleo because of a potential conflict of interest. The CDD reviewed the criteria for the granting of variances and explained that the application did not meet all the criteria, specifically whether there was a hardship unique to the property. Jason Schwieger, the applicant, explained that according to his measurements only the first 11 feet of the garage would encroach within the setback, and he agreed it was a self-induced hardship but it could be argued it was a unique piece of property because it was on a curved road. He intended on putting a bedroom addition above the existing and proposed garage. His lot was greater than 15,000 square feet, and he would only be imposing on approximately 22 square feet of the setback. Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting October 12, 2006 - page 2 Puleo asked when the home was built. The applicant said he had bought the house as is approximately two years ago. He stated it was hard to put in a shed because of the easements, and he needed a bonus room. Josh Adamietz, 6071 144th Street, was present with his wife Paula. Adamietz stated he owned the property adjacent to the applicants and had concerns about the value of his home with an encroaching two-story structure. With the addition with eves, gutters, and roof overhang, there would be approximately twelve feet between the homes, and it could be a fire hazard. He disapproved of the variance and stated that any work that needed to be done within the easement would be difficult to do. Puleo asked if there were other properties with five foot setbacks. The CDD said there were, and structures could be designed with fire protection. Puleo questioned the setback of the garage on the Adamietz property. The CDD said according to the survey and a site visit, it was believed to be 10 feet. Brunotte commented that it did not appear to be by looking at the photo. Brunotte made motion to recommended approval of the variance for 6061 144th Street North to allow a six-foot side yard setback for a garage. Puleo seconded the motion because it was only a corner of the garage that would be encroaching and there were other developments with very expensive homes with five foot setbacks. All Ayes. Motion carried. Puleo turned the gavel back to Schumann. Variance for Todd Christensen for a Driveway The Board considered the request of Todd Christensen, 6192 147th Street North, for a variance to permit a driveway to be located along the side property line where a five foot edge clearance was required by ordinance and variance to allow a 32 foot wide driveway where ordinance allows a maximum width of 24 feet as measured at the property line. The property was legally described as Lot 10, Block 1, Rice Lake Meadows. The applicant expanded the driveway between the existing garage and the east property line, and constructed a retaining wall approximately 18 inches high along the property line The CDD said the driveway was noticed by the building official while investigating a complaint about the location of the storage shed. The shed was located to the rear of the home within the drainage and utility easement and approximately two feet from the side property line. The applicant has indicated he would move the shed to comply with City Code. To permit the driveway to remain as is, the applicant would need a variance from the required edge clearance, Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting October 12, 2006 - page 3 a variance from the maximum width, as well as approval from Council for an encroachment agreement to allow the driveway to be located within the six-foot drainage and utility easement located along the property line. He explained the application had been evaluated by staff and it was found it did not meet the criteria for the granting of a variance. The applicant's desire to increase the driveway was a self-created hardship. The strict enforcement of the ordinance would not cause undue hardship because a 24 -foot driveway was adequate to access a garage and the pad between the garage and property line could be removed or reduced. Schumann commented there could be an issue with the utility easement. The CDD stated policy was to prohibit encroachment into easements with permanent structures. Schumann had visited the site and noticed other homes in the area had similar structures with double garages and class five rock to expand the driveways. He questioned whether that was any more attractive. He pointed out there had been discussions on parking trailers and campers on the side of garages and he was reluctant to require the driveway be removed when the ordinance may be revised to require those items be parked there. He said the drainage and utility easement was a separate issue and staff needed to look into whether there were any utilities in the easement. Brunotte asked if the retaining wall was in the easement as well. The CDD said it was and pointed out where the wall was located on the property line. Schumann opened the public hearing. Mike Cirecis, 6212 147th Street North, said he lived next to the applicant and the driveway was not noticeable, it looked nice and the wall was well built. He said it would be a shame to have him remove it. Puleo asked about the encroachment in the easement. The CDD said the Council could approve an encroachment agreement to allow it. Schumann made motion, Puleo seconded, to table the item until the next meeting to allow staff to determine if there were any issues regarding the easement. All Ayes. Motion carried. Adjournment Puleo made motion, Brunotte seconded, to adjourn at 7:27 p.m. All Ayes. Motion carried. Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting October 12, 2006 - page 4 Michele Lindau, Secretary Board of Zoning Adjustments