The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About12.A. Appeal of BOAA Determination-Nolan Schoening 11.ft. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Appeal ofBOAA Determination - Nolan Schoening MEETING DATE: September 4, 2007 SITE INFORMATION: Applicant: Nolan Schoening Location: 1824 Westchester Lane, Shakopee, MN 55379 Existing Zoning: Residential (R1-B) Adjacent Zoning: Residential (R1-B) BACKGROUND: Mr. Nolan Schoening has submitted an application of appeal of the Board of Adjustment and Appeals' determination. Please see the attachments for the property location and the applicants narrative. On June 5, 2007 City Council adopted Ordinance's No. 780 and 781 and Resolution No. 6616, which pertains to fence permits, fence permit fees and a policy on fencing and landscaping within City easements. Prior to June. 5, 2007, residents were allowed to construct fences within City easements at their own risk with the understanding that if the City needed the fence removed the property owner would be responsible for removing the fence. The reality is once a fence is constructed, it is a very costly and cumbersome process to remove the fence. In an effort to reduce City costs, the fence permit was adopted to prevent fences from being constructed in easements containing utilities or used for access to storm water ponds. On August 9, 2007 the Board of Adjustment and Appeals voted 7-0 to uphold staffs determination not to allow the fence to be constructed within the easement located along Mr. Schoening's north property line. The easement on the north side of Mr. Schoening's property does contain a 12-inch trunk watermain, therefore, staff denied the fence permit for construction of a fence within the easement located on the north property line. Mr. Schoening is permitted to construct a fence within the easement located on his south property line. Shakopee Public Utilities supports staff s decision and does not want to see a fence constructed over the watermain. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Offer and approve a motion upholding the determination of the BOAA. . .. 2. Offer and approve a motion granting the appeal of the applicant. 3. Table a decision and request additional information from staff andlor the applicant. RECOMMENDATION: Offer and approve a motion upholding the determination of the BOAA. ACTION REQUESTED: Offer a motion to uphold the Board of Adjustment and Appeals' determination not to allow a fence to be constructed within the easement located along Mr. Schoenig's north property line at 1824 Westchester Lane. JW/pmp ENGR/2007PROJECTS/2007-COUNCILISCHOENING-APPEAL / ( City of Shakopee 129 Holmes St. N. Shakopee, MN 55379 Nolan Schoening 1824 Westchester Ln. Shakopee, MN 55379 This appeal is for the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on their ruling of my fence permit on 6/21/07, directed towards City Council. The fence permit was approved, with notation that it not be in the north easement as my plan initially drew out. After reviewing ordinances on easements last year and early this year, I planned my fence with the notion that if City Employees needed the fence moved for repair purposes it was to be taken down by me at my expense, and I was fine with that. Also note, that the northwest section of the fence will have an 8' removable panel for easy access into my yard. Furthermore, other than a complete rupture of the water main in this 90' section offence, which odds of that happening are probably slim- to-none, there are water main access covers in the road directly to the east of my house and one to the west of my house that is approx. 20' beyond where my fence ends. I have this fence planned to run pretty close to the yard line which will not interfere with my or my neighbors in-ground irrigation, which that party was fine with. As drawn, this gives me the best termination point for where the fence meets the house. As drawn up, this fence line will also contain two boulder walls I had to build two and a half years ago when I moved in due to the slope of the land on the side of my house which I would like for liability issues involving the neighborhood kids playing on them. In ending, I am simply asking that this appeal overturns the initial decision on my fence permit, and grants me access to build the north section of my fence near the yard line. As noted in the attached letter I sent to the Engineering Dept on 6/21/07, an ordinance that pertains to spring/summer activities (ie. building a fence) should go into affect at the start of the season rather than June 15th when people have been planning projects, and neighbors have already completed projects that encroach water main easements. Enclosed also is my $300 application fee. Thank you for your time on this matter. Sincerely, lIrL~~ Nolan Schoening ( Bonnie Homer Civil Eng. Tech. City of Shakopee Nolan Schoening 1824 Westchester Lane Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear Bonnie, I am writing in connection to your rejection of my fence permit application at 1824 Westchester Lane, Lot 31 ~ Block 8, in the Westchester Estates. Although a winter month would have been a great time to enact a new ordinance that effects spring/summer house projects, I understand there are new ordinances and permits needed for a fence that went into affect on June 15, 2007. But I find it troubling that you can't look at this with a little more sensitivity on a situational basis. Like I stated before, not only do I have all the material and ,manpower set up for this weekend, but I had all the intentions to build this fence earlier this spring and even as far back as last summer but time did not permit. Which had I built it a few weeks ago, I would not find it frustrating and necessary to write this letter, as we simply would not be in discussion. As you're sticking to your argument of not letting my fence go in the north easement I would now have to reroute the design I had, which leaves me not only with a very awkwardly terminated fence line to my house, but time and money involved in landscaping and irrigation that would have to be adjusted. I am simply asking that you look into this issue and consider accepting my plan as drawn out. Otherwise I am going to have a difficult time everyday when I drive by a neighbors house who has the same exact fence that I am going to build, running over the same exact type of watermain easement running along his property line, that was just erected in the last six weeks. Please give me a call at 763.535.4445, or email me at nolan@minnesota~ndin!!.com if we can discuss this any further. My family and myself thank you in advance for looking at this a little more from our point of view. Sincerely, "7 rl L~ ~ Nolan Schoening cc: Kyle, Planning/Zoning Building Department Joe Swentek, Engineering Department l '1000 EAST .146th S1REET, BURNSVlL1.E, MINNESOTA 55.:337 PH ~2-JOOO ~:x . n . . . c~r( IFICATE' O'FSUR'''~ / :' Legal Description :ftOT:;.31"';~~BCOGK::'8~~: :WEST.cRESTEK~,",~sTATES~ ' SCOTT COUN1Y, ',MINNESOTA , , ' @:j) . DENOTES EXISTING ELEVATION (B~, ~ DENOTES, PROPOSED ELEVATION'. __ . INDICATES DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE ~= FINISHED GARAGE' FLOOR ELEVATION . 698. 90/ = . BASEMENT FLOOR ElEVATION . . 84-11{D I = TOP OF FO~NDATlON ELEVATION SCALE : 1" = ~t . LOT AREA: 17,920 SQ. FT. HOUSE AREA: 2,002 SQ. FT. (' ~ (t~ 130 \ ~ t'Jo/~~ ~~rKl ~If>'. Ct /' ~ Y.: ' :!r.... '"f':> . ~ ... c::::- . ~'"'9\;" " . ~~~ :2~~OOTMAX.DAlvaNAY ..1t .~~. ~ cs- OPENING-TO RO.W. ~ ~~s)<(., \ \' ~~~':) ~rt) . " ~<,"J, (~, ... c.o,'t$~('vJ.-- rc;cl , ,_I ~. , .......... e."-T1'b..""-c..e DRAINAGE AND . UTlUTY EASEMENT.. +- e\'\.ct f'c \c tot- w/~; t+ h:n.c ( ..)-0. e~"""c ^-+ e~o.d <;) ~ . POND .._ ._.. _,_" ....... __." w ___". . . HWL :::' B33, Go . /' -"~-S'--b' ks i @'!) . klwL =B~OO . R-IB et ac ; . Front = 30 feet Rear::: 30 feet Side = 10 feet Height::: 35 feet or Streetside::: 20 feet 2 1/2 stories . .