Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15.D.1. Discussion of Encroachment in Pulic Right-of-way at 1908 Rochelle Curve and 409 11th Avenue East IS'. :0. L CITY OF SHAKO PEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Discussion of Encroachments in Public Right-of-Way at 1908 Rochelle Curve and 409 11 th Avenue E. DATE: August 3, 2005 INTRODUCTION: Attached to this memo is a letter from Chad & Angela Tamke who reside at 409 11 th Avenue E. and an e-mail letter from Dan Walker who resides at 1908 Rochelle Curve, in regard to construction of retaining walls within City right-of-way and easements. Staffs request was to remove the retaining walls out ofthe right-of-way and for the proper set- back for the alley encroachment and to also remove the retaining wall out of the drainage and utility easement on 17th A venue. The purpose ofthis agenda item is for Council to discuss these encroachments and decide whether to require the property owners to remove the retaining walls or enter into an encroachment agreement for these installations. BACKGROUND: Per City Code, in Chapter 4, Section 4.03, Subd. 1 which is for Fence Construction Requirements and Subd. 2 Prohibitions and Limitations. outlined the requirements for fences and limitations in the easements in the City of Shakopee. In Subd. 1 on fence requirements, a building permit for fences less than six feet is not required. Fences over six feet in height require a conditional use permit and a building permit. The height of the fence would be measured from the existing ground and not on top of the retaining wall. In both of these locations, the property owner was planning to construct a retaining wall to three feet high and then place a six foot high fence, which would require a conditional use permit for an over height fence. Other requirements in Subd. 1, require a 3 foot setback from the property line when abutting an alley. The retaining wall being built at 409 11 th Avenue E. the property owner appears to be within City alley right-of-way and does not meet the proper setback. In Subd. 2 of Section 4.30 of the City Code, states no landscaping not limited to trees, shrub, fences, walks, and berms shall be placed in easements of the City or SPUC that will interfere with the ingress or egress by the City or SPUC for utility maintenance. In the area along 1 ih Avenue, the City does have its I-NET fiber and Shakopee Public Utilities has its electrical main line within the 10 foot drainage and utility easement. Also in this easement are Time Warner and Qwest's fiber optic lines. The property owner was constructing a three-foot high retaining wall and would be adding that amount of fill over the drainage and utility easement area. With this background on City requirements, I would then address each particular separate encroachment issue. 409 11th Avenue E. The property owner has written a letter to City Council outlining the facts as to how the retaining wall did get built and what attempts were made to discuss with City staff, prior to construction. As mentioned previously in the City Code, there is no requirement for a building permit for a fence or retaining wall unless the fence is over six feet in height and the retaining wall is over four feet in height. In regard to the retaining wall at 409 11 th A venue E., Mr. Tamke did meet with a Planner in our office and was given a fence handout, which is attached and includes the criteria of Section 4.03, Subd, 1 in the City Gode. In this handout is the requirement ofa 3-foot setback from the rear property line abutting a public alley. The property owner misinterpreted the requirement to be 3 feet off ofthe edge ofthe alley and measured from the gravel surface portion of the alley. Some times our alleys are not in the middle ofthe 16-foot right-of-way which is the normal width platted for alleys, thus the property owner needs to determine where his property line is in order to set the retaining wall to the proper setback. The property owner was also informed for the need of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) if there was an over height fence. The property owner is correct that he was unaware that he would need a CUP for over a 6- foot high fence, because he was measuring from the top of the retaining wall and not from the existing ground. Attached is a photograph showing the retaining wall and the alley. The retaining wall is being constructed around an electrical pole with an anchor line. With the proper setback the anchor and power pole would be outside of the retaining wall and would be easy to maintain by SPUC. Staff did investigate this issue after being informed of it after the July 5,2005 city council meeting. After finding some property comers, staffthen met with the property owner to inform that he may be in violation of City Code on his installation. At that time the property owner did cease his construction activities and thus the letter requesting a Joint Use or Encroachment Agreement. The issues with allowing the installation to remain are that it will hamper operations and maintenance of the alley as well as maintenance of the electric line and pole by SPUc. The retaining wall and fence would also act as a barrier for snow storage and in heavy snow seasons would require the snow to be stored on the east side of the alley. The property owner will be present to discuss this with the City Council. The property owner has appealed by a letter to the City Council to decide on whether a joint use agreement can be entered into for this fence and retaining wall in city right of way. One item that probably needs to be done in order to see the full impact ofthe installation is to have the property line surveyed so the actual encroachment can be verified. To be consistent with City Code, a CUP is needed for the overheight fence. 1908 Rochelle Curve The property owner has submitted an e-mail letter to City Council with the facts as he understands them in the installation of the retaining wall. Attached to this memo is a picture showing the retaining wall up against the sidewalk on 17th A venue. Also attached are a stop work order dated July 20, 2005 and a letter that was sent by certified mail on July 5,2005 but never received and a copy of the City Code of the requirements and limitations. Also included is a typical section of 1 ih A venue in this area showing a one- foot distance from the sidewalk to the right-of-way line. Also there exists a lO-foot drainage and utility easement along 17th A venue, which was previously, mentioned containing the City's I-NET cable as well as SPUC's electrical main line. In regard to building the retaining wall fence in his yard, it does appear that the property owner may be on City right-of way, which will soon be County right-of-way upon completion of 17th Avenue to C.R. 83. In a letter from Mr. Walker, he does describe a telephone conversation with a City employee in which he felt he was told that there was no building permit needed and he could proceed to go ahead as planned. He understood that he needed to find his property lines and stay within them. In talking with other staff, the phone conversation was indicated a permit is not needed unless the retaining wall is over 4 feet high and also stated that the retaining wall should be out of City right-of way. It appears that the retaining wall is built within City right-of-way, which would be turned over to the County in the future. In the picture that is enclosed, the property owner to the east did install a fence and has kept the fence one foot from the sidewalk where the property line is most likely. The main difference with the retaining wall is the altering of grade of at least three feet and a more permanent structure that is more difficult to remove than a fence to the east when repairing or replacing utility lines. Again, in this matter, a surveyed property line is probably in order to determine the actual encroachment of the retaining wall. Staff did conduct an attached survey of cities on the question of fences and retaining walls in easements or right of way. Some cities such as Prior Lake and Lakeville require fence permits while most do not. No fees were charged for permits in Prior Lake and Plymouth. All cities do not require a retaining wall permit if the wall is 4 feet or less. Most cities do require permission to place fences or walls in their easements with conditions. Savage requires a waiver by the property owner stating that they are responsible for removal and replacement costs ifthe city needs to access the easement. Eden Prairie and Plymouth do not allow walls or fences within any drainage or ponding easements. In Bloomington, any encroachment into public easements requires written approval of the Engineering Division. Almost all cities require the property owner to be responsible for the removal and restoration of items resulting in(any future utility work. On the issue of easement or right of way encroachment, cities do struggle with the enforcement of these ordinances. In both instances, the property owners were well intended in making improvements to their property. They also did contact staff at the city prior to doing the work which is usually not the case on most fence or retaining wall installations in the city. The city does have easements around each lot and some easements are more important than others. Ifthere is a sewer, storm sewer or watermain line or a maintenance access point to access a city facility for maintenance, these easements would be the highest priority. Easements where there are no utility lines need to serve a drainage purpose and encroachments in the easement may be acceptable if drainage is maintained and with the provision that the property owner is responsible for removal and restoration of the easement area if needed by the city. In summary, the options available for council to consider on the retaining wall/fence installations would be as follows: 1. Require the property owner to remove the retaining wall to outside the easement at 1908 Rochelle Curve and to remove the retaining wall to the proper setback along the alley at 409 11 th East. 2. Allow an encroachment agreement to be entered into for the retaining wall installation to remain with the agreement to be prepared by the city attorney, with the understanding that if the retaining wall needed to be removed due to the City or SPUC maintenance needs in the future, the removal (and subsequent relocation) would be at the property owner's expense. 3. Provide direction to staff on a different alternative. In regards to the global issue of easement encroachment, it is staff's intent to review the existing ordinance with the city attorney and look at possible revisions for council approval. Also a policy handout will be prepared explaining the city's ordinance and policies on easements and include this with future building permits and on the web site. Staff would also like to be proactive in notifying property owners of critical easements, that in the event of the city needing to utilize the easement that the property owner would be responsible for removing and restoration of any encroachment into the easement that interferes with the city's ability to maintain its facilities. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve a motion requiring the retaining wall at 409 11 th A venue East be removed from the City's right of way and placed at the proper 3-foot setback from the rear property line. 2. Approve a motion requiring the retaining wall at 1908 Rochelle Curve be removed from the City's right of way and drainage and utility area. 3. Approve a motion to allow the retaining wall at 409 11 th A venue East to remain with an encroachment agreement as prepared by the city attorney. 4. Approve a motion to allow the retaining wall at 1908 Rochelle Curve to remain with an encroachment agreement as prepared by the city attorney. 5. Direct staff to review the city's existing ordinance on Prohibitions and Limitations within city easements. 6. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff s recommendation is for the property owners to be directed to remove the walls to areas meeting the code in Chapter 4. The Council has the discretion to allow encroachments in city right of way, thus this is a policy question for the council. Staff will follow up with the city attorney on reviewing the ordinance for any possible changes that are needed and work on a handout providing information on fences and retaining walls in the city. Depending on the discussion, Council may want to table this item and request more information before making a decision. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Approve a motion to remove or to allow the retaining wall at 409 11 th Avenue East to remain with an encroachment agreement as prepared by the city attorney. 2. Approve a motion to remove or to allow the retaining wall at 1908 Rochelle Curve remain with an encroachment agreement as prepared by the city attorney. 3. Direct staff to review the city's existing ordinance on Prohibitions and Limitations within city easements. ~ Bruce Loney Public Works DIrector BI/PMP ENGRlEMPLOYEEFOWERlPPENNINGTON/COUNCIlJROWENCROACHMENTS 94.03 V. This municipality may adopt by reference any or aI/ of the fol/owing optional chapters of Minnesota Rules: Chapter 1306, Special Fire Protection System; and Chapter 1335, Floodproofing Regulations, parts 1335.0600 to 1335.'1200; W. This municipality may ad9Pt by reference appendix chapter K (Grading), of the 2002 Supplementto the 2000 International Building Code. SEC. 4.02. Repealed; (Ord. 123, July 19, 1983) SEC. 4.03. BUILDING PERMITS. It is unlawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve; remove, convert, or demolish any building or structure, or any part or portion thereof,including, but not limited to, the plumbing, electrical, ventilating, heating or air conditioning systems, water wells and on-site disposal,-systems therein, or remove or displace any soil, ground or earth preparatory to any . action, or cause the same to be done, without first obtaining a separate building permit for each such building or structure from the Building Official. It is also unlawful for any firm, person or corporation to erect, enlarge, improve, construct or move a fence in all zoning districts of the City except agricultural within the corporate limits of the City without first obtaining a permit. Notwithstanding any provision of this Section and in addition thereto, it is Unlawful for any person to remove or displace any soil, ground, gravel or earth without first obtaining a permit from the proper City officials. Subd. 1. Fence Construction Reauirements. A. Fences less than six (6) feet in height shall not require a building permit. Fences six (6) feet in height or greater shaUrequire both a conditional use permit (CUP) and building permit. All proposed fence designs for fences six (6) feet in height or greater shall be approved by the Building Official prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Added, Ord. 591, March 1,2001) B. All fencing erected in the City may be constructed adjacent to the property lines. If a fence on the rear property line abuts a public alley there must be a three (3) foot setback. C. Type of construction shall be of any materials not deemed hazardous by the Building Official and in appearance not deemed detrimental to the property values .of the area by the City Planner. D. Additional Requirements: 1. Fences six (6) feet and under shall be permitted anywhere on the lot except in the front yard setback. In the case of. a double frontage lot, fences six (6) feet high and under shall. be permitted within the front yard setback on a street frontage from which access is not obtained. (Ord. 550, June 10,1999) Fences up to three (3) feet in height shall be allowed in the front yard setback. (Amended, Ord. 571, July 27,2000) 2. Fences in excess of the above heights shall require a conditional use permit. page revised in 2003 305 . , ~ ,/ ~ .' ." '.t . ,J ~4.03 Subd. 2. Prohibitions 'and LImitations. '" . ; .' ... . A- No building permit shall be issued for. the construction, alteration;' extension or enlargement of any permaRent building, structure or fixture on, over, under or across any easement of the City or Shakopee Public Utility. Commission without first. obtaining written approval from the. City. or the' Shakopee Public Utility Commission. EXCEPTION: Building permits may be issued for buildings constructed prior to enactment of this Subdivision for repairs or alterations; however, if a building Is damaged by more than 50% of Its fair market-valuej no building permit for repairs or alterations shall be Issued. (Ord, 492', July 24, 1997) B. Movable buildings, structures or fixtures of less than 120 square feet and weighing less than 400 pounds may be placed on an easement only if they can be moved. without damage during an. emergency. . . , .. C. No Improvement far Ingress, egress, .or parking lots shall be permitted within a public easement without. a permit th.erefor. pursuant to Section 7.07 of .the Shakopee City Code. D. ..... No landscaping Including but not lImlted.to,trees, shrubs, fences, rocks and berms shall be placed on, over or across'.any'easement of the City.or. S.P.U.C. that Will Interfere With the ingress or egress by the City or S.P.U.C. for utility maintenance. E. The City or S.P.U.C., whom~ver enters upon the easement will only replace ,movable buildings as defined In Sub-paragraph B above, fences, driveways or walkways In easements for which the. proper permits were obtained prior to construction and shall either seed or sod to replace turf. The City.or. S.P.U.C. shall .' . not be responsible for replacement of any building, structure' or fixture installed without having obtained the proper permit or replacement of any landscaping except turf. EXCEPTION: Work performed prior to enactment of this Subdivision 'may not have been required to have .had a permit. In this case replacements will be made. (Ord. 67, June 18, 1981; Ord. 75, November 12,1981; Ord, 115, March , . '24, 1983-; Ord.' 129.. August ii, 1983; Ord. 221, July. 30, .1987; .Ord. 361, August 1,9, 1993; Ord. 403, March 2, 1995) SEC. 4.04. FOREIGN MATTER IN STREETS. Subd. 1. General Prohibition. No person shall drive or move. a vehicle wplch carries into or deposits In any public street, alley, or other public place, foreign matter of any kind, Including but not limited to mud, dirt, sticky substances, or litter. A person who violates this provision. shall immediately remove the foreign matter, and upon failure to do so may be prpsecuted. .. ... Subd. 2. Construction 'Sltes:'Any person, firm, or corporation to whom a grading permit, building permit, street cut permit, or utility permit has been Issued shall remove at least once each working day aflY foreign matter carried into or deposited in any public place by any vehicle. entering or leaving the construction site. (Ord. 362, September 3D, 1993) page revised In 2003 306 .., ~ Chad and Angela T amke 409 11th Ave. East Shakopee, MN 55379 952-233-4993 July 26, 2005 RE: Joint Use Agreement Dear Mayor Schmitt and members of the Shakopee City Council, We are requesting a Joint Use Agreement from the eity of Shakopee. This agreement would allow a fence and retaining wall on which we have began construction along the alley way adjacent to our property to remain in place, despite the fact that has been determined to be too close to the right-of-way. It is our understanding that this fence and retaining wall would be removed at our own expense, in the event that the eity would need to gain access to this area. In June of this year, we began a project to improve our property that includes building an 18-inch retaining wall to level our land and the placement of a privacy fence, measuring less than 6-feet, on top of that. To date, we have set the posts for our fence and constructed 95% of the retaining wall at a cost of $1018.14 for rentals, lumber, landscaping block, and other supplies. We wanted to do this project properly, so before we even purchased supplies for this project, ehad went to the eity Planning office to obtain information regarding permits, codes, rules, etc. He asked very specific questions regarding our retaining wall, addressing the fact that our property is adjacent to the alley, as well as the fact that we have a telephone pole near the edge of our yard. He was given a "Fence Handout" and a sheet that included a picture of our property along with a property description. In addition to these pieces of information, he was also given an application for a Conditional Use Permit and an information packet regarding the CUP. He was informed that the fence need only be 3-feet off the edge of the alley, which the gentleman in the office reiterated by writing "3' off alley" on the sheet with our property description. Therefore, we set our fence posts three feet from the edge of the alley, which would enclose the telephone pole in our yard. We constructed our retaining wall in front of the posts, unaware at that time that the retaining wall was included in the eity's definition of a fence. We did not think we would need the Conditional Use Permit, since our fence panels would be under the 6 foot height requirement. On July 1, after the posts were set and before the retaining wall was built beyond the first course, Angela observed two gentlemen in front of our property having a discussion that appeared to be about our home improvement project at about 8:30 a.m. One was driving a eity vehicle and wearing a fluorescent work vest. The other drove what appeared to be a personal vehicle and wore business attire. She went outside to make herself available for questions, but neither of the gentlemen approached her. On July 12, a uniformed gentleman driving a '. , eity vehicle came to our door to inform us that our project was illegal and we would not only need to stop construction immediately, but the retaining wall and fence posts would need to be removed. During this week and a half of elapsed time, the wall went from a single base course to a fully erected wall, secured by landscaping block adhesive. It is not our objective to deliberately disregard Shakopee's City eodes, nor is it our intent to create an eyesore for our neighbors. Rather, our objective in constructing this retaining wall and privacy fence is to create a safe environment for our 6 and 2 year-old boys to play in and to improve our property. In the 5 years we have lived in our home, we have called the police to remove drug paraphernalia from our yard. We have also reported "suspicious activity" (we witnessed what appeared to be a drug-related transaction), acts of vandalism to our property, vandalism of our neighbor's property where a D.W.1. was issued, and stray dogs wandering into our yard and approaching our home. We have also witnessed people stopping their vehicles in the alley to urinate on our neighbor's tree, vehicles and snowmobiles driving through our yard, and excessive speeding in the alley. We find these activities to be unacceptable in keeping with the safety and well-being of our children. It has been brought to our attention that the close proximity of the retaining wall and fence to the right-of-way could pose problems by limiting the eity's access to the telephone pole, as well as impeding snow removal and storage. Therefore, we have created a couple of different modifications to our design that may provide for some compromise to aid in resolving these issues. Naturally, our first choice (Original Plan) is for our design to stand as is. However, we have also created a plan (Change 1) that involves the indentation of our fence, leaving the pole outside of the fence for convenient access. Another change in our design (ehange 2) involves the same indentation of the fence, but the retaining wall would come in around the pole as well. All of the panels in our fence designs remove easily to provide greater access to the telephone pole. Please refer to the enclosed design plans for further explanation. We appeal to you, Mayor Schmitt and members of the City Council, to take our situation into consideration when deciding whether to allow a Joint Use Agreement. Again, our primary objective in building this fence and retaining wall is to provide a safe place for our children to play. Unfortunate failures in communication lead to the errors we made in our construction. It would create a tremendous financial burden for us to replace the fence posts and rebuild the retaining wall, as none of the materials would be salvageable. Thank you for your consideration, . '. 1",. ' ...... ". '. I'" .... '", '. .,.,". ' ." .....L. '. · .,J . I 'I ",.;" 'I,.. ,.,'I,'e '.' "'..' IT,!,!. .;", ",.. ", ," . .,..... ............, ',!, ....... ..~.. < " · I,' , <. "" , " "....... ,. ., .. .,...., , , . ~ . . . . I., ' "mi ,T! I[LLI'I , LTT" .,. ,'. i, iI," ""[ . . . . ,I LJ. ." . . . '1'" :,' .,....... < iI," < ", ,,',.; 'l[ , ',. . IT,,' , . ... .[...... ......., . .'. ....'.......... .'-'1'.'. " '.'. ...... ~. :,..' I, ir,. [ :'.' IJ :. ,', ...L . .T ' "'T. ............, . ' ,..Il\. < . , ,.,[, "",. ... <, ,'" '," . ,..,...... '.' ',,_ " ..... . ,.....' , '1':: ". ..L '.' "'i.. '.'. ' " '." i,L 'J.lL J ,L ," "'.. "1' .."'" i"" 'r .,..........' .,." ". " " ""'" ,.",..... . .,...t;:. "T' ., , ,+, l'IIi'i "!,,,;, ,L, II' , 1";'- 'T i, ,..... , """",,", '. +, LJ, '.'" . .....,' .......... , IJ, ......... 'i ,. < ,. .......... .' ,.:. . 'J' "Ii'. .L. : I';"J: . ". ""'.' '." . '.' ....... .' ! ........ , ~. "i" I'T + . . , , .,....' ". ' , " . ... . .........'. ' Ii ,I 'i' " ' " ". .' ; "'. 'jGI'~'" ' · .:,; "" .,. ." . . . ;, i.""" . !!; ! '".,L '.! : :,; .: .,., ' ;, ' .., , i.'...... "IL ,m" ,.' ,....,....., ' .....;. ....,. .... ,..".,...", " T::.... .....'... ," ..,' ..! ~,.. " ,T ,! 'i. .'.' .... ........;.... ,........., "', ... .. . .. ,.j f.-"" '. ...... .". . \'1"'1.' r-:',;;',I ' . "I' I,. '..1 '.'1,'.' ,. , ..., ,.., i " T-iR "'..~. .' . " T 'T,'I T .' ,. ," ,......,. ,'" ',"'. ""'. '.... ~~ 'T'" "J.; ... . ,1, ,. ,".T'" .... ....... ",...., ,.,...." ~, . ..,.,. ,.L,l' .1, . 'TTLL 'T "'T " . .1, ...... ..! I 'f ,. '. ,," < .. "".'. . .." ',' ' .,...,...,.., ',' ,'.!I ,.. ,...... .: ,I'lTi 'i['ll' ... .. ,; '. .',.: ., ...........,..... ",L,! .' "TT: ""."". . ;, . ; . " " ' , ".; ,..' .' i..,.. , ." ' H " ,:3'LG~~t .TILHJr!=t ,;;, fij f ['f . ,L · 1 rH ! . . ..'.... ... .. . :' i' ,; !.. . :>(Ii~ta4TlC' '.: :, '. ,,',' ".11,' 'I ". . TI; '," ......'.'....... " ,I . ,. ""' """L .,....." ,..", < .' ".' . 1:11 ."J"[ ,..lrL" ,I i.I'" e 'e.' . '. G ' ':t. .'.. . ' I F.rr:Z;4. Wfl'Yh " '.Tl j' '." i, .' gr.. TA. wZ.N.G: ,., ~' . . .' .: :,..... ". '",., l' _IV '. . <')/1 'Ai"" ' , :'. ' , . ' . ' . .' "'" "::..J:'" '.' Arn <r ..'..'...,. ,.Z.Z., .." """ :1 . " ., '." il:! " ',., ",! ",: .'."': .' " .... , .' . . WAl.,L ,'I.t!Zr,'! < TL , " 'i, '.. ". :;' ,. , ,. "', 'II,' "','! "'," ..' " ..., ifj7"' . , , ;1 "1'.' . "', " .".', .,. ...., '1-~ tPlfollt 'o/.. t ,I ..' ,.'....... ,....'.', '.',' .' ;\i:; ,,: ,i i.:I. iCl..~(:, , "r.,.' ,I '.~. I, . ~+ .. - v .... ,'" ,,"; A '\0..., ,...' X ,'YT T'.....)'."",',;...,'\'! . \\'\~V\J\'\\C(~'( ~H\'.\' ,-','~ .,',''';\ ,\"r'''{ 0 ?'ErA:U,irW(;'WlU.L' ., 1 -', ,1....\;.~~T, "'.' f~f':"'" ~...-.>-,,: ",'''. ..\-,4\..X,,~ .,,,, '. ' ... i ; , l ' ~ ' , : , ~ . c ' ,;." ~ l . , . . . . LIr .. 1';" , , , . . ," t '. ! .! " '.' .' , . , flEI'" r' "I"" " .. i ' _L, . ,'i!.' ..'; ,:;. ,". ", ....,.+, ,---;--J,._..-._~" '. ." .........."..'.. -.(~1fL.~ . iTL 'i" .,.....,'!' pi;'i 'i: ""',; "", .,.,. iT ;'i., ,I.: ... H, . '.. t.. . · . . .'. ......... .. -,,, t.~""....'T.....". .... Tri"" ',., i "(, .' ,T' ' . .. , . .. ..... " ,..I ,T'. '" i... ..1. '.."'. . . .'.... . ", ... ,,,.i.,,, '.' , ,1..,. .':1 '. Ll! ............,.. . . " " ,...! .L.. .' ,', , .............. . ',.1.: .], . ,1 'ii'. i . '.. . i, .,." .' , ' .' ........ ...... ....: z : ; ~(I ~C~'f ,...e ':"'+';+,+ li!l i1'.' 'lfI) Jr.rV: ; .' .: '.' . 1...',.... 'j' i i; j.'. 'rtl., +:i : ':i,,' .. . " ::.iT., '. . ' .. '.. ". . '. Zl.L(.J....l'..,L i ., J. ..' j,j . ,.... LL ...'......1....1 :. ;.! " ""]! . ",'" 0 ,. .,.. '., . ..' ,.. .... ......' i'" :"'1' ""[. '. iL' ....... . .... ..... ,'H'" .,.., """. ......... ' "........ ... 'J " .'J "i, "'T' "i'i ... .., '" ....... . < .1 ...... , '0" .; 'i' 'j' .i. ..,'1 ' !"Ti.:. . T' . '.. j ;'. i . ;..ii ','T' ;. '," ... i. ',' .' . : . :"'," .',1 1 "T" I .i ,.,i, ii'" · , .. .........' L,.. ' .... . ... '.' .U iJ.' " ,j " T:'.'. .' ! ....,. I.' """. T ""T,t,... ' "II;" ....,..... ... . ", " ..... ". '. .. .. ..... < '."" !I' . 'i' ",,: , .....",.H. :' ,.,. 'TT ... '''Ii- , "'T' ,..; "i ,!. " . ," . , ! ' ' . ........., .. . :i::': :" . i+ ,'I'" , ",,",',c"!' . . . 'T';' , ,............,. ",., .. .. .' .... ...,., "i' '; ;.. "!' ,:fL """.', t.'T ; '." ................. .. , ': ......:. '.' ..: .,..... !, ,. ...... ,! ,1 t;l~ ...........f , i.... . , "'" ' .. ;"",T' . ." ...... ii' '.. .< i",L ".'. . ,:' .. "T' 1""'.'.1 ....,. DRAFTER: SCALE: I C r,~ - / r= TITLE: () . /' . 0 NO. --r7IN kc C!.IIA^ ::J \.)( - T T (( I {T' <trJ AL r'L AN DATE: 1.~ \:.J~f ()j 5 MATERIAL: PERIOD: 7/86-224 . < SCALE: IS': / tT TITLE: NO. DATE: JJo 5" MATERIAL: PERIOD: 7/86-224 ! " .... . I ., rmlm, II .l '.m,' :'!!,I m. I.+l,i. ,+I:..imTT!!'" '...'[ 'I.,ir"['+ ,. i! I . 'm ,mil" . :. ~iT'; , ....,......m, " i T,m; 'f im,'l ' " i c,I.,. ....,.. ... ',m ... .... .m mm . . .m.m" , .' !, '" " I '. rm.mT ,T! ........m. '; ,.... tl:'\T .~ TT, ' . ..., '."m,m,m!'" ..,.....'., , .....m.., .i, ' itI . ,.' m ..... ;.' ,m, . ,m ;. ...,..... ;mc . m,' ............... .'" 'm ,. . ! ....... ,; " ;;t:, , f,' , , "~i-; r .' ,i id. , , " : , " ; " , " ,. ,". ' " 'T' ',C ..!'m ,m,m,:,.m!,..'!I : i...... ;lmIIIBOVISr,mT!. ' ....'......!.. .m, "m . ;, .. ,......... J'. 'T ,', : ' 'il, ' I,' ,!mmm'l." IIi IT, " :", ....'..I]+! " ',L.' Ti i . 'm,., '+lm.. m...... ........ .. .m . .J' ',I,...!m.m .mT;m'm.' ..... ....... . ,'. '.: 'f 'm 1 imi.!T IT, [._'! I. '.' '.. , ,i_ )....... I ",m,; "". ..... ," .:::8, " ' . .m................. , i; i i"m imT_ m" " " 'm' '.m. m. .mm m . I ! ~' , ~i imm'm' 'mm'TT, !i "um, 'i' 'i,mim, ' :' !. Ii .' i.. . ....,. IT........... ., ,m.) l' "".m.I'.. ,I'.m .,m . ' " , , . I "ml'. '. imm ; m " , . '. " .... W. i 'm , . 'm: .m" ,; mm .m ....... . m..'. ........mmmm ,m'm.. .' . I ... '?- ...... m' . ' . ,m,; "'i,, . 'm"m ......m, 'i m,m, "'. . 'i . 'i' &j ... mm:'m.m+;! .Tm ,TL ., ',IT" 'I:T1. ,'T:I,[, ' , '! .' . . i .' t=b- .. i ,. IJ Iii .Jm "mim, Tm., HI; ',m 1 .... ." I ."'. .'m,. I ..m ,.. '. '.' ,. i' ". ..i '.'. ..... r ><; (~ATF' ,.I'I' i,.'!' "T ; Ii:': m,mi i', ., i "m i"', ' .......;m . . ", ~'i' . " .m',' ,;' II ,.. C'l' ,mj ICI' iiC+ ' 'L'j': . 'i". (],) tf'GJT8 "'i (;.iiJ!. ,.mT,I,m", ...... i.I.. . . .........m..I' .....,. ...... ; " " .,...m... . mm.m':. ,..1 i'. !. ' "', T .mi m T i i' . ' ....m...m... '. '.' . . "," , i" ..... 'I' .. I, iT ; 'm ; " LI; iT" .;..; i. I.....; I',mm ..... ; G.of."" . . .. .\ f L lii'}Lm iILm,! . , m, m i,; '!' i", I, ,!m ......... .i..'..........! ;TIL;'m ........ ,;/ ,,,cr,AT/f rl\(~w'A . . .... ' i.., LJli! T'TI. 'I.m , ...., . .m.m , .' W=lJOTII 8. ll;m"!I.+ ; '; i..... ......... il:! 'i '!m [, ...'K~T,..jJ&I[IYG 'YI~lL 1m; 'T . .. ;+ ..... y. BEY 18ft' m.,. m: ' m ,.... .m,", . imi,m::., i' m.. i ~,'" i' ~ ,'k:;;V, ' '. IG- T '. .!.. . I . , .'\. ,.' \l , '" \ '\ '\' F \ ''\ '\ \ . 1,\ \ '\ \ \. ',\ \ \ "" -" . ; , . ; , . .; 'm.' 0' ' .. , . '. ........... . ii". ..1. , . . . . ,.. . , ' II' . 'I "m " . 'm ' ..: '., m.;' m........ ,...... 'E.T ,L.'.',j. L'.. '..'T ; [T.mi 'T.m!" ;', ['.l'm J Lm'!lm 'mT ......... ,.i",'.' "', . . ' , , ' ,. . ' .. . ,....... . "i i l' ...... ,,' >-.. ' m' 'm' , .,. .,.;:' \ /11;L' Ai C cit] ... ^ r- '. e. ^ .'. .'" '.....im i ".'mm . ...... . . , .m,' i . ' . _ mm , . ,VI4f.:.,61t..:,-2 . , 'M B.n;;.IY,':..J . TQ. .,,;.. .'[i'1 T "', 'T I. '.';L.. [. ['.' i.m:, L[ . iT, 'i (rjt1;"il!.H iF!F''tl ~.lt '. i: .fi [i 'ii'L . .J........I.... TO '/f,AV,, ' ......B' 'U""Ei["Vrm.'..... 1..'. ",' "', i' ..., ,imI,Ll ~ . ,....... .. ..,.. , . 'I'; i'mL .i, ....... 'm....... ........ , . " ' m ., . " .. . . Ti'.T" ,........ ........ .... I .' .......... .,m',' ........ ,. . 'II", ' i ",mm .' "Tm:.. . . , ,T' . ; : Tif. imtm,m 'Lml ....... ".+ .. ..mTT ,'iL iit, , [. 'm, ,iLL '.', .... i , ........ii ...... .... . ',' .... ., ......., .mm. ..m '.m' ......., '.. im,m .1 . "m: 'm" . ,LIL..! ,'.'LT, T 0 Tt ,Tit "" '" '; ,;T 'Tm: 'L'm; ,ii' i 'L;; "; , ,i' .. .: '... q ,.' . "'i' ,,', i'; 1m ,'i- "m,mm..m'm; ...; ....., ;m, , . ,i.' 1': ,. i' " .' m.m'm, .... " ..... . i. , ; '" , ,:,m',Lm. ifm, . . ',' ........ , "" .'i!, . . , ; ,.. fT" "'LI DRAFTER:~ SCALE: /s I r:: TITLE: C'.lJ'/I.~' *'1 NO. 'lJ!mKEI'JI,4D Q::, T T nl'tLVGE .J. DATE: l' ruL ,/ Of/)' MATERIAL: PERIOD: I 7/86-224 '.' ~ .. )-t." , ,. \l '. '." ... , " :...' l.I,' .,t. ,~. ....',. ~ ,.,,;,.1<>,.. "~ A. . ~ "'~'~ . \;t;\", ,I ... '" '\ >, ~ "-\' ',' : .) "') ':.1. ... \.\ ... '\' '. ':".'t'" ~., 1, .." ~ " ~ 'to. . '. ' '~ ',. 'y t h t~ % <, .. , );J t.~ : f{4~*' . . " ~ CITY OF SHAKOPEE FENCE HANDOUT Fences less than six (6) feet in height shall not require a building permit. Fences six (6) feet in height of greater shall require both a conditional use permit (CUP) and building permit. All proposed fence designs for fences six (6) feet in height or greater shall be approved by Building Official prior to the issuance of the building permit. Information regarding the proposed fence height, design, and materials along with a drawing which shows the proposed fence location, must be submitted with the application for a Building Permit. The Shakopee eity Code defines a fence as "any partition, structure, wall or gate erected as a dividing marker, barrier, or enclosure, and located along a property boundary, or within a lot". Section 4.03, Subd. 1, of the Shakopee City eode establishes the following criteria for the construction of fences: A. All fencing erected in the eity may be constructed adjacent to the property lines. If a fence on the rear property line abuts a public alley there must . .be a three (3)foot.setback. B. Type of construction shall be of any materials not deemed hazardous by the Building Official and in appearance not deemed detrimental to the property values of the area by the City Planner. e. Additional requirements: a. Fences six (6) feet and under shall be permitted anywhere on the lot except in the front yard setback. In the case of a double frontage lot, fences six (6) feet high and under shall be permitted within the front yard setback on a street frontage from which access is not obtained. (ord. 550, June 10, 1999). Fences up to three feet in height shall be allowed in the front yard setback (ord. 571, July 18,2000). b. Fences in excess of the above heights shall require a conditional use permit. D. The fence must comply with the Fire Departments requirements, which state that there must be a 3-foot (914.4 mm) clear space maintained around the circumference of fire hydrants except as otherwise required or approved. To locate utilities please contact Gopher State at 651-454-0002. Fences located in any easement are subject to removal, at the property owner's expense, if requested by a governmental or utility agency. For additional information on these requirements, please contact the Planning Department at (952) 233-9300. resident request Page 1 of 4 Bruce Loney From: Mark McNeill Sent: Monday, July 25,20058:42 AM To: Jeff Weyandt Cc: Bruce Loney Subject: FW: resident request I've had three Councilors ask about his one. I told them that it will be on the agenda for next Tuesday. Jeff, have you personally spoken with this guy? Do we know who or if he talked to someone here, and got bad information? From: Dan Walker [mailto:texasranger2380@yahoo.com] Sent: Sat 7/23/20057:34 PM To: John Schmitt; jlhent6@att.net; terryjoos@hotmail.com; Steve Menden; mlehman@mn.rr.com Subject: resident request July 23, 2005 Dan Walker 1908 Rochelle Curve Shakopee, MN 55379 PHONE: Home: 952-933-9609 VVork:952-941-1000 EMAIL: Home: texasranger2380@yahoo.com VV ork: dwalker@lssdata.com Mayor Schmitt and Councilors Helkamp, Joos, Menden, and Lehman: I am writing to ask for your help regarding an issue that I have encountered with building a retaining wall/fence in my yard. My wife and I purchased our fIrst home and moved to Shakopee last sununer - excited about the possibilities of owning and working on our new home. After shopping around, it seemed that Shakopee had a lot of opportunities for young families and was the right fIt for us. So, we eventually settled on our current home at 1908 Rochelle Curve and excitedly moved in. Sadly, since that time, our view of the city of Shakopee has gone downhill despite our best efforts to stay positive about our home purchase. Not long after we moved in, there was a murder on our block only a few houses down from ours. It was a very unsettling experience especially after just moving into a brand new community. Despite that, we have stayed optimistic about our home, our projects, and our choice of community. Unfortunately, now we are dealing with a completely different sort of issue that directly involves the City of Shakopee. 7/27/2005 resident request Page 2 of 4 One of the things my wife and I were most excited about when purchasing our home was fixing up our yard. When we bought this house there was only one tree and no landscaping whatsoever done to the yard. The first thing we decided we'd like to do is provide some privacy and boundaries for future children/pets in our backyard by putting up a fence, as well as preserve/enhance our sloping yard with a retaining wall. The back of our yard is up against 17th Avenue (a fairly busy non-residential road). Our backyard gradually declines from the back of the house towards 17th A venue. However, the fmal12 feet of our backyard (closest to 17th Avenue) drops off drastically - about a 4 foot drop off at the end. Our plan was to build a 3 foot high retaining wall on the 17th A venue side of our yard, fill behind the wall with drainage sand and then dirt, and then put a 6 foot high privacy fence up after filling in behind the wall. These were to block the noise and commotion on 17th Avenue. So, with that plan in mind, I called the City of Shakopee toward the end of May, 2005 (before I purchased any materials or started any work on the project) to verify that my plan was up to city codes and to see if! needed a building permit, etc. At that time, I asked several very specific questions about what I could or could not do and gave details about my plans including the five following items: 1. I specified that my address was 1908 Rochelle Curve. 2. I described my plan as I did above - saying that the 3 foot tall retaining wall would be on the edge of my property nearest 17th A venue with a fence on top of it. 3. I asked if there was any reason to have someone from the city come out and look at my yard and verify that my plan fit within city regulations. 4. I asked if there was any reason that I would need a building permit to put in a 3 foot retaining wall in that location with a 6 foot privacy fence on top of it. 5. I asked if there were any restrictions on my property that would get in the way of my plan to build this retaining wall and fence. The responses that I got were that I did not need any building permits and that there was no reason why I couldn't go ahead as I had planned. The lady I talked to told me to call Gopher State if I was going to be digging and to make sure to fmd the property stakes with a metal detector to determine where my property lines were and to stay within those. 7/27/2005 resident request Page 3 of 4 So, with that, I proceeded as planned: June 15,2005 - had 360 retaining wall blocks delivered for a total of $2003.27 July 2, 2005 - completed the retaining wall portion of my project. July 15,2005 - had 11 yards of drainage sand and 22 yards of black dirt delivered for a total of $577.37 July 19,2005 - had about 1/4 of the drainage sand distributed behind the retaining wall. July 20, 2005 at 9PM - found a STOP WORK notice stuck in my front door. July 21,2005 midday - called the number on the STOP WORK notice and was told that I was building my retaining wall on a city right of way and a drainage utility easement and that I was to move it a total of 11 feet towards my house. July 21, 2005 at 6PM - received a letter in my mailbox dated July 5, 2005 saying that I had until July 25, 2005 to move the retaining wall or further action would be taken. At this time, I also received a map of my property showing the drainage utility easement and a copy of the rule stating that "No landscaping including but not limited to trees, shrubs, fences, rocks and berms shall be placed on, over or across any easement of the City or S.P.U.C. that will interfere with the ingress or egress by the City or S.P.U.C. [Shakopee Public Utility Commission] for utility maintenance. " July 22, 2005 midday - called the number on the STOP WORK notice again to ask for an extension on the amount of time I had before further action would be taken. It was agreed that I would talk to Bruce Loney when he returns from his vacation on July 27,2005 to renegotiate the date by which I may have to remove the retaining wall. The above timeline brings you up to the current situation on July 23,2005: I have 360 blocks built into a very nice looking retaining wall that is apparently sitting on a drainage utility easement. I also have 33 yards of sand and dirt piled in my yard. Without a retaining wall, I feel my yard will slowly erode down the back slope of my yard. Besides that, without the retaining wall I have no place to put the blocks or the dirt - not to mention the fact that I do not have any money left to have them removed at this time. I feel that I took all of the necessary precautions to make sure that I was within city ordinances before starting this project. I called the city office and asked all the questions that I feel I should have 7/27/2005 resident request Page 4 of 4 asked. I made very clear what I intended to do with this project and where I intended to do it. I strongly feel that it should have been during this phone call in May, 2005 that I was made aware of both the property map and the city ordinance mentioned above - NOT on July 21, 2005 - 2 months oflabor and $2580.67 worth of materials late. What I am requesting is some sort of variance for my property to allow this retaining wall and fence to go into the drainage utility easement. It seems that other such arrangements have been made in the past, as even my immediate neighbors have shrubs and fences built in this drainage utility easement. The retaining wall is sturdy, but is not cemented together in any way and is no more permanent than a fence, a tree, or a shrub. I would be willing to put whatever legal documentation is necessary on the title of my home (or wherever) stating that the homeowner of 1908 Rochelle Curve would be immediately responsible for the costs of removing this retaining wall in the case that any utility work needed to be done by the city within this drainage utility easement - or something along those lines. I would greatly appreciate anything you can do to assist in this matter. I would be more than willing to attend a meeting of the city council to discuss any options further if you feel that would be helpful. Please do not hesitate to call or email me using any of the contact information I provided at the top of this email. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Daniel J. Walker - Shakopee home owner and resident Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.comlr/hs 7/27/2005 t.: ~.; << .- '/1 .;=_,',.< .J~:" ;'? c' '$::,~~, .. ~ ' ''.e- ~ . .t1 .' - .. '. . .~~~. " . . ~ ~ l' . :.....~,;...:. ~....~... ,...,.... '.. . . -.., .' ". .. . ... '> A ~ Z Z ~ I ~I; q-" I~ z , , ~ Z . . ~~ I I ill'!; STOP WORK . SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA OFFICE OF BUILDING OFFICIAL NOTICE This building has been inspected and 0 General Construction 4< eta'll'\ : "'l m Concrete, Masonry and Finish Cement Work . LD~l\ 0 Lathing ~ ~ - 0 Plastering iJ"t<2( +0 0 \, Elevators ~1\oJ 0 Plumbing 0 Warm Air Furnace 0 Electric Wiring 0 Steam Fitting .. ., IS NOT ACCEPTED Please correct as noted below before any further work is done. .", .. DETACH and Bring this Portion of Card With You. Location: --L3" () ~ Rc cla.J/-e ell I 11 e Date ~lt 2DJ05 . Office of the Building Official SHAKOPEE,MINNESOTA 4; ./~~/ Bu d1~o IC~ . '/2 - 3 ~ 7~ 457 o1-(-/3tJNNIC) . " ~' ,,' " DClV\ vJall(e"v QS).-94/-/000 July 5,2005 Kristin Statham Lt)oJ lc.<u 1908 Rochelle Curve Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Kristin, It has come to my attention that you are building a retaining wall on the back of your property. It appears that you have built this in the City of Shakopee right of way and not on your property. The City of Shakopee right of way along 17th Ave. is 1 foot (O.3m) behind the sidewalk. Also, you can not build a retaining wall in the drainage and utility easement - which for your property is 10 feet across the back. (See enclosed Certificate of Survey). City code 4.03 - no landscaping including rocks and berms shall be placed on, over any easement of the City Please be advised that you will have to remove your retaining wall from the right of way and drainage and utility easement by the 25th of July or further action will be taken. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie Horner Right of Way Permits 952-233-9365 Cell 612-369-4572 " , ." , ---...-- Il 17th Avenue Sta. 10+025.48 to Sta 10+335.23 rt I R/W R/W . 15.24 m 15.24 AI I ! 5.64 .. 9.6 m 9.6 m 5.64 III . MIN. 100 ifill T(FSDIL " 2.7 AI (TYP. 80TH SIDES J i 1.8 m . - 2.4 m 2.94 AI 4.2 AI 3.6 AI 1.11 AI 1.8 III 3.G m 4.2 m :; ~ is 0.3 m TIlAU THRU TURN THRU iNOO B618 CONCRETE LANE LAHE LANE LANE LANE ~ 0.3 m Ii CURB &. GUTTER PROFILE 8618 CONCRETE '2 _~ : i! 2." 4.M~ .l& OR"'E 2." CURe &. GUTTER 500 ~. 500 ,_ SEeD i j" -! ----.----------- -'--'-, ':f ~;.. --""" SOD 0.4$ m WIDE BITUMINOUS PATH CONCRFTF WALK SO mn 23010 TYPE 41 BJTUMIHDUS WEAR COURSE 100 nm CONCRETE 150 nm GRANULAR BooRaw 150 mn CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE C 1 001. CRUSHEO ROCK I COMPACTED GRANUUR SUBCRADE Cot.PACTEO GRANULAR SUBGRADE 50 nm 2340 TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR COURSE 2351 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 75 mn 2340 TYPE 31 BIT. BASE COOOSE THIS DRAWING IS TO OUR KNOWLEDGE AN ACCURATE Z50 nm CL.ASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE '1~ CRUSHED ROCkJ RECORD Of THE PROJECT AS CONSTRUCTED. RECORD DRAWING 450 mn SELECT GRANUlAR 8MROW' BRET A. WEISS. P.E. - PROJECT ENGINEER INFORMATION IS FURNISHED IIITHOUT WSB 4 ASSOCIATES RAY RWSKAI' - CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR WARRAJlTY AS TO ACCURACY. USERS lANE OTTEHSON CITY Of SHAKOPEE SHOULD FIELD VERIF'f LOCATIONS AND ~ MAY 1999 ELEVATIONS. P-ls a ljl .. co " HOTE: CLEARANCE OF 0.5 m FROM FA.CE OF CURB TO FIXED OBJECTS IaJST BE PROVIDED. = ~.~ 17th Avenue ~~~ Sta. 10+335.23 to Sta 10+814.97 ~ ~ 8- R/W ... '" 0 R/W 15.2<4 m ... .S ~ 15.24 III ;'" 7.44 m '" 7.44 III 7.8 m lJ (VARIES) . CVARIES) CVARIESI (VARIES) 2.7 III 1.8 m r:l 4.19 III 4.2 III 3.6 m ].6 m 4.2 m D.] 111 "IN. 100 nm T~ U nyp BOTH SIDES) 0.3 m 8618 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER B61 B CONCRETE ~~---si;;~~~~~~_ PROF lLE CURB 4. GUTTER ~i~ HI 2.0',( SOO ~ GRADE &JL!... ~ -.------- ~~~--------=- ~ ~-.;;;-...- ~ ! ~. W _I. SOD 0.45 .. ~~IDE I-I I SOD 0.45 m WIDE CONCRETE WALK ~i! BITUUINOIIS PATH 100 1mI CONCRETE 50 nn 2340 TYPE 41 BIT. WEAR ctUl.SE '50 Iml GRAHlA..AR BORftOW ~~liI 150 am CLASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (100'1 CRUSHED ROCIt1 COMPACTED GRANULAR SUBGRADE CDt,PACl'ED GRAHULAR SUBGRAOE ~ 50 nm 2340 TYPE 41 81T. WEAR COURSE 2357 BITUMINOUS TACK COAT NOTEI CLEARANCE Of 0.5 1ft fROM FACE OF CURB TO fiXED DfWECTS /lJST BE PROYIOED. 75 mn 2340 TYPE 31 Bn. BASE COURSE ;- 250 11m ClASS 5 AGGREGATE BASE (1001. CRUSHED RDCIt J I 450 Am SELECT GRANULAR BORROW i I I CIlY PROJ. NO. 1ll98-5 ! CONTRACTOR: CHARD TlUNG & EXCAVATING * RECORD DRAWING SAP. 166-119-02 TYPICAl SECTIONS SHEET 11 OF 30 SHEETS I _J ~', ro,[. J [/3 TO.c. <3illll '6}.J. ~3 .17TH A VENUE Yo.} I \'1}.y.q), P (cJ Po 5eJ F,. i. "5~ Elf!. vo.1i 0<1 ro for &'VCdf (Iou'" ~ 26FOOTMAX.DRIVEWAV. Q 3 L/ 33 OPENlNGTOR,O.W. TOI Qr fov"l r.l(<~ ;Or' ~ . rOI iJ.( IffA.lefrlPI11 Floor wJl USE SllT FENCE AS NEEDED l'O=:-~~/~~~NT c=::> o(",h. If.foP'; (,'n)',\ t!;/UC\. fiol'\ PROTECT STORM SYSTEM FROM CONTAMINANTS. , . NORTH "' ~31.1~ ff3/.'7J f>31.,) SCALE 1" = 30' o DENOlES IRON MONUMENT SURVEY FOR: LAURENT LAND DEVELOPMENT, INC.. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 10, Block 1, FRENCH TRACE 2ND ADDITION according to the recorded plat thereof, situate in Scott County, Minnesota. I hereby certify that this map was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and , that I am a. duly licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Dated this 22nd day of October, 1999. by. If~ . Jack 0 e Min esota License No. 20281 NOTES: 1. The orientation of this bearing system is based on the North line of Lot 10, Block 1, FRENCH TRACE 2ND ADDITION which is assumed to have a bearhig of North 89 degrees 30 minutes 38 seconds East. 2. Area of the property described hereon is 10,023 square feet or 0.2301 acres. EGAN, FIELD & NOWAK INC. ~::;""W~~t:J=~Jd . SURVEYORS 1ele: l.'ll12; 546-8837 DAK191 2340JCEltr. City of Savage (Brian Tucker-Planning) Permits are not required for fences. They can be placed in easements. Small retaining walls are allowed within easements and do not require permits. Large retaining walls do require approval by engineering. Included in the approval is a waiver stating that the resident is responsible for removal and replacement costs if the city needs to access the easement. City of Lakeville (Jay and Leif) Permits are required for fences and they are allowed on easements. In the permit it states the owners' responsibilities if the city needs to access the easement. Small retaining walls are allowed within easements and permits are not required for them. Most ponds which are less than 10 years old are located on city owned outlots. Jay stated that this makes it much easier ofthe city to access to ponds. If there is no outlot, the city has 20 foot easements. The city has paid for the cost of replacement sod on the properties they have had to access. City of Prior Lake (Robert Hutchins) Fence permits are required. They are free because they generally just look at the location of the fence on the property. If the fence is going to be placed over a pipe, lift station, or any location that requires regular access, they inform the property owner that it is their responsibility to remove and replace at their cost. However, they have ended up paying for most of the costs because the council has felt that is the best thing to do for public relations. They are in the process oftaking a homeowner to court because they will not remove a fence that is in the easement. They would like the judge to order the owners to remove it before the city goes in to take down. Retaining walls less than 4 feet do not require a permit. Nothing can be placed in an easement that would impede the drainage. So if a small retaining wall would affect the drainage the city would ask them to remove the wall. Most of the ponds are not on city outlots. They are starting to pave some of the accesses to ponds. City of Eden Prairie (Randy & Leslie) Permits are not required for the construction of fences less than 6 feet or small retaining walls. Neither fences nor retaining walls are allowed in drainage easements. They have had problems where residents construct in the easements. On one occasion the builder actually worked with the city to conduct a study as to how the illegal retaining wall would affect to function of the pond. After a couple of years it was determined that the retaining wall would not negatively impact the pond and they allowed it to remain. Most ponds that are less than 8 years old are on city owned outlots. City of Bloomington (website) In all zoning districts: Retaining walls up to four feet in height are permitted at any location in a front yard provided that a front setback of not less than t€m feet shall be maintained and at any location in a side or rear yard with no minimum setback from any property line. There shall be no encroachment into public easements of record without the written approval of the Issuing Authority. Fences may be placed in easement areas with the approval ofthe City of Bloomington Engineering Division. A fence must not affect drainage because oflocation or debris buildup. Any future utility work could result in the removal ofthe fence. Removal and restoration would be at the homeowner's expense. Easement information must be obtained from the Engineering Division at 952-563-4870 prior to the installation of any fence. City of Blaine (website) No fences shall be allowed or constructed on street right-of-ways. Fences may, by permit, be placed on public utility easements so long as the structures do not interfere in any way with existing underground or over ground utilities. Further, the City or any utility company having authority to use such easements, shall not be liable for repair or replacement of such fences in the event they are moved, damaged, or destroyed by virtue of the lawful use of said easement. City of Chanhassen (website) A permit is required for a retaining wall if the wall is over 4 feet tall. The retaining wall may not encroach in the drainage of the property. Contact the City ofChanhassen Engineering Department at 952-227-1160 regarding drainage issues. City of Eagan (website) Question: What do I do if I want to place a fence, sprinkler system, or plant shrubs, etc. in my yard adjacent to the street? Answer: Most City residential streets include a minimum of 60' of public right of way. If your street is 32' wide, (City Standard) this means that approximately 12-13' behind the curb is designated City Right of Way. This area is intended for underground utility installations and winter snow storage and should be kept clear of any item that may be damaged. Fences, boulevard trees etc, should be placed behind this area. The city is not responsible for damage to Sprinkler systems or other items located in the Right of Way. City of Plymouth (website) Retaining walls shall not be placed within any drainage or ponding easement unless reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. There is no charge for permits for fences not exceeding 6 feet in height, or retaining walls not exceeding 4 feet in height. Fences are not permitted within wetland buffer areas. ~'TY OF Fences BLOOMINGTON Information Sheet MINNESOTA Height Fences may be placed in easement areas with the approval of the City of Bloomington Engineering Division. Fences shall not exceed six feet above the natural grade. A fence must not affect drainage because of location or A fence may be erected six feet above the grade of a debris buildup. Any future utility work could result in the retaining wall only if the drop to the natural grade (or the removal of the fence. Removal and restoration would be at next level of the retaining wall) is at least eighteen inches the homeowner's expense. Easement information must be away (horizontally) from the fence. If the eighteen inches obtained from the Engineering Division at 952-563-4870 cannot be maintained, the top of the fence may only be six prior to the installation of any fence. feet above the natural grade. Utilities Permits Before you dig, call Gopher State One-Call at No building permit is required. 651-454-0002 to locate utility lines. The owner is Materials responsible for damage to underground utilities. The City of Bloomington does not dictate which side of the Swimming pools fence must be "finished". Neither electric nor barbed wire See City of Bloomington Pool/Spa Permit Requirements fences are allowed in the City of Bloomington. Information Sheet for requirements on pool fences. Location Screening Fences under six feet may be erected anywhere on the See City of Bloomington Exterior Storage: Residential owner's property. The property owner is responsible for Districts Information Sheet handout for requirements on locating property lines. Property irons (buried in each screening fences. corner of the lot) should be located with a metal detector Commercial properties before a fence is erected. Property boundaries generally lie 30 feet from the Questions about fences in areas zoned for commercial or center of the street. Intersection = = Property dimensions industrial uses should be directed to the City of may be obtained by Bloomington Planning Division at 952-563-8920. calling the Building Property and Inspection Stake Division at 952-563- ~ 8930 (8 a.m. - 4:30 p.m., Monday - Friday). The owner ~ may also hire a surveyor to locate the Boulevard property lines. The City of Bloomington does not survey properties. Fences must not encroach on adjacent properties. Maintenance of both sides of the fence (painting, mowing, etc.) should be considered when determining placement. No fence shall block the view of traffic. Fences erected on a corner lot must maintain a 15 foot clear view triangle. 8' Tree with 12"or See illustration. less trunk The City of Bloomington does not settle property line permitted if trimmed to at least disputes between neighbors, including, but not limited to, 8' above street. disputes over the placement of fences, hedges, and trees. (The City does enforce required setbacks for placement of houses, garages, decks, accessory buildings, driveways, etc.) Community Development Building and Inspection PH 952-563-8930 www.ci.bloomington.mn.us 1800 W. Old Shakopee Road FAX 952-563-8949 web_53pfences pg1 Of 2 (05/04) Bloomington MN 55431-3027 TTY 952-563-8740 Variances Bloomington City Code Division E. Intersections, Section 17.31. A variance is required to erect a fence over six feet high on Clear View Triangle the side and rear yards. Such a fence must be set back at On property at any corner formed by intersecting streets, it least ten feet from the side property lines and 30 feet from shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant to install, set the front and rear property lines. A building permit is out, maintain or to permit the installation or maintenance required to erect a fence higher than six feet above the of any sign, fence, hedge, tree, shrubbery, natural growth, natural grade. For more information on variances, call the building, construction or other obstructions to a clear view City of Bloomington Planning Division at 952-563-8920. to a height greater than three feet above the level of the center of the adjacent intersection within the triangle of land formed on the corner of the lot by measuring a distance of 15 feet along each lot line from the street- property line intersection. It is hereby declared that any such installation or construction within the clear view triangle as herein defined is a public nuisance and encumbrance and obstruction to the public streets. Code, 1958, S 161.02 web_53p/ence. pg2 Of 2 (05104)