HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 10-15 PCP Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 87023
Applicant: James Andrescik
Location: 5806 Halifax Avenue North
Request: Variance
Background
The applicant requests a variance from Section 35-400 of the Zoning Crdinance to
allow a zero setback for an existing garage from the north side lot line at 5806
Halifax Avenue North. The lot in question is zoned R1 and is bounded on the north,
east, and south by other single family homes, and on the west by Halifax Avenue
North. The variance request arises because the applicant, in the process of
selling his residence at 5806 Halifax, discovered that his attached garage and
second storey family room were built in 1968 over an existing storm sewer easement.
Surveys of the property revealed that the garage and family room were, in fact, built
over two storm sewer lines and that the garage encroached .6' onto the neighboring
property at 5812 Halifax Avenue North.
The family room built over the garage is set back approximately 5' further than the
north side of the garage. The original permit for the garage and family room showed
the garage set back 5' from the side lot line and the dwelling space set back 10' as
required by ordinance. However, the permit did not show all the measurements on the
lot which would have revealed that there was insufficient room on the north side of
the then existing house to make the proposed addition. The existence of the storm
sewer easement was also missed by both the owner applying for that permit and by the
City. As a result, the garage and family room addition encroach into the existing
storm sewer easement, which is 15' on either side of the common property line with
5812 Halifax, and the garage actually encroaches onto the neighboring property by
some .61 . Surveys have also revealed that the neighboring home owned by Twila
Rubenstein at 5812 Halifax Avenue North also encroaches into the storm sewer
easement by 5.491 .
The existing situation and five options for dealing with it have been outlined by the
Director of Public Works in a memo to the City Manager dated August 12, 1987 (see memo
attached) . Mr. Andrescik is pursuing Option No. 5 which entails the following:
a) Relocate the storm sewer to the portion of the easement between
the two houses.
b) Make no change to the Andrescik house.
c) Vacate those portions of the easement lying under the two houses.
d) Property owners resolve question of the encroachment of the
Andrescik house across the property line.
e) Variance from setback requirements for one or both houses
depending on amount of land purchased by Andrescik.
f) Variance from platting requirements to transfer a small wedge of
land by metes and bounds descriptionn from Rubenstein to
Andrescik.
10-15-87 -1-
Application No. 87023 continued
Mr. Andrescik is in the process of concluding an agreement with Ms. Rubenstein to
purchase a small wedge of land that would follow the wall line of the Andrescik house
where it encroaches into the Rubenstein lot. This will leave the Andrescik
residence with a zero setback from the north side lot line. Meanwhile, the City is
in the process of having a study done and a design developed for the relocation of the
storm sewer and an enlargement of its capacity to minimize flooding in the area.
Also, a first reading of an ordinance vacating the portions of the storm sewer
easement lying under both houses has been held by the City Council.
Reasoning
F. Andrescik has submitted no written arguments in support of the variance request.
This does not indicate a lack of concern, however, inasmuchas the sale of the
residence at 5806 Halifax cannot be consummated until the matters of the storm sewer
and the property line encroachment are resolved. Variances are subject to the
standards set forth in Section 35-240, Subsection 2 (attached) . The first standard
relates to hardship. "Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular
hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if
the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out." Mr. Andrescik has
apparently investigated the possibility of remodeling the house to do away with the
encroachment and he has received an estimate of $30,000 for the cost of remodeling.
In addition, he estimates that the value of the house would be reduced by
approximately $20,000. Thus, a net loss of $50,000 would be realized by Mir.
Andrescik. We would agree that this is more than a "mere inconvenience." There is
the possibility of Mr. Andrescik acquiring more land from Ms. Rubenstein so as to
meet a 5' sideyard setback and 10' for the family room. This would leave Ms.
Rubenstein's house in a substandard situation as well. Ms. Rubenstein is
apparently unwilling to sell the additional land and the City certainly cannot force
her to.
The second standard requires that the conditions upon which the application for a
variance is based are unique to the parcel of land and are not common generally to
other property in the same zoning classification. The circumstances of this
application - an attached garage built over a property line and on top of a storm
sewer - are, thank goodness, unique to this parcel and not common generally to
properties in the R1 district.
The third standard for a variance requires that the alleged hardship is related to
the requirements of the ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently
or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. In this case, although the
condition was created by Mr. Andrescik, the City did issue a permit for the work and
apparently made inspections without a proper verification of where the property
line was actually located, or noting that, even as applied for, the garage and family
room addition would be located over a storm sewer easement. Therefore, the City has
by its actions or inaction erroneously acknowledged the condition as acceptable.
On balance, the costs of total compliance at this stage appear to exceed the
benefits. It, therefore, seems reasonable to set the ordinance aside in this case
and achieve the best possible solution under the circumstances.
Finally, the granting of the variance is not to be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. In this case,
whatever injury there is to the Rubenstein property is compensated for under the
provisions of the agreement between the Andresciks and Ms. Rubenstein. We see no
injury to other neighboring properties.
10-15-87 -2-
i
Application No. 87023
J
Conclusion
Based on the reasoning outlined above, staff recommend approval of the
variance request, subject to the following conditions:
1. A variance from Section 35-400 of the Zoning Ordinance is
warranted in this case for the following reasons:
a) The remodeling of the existing residence necessary to comply
with the ordinance would be prohibitively expensive and
constitute a genuine hardship as opposed to a mere
inconvenience.
b) The circumstances of an attached garage built over a side lot
line are unique to this parcel and are not common generally in
the R1 zone.
c) The condition of the encroachment of the attached garage into
the storm sewer easement and into the Rubenstein property has
been accomplished with the erroneous acknowledgement of the
City.
d) Injury to the Rubenstein property is compensated for and
there is no injury to other properties.
e) The private cost to achieve compliance at this time exceeds
the public benefit derived from such compliance.
2. The applicant shall enter into an agreement providing for the
relocation of the storm sewer between the two houses and for the
assessment of costs prior to final vacation of the storm sewer
easement under the two houses.
10-15-87 _3-
1
� I
1
1
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 87024
Applicant: James Andrescik
Location: 5806 Halifax Avenue North
Request: Variance
The applicant requests a variance from the Subdivision Ordinance to transfer a small
wedge of land by metes and bounds rather than through formal platting. The land in
question is zoned Rl and is bounded on the north, east, and south by single-family
homes, and on the west by Halifax Avenue North. The proposed transfer of land comes
about as a result of a survey by Westwood Planning and Engineering which revealed
that the attached garage of the residence at 5806 Halifax Avenue North encroached by
.6' into the parcel of land at 5812 Halifax Avenue North. The existing legal
description of these parcels is Lot 46 (5806) and Lot 47 (5812) , Block 6, Pearson's
Northport 3rd Addition.
In the past, transfers of property by metes and bounds description have been allowed
when the underlying land is platted property and when no new buildable lots are being
created. That is the case here. Staff are, therefore, prepared to recommend
approval of the variance request without conditions, other than the following:
1. The applicant shall enter into an agreement providing for the
relocation of the storm sewer between the two houses and for the
assessment of costs.
10-15-87
1
1
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 87025
Applicant: John Ditzler
Location: 707 69th Avenue North
Request: Preliminary Plat
The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to subdivide into a lot and an
outlot the parcel of land immediately west of 701 69th Avenue North. The land in
question is zoned Rl and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North; on the east by a
single-family home and vacant Rl zoned property; on the south by the south half"of
68th Avenue North right-of-way (the street is not installed at this time) ; and on the
west by a single-family home on a long lot extending from 69th down to 68th Avenue
North right-of-way. The owner wishes to create a standard single-family lot at the
north end of the existing parcel and reserve the remainder of the land for future
subdivision.
The measurements of the two proposed parcels are as follows:
Parcel Width Depth Area
Lot 1 75.23' 134.5' 10,088 s.f.
Outlot A 75.23' 493.39' 36,997 s.f.
Total 75.23' 627.89' 47,085 s.f.
The existing legal description is "the west 75' of the east 150' of Lot 31, Auditor's
Subdivision No. 310, City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota." The
proposed legal description is Lot 1 and Outlot A, Block 1, Ditzler Addition.
A permit has been issued for a single-family home at the north end of the existing
parcel (35' south of 69th Avenue North) where the proposed Lot 1 is located. The
highest elevation on the plat is the building pad for the new residence at 849.5' .
Drainage over the entire plat is generally to the south and west. The preliminary
plat proposes drainage and utility easements of 5' in width along the side and rear
property lines and 10' in width along the front property line along 69th Avenue
North.
Although right-of-way was dedicated on the Swanco Terrace Addition to the east
approximately 10 years ago, no right-of-way is being dedicated on this plat.
Swanco Terrace dedicated 7' of additional right-of-way along 69th Avenue North
because at that time this portion of 69th was a County Road and a major collector in
the Northeast Neighborhood. This section of 69th is no longer a County Road, nor is
it a collector now since it ends in a cul-de-sac and does not intersect with Highway
252. On the south, Swanco Terrace dedicated 30' of right-of-way for 68th Avenue
North. However, the City Engineer advises against the dedication of right-of-way
for 68th at present because the layout of a future subdivision is not known at this
time. It may be that lots would be created fronting on a cul-de-sac at the end of
Camden Avenue North rather than on 68th. By platting the south portion of the plat
as an outlot, the owner reserves to the future decisions about the development of the
vacant land since outlots are by definition unbuildable.
Altogether, the plat appears to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to
at least the following conditions:
10-15-87 _1_
Application No. 87025 continued
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
3. The owner shall enter into an agreement with the City prior to
final plat approval that development of Outlot A shall not
proceed until plans for access, utilities, and drainage have
been approved by the City.
10-15-87 -2-