Loading...
Memo2MEMORANDUM DATE: November 9, 1987 TO: Zoning and Planning Commission FROM: Nancy S. Anderson fJ q SUBJECT: Zero lot line for Dale Feste's auto repair building The City Attorney has rendered an opinion on the status of the zero lot line for Dale Feste's auto service facility. The City Attorney is of the opinion that Mr. Feste's building may be on the lot line and not be aligned front to rear with the adjacent building. He also noted that there should be an easement for maintenance between both property owners. This can be a condition of the Conditional Use Permit. The staff would also recommend improving the alley behind the applicants property. The City Attorney's opinion is enclosed for your review. • Date: November 3, 1987 To: Nancy Anderson From: Jerre Miller Re: Feste Conditional Use Permit C I T Y O F H O P K I N S MEMO I have reviewed the matter pertaining to the Feste Application with Jim Kerrigan. Mr. Feste desires to construct a service center at 630 llth Avenue South with zero lot line. The adjacent structure is also at zero lot line. The language of Ordinance 540.01 does not specifically address the question posed by the Planning Commission nor does it define its application to an existing structure. I believe the spirit of the Ordinance contemplated zero lot line buildings on adjacent parcels where alternate side yard access would be provided. I do not believe the Ordinance considered or contemplated a precise match of side walls front to rear. As in this situation, the existing building has front yard parking which creates a jog in the side yard wall but there is nothing in the Ordinance to prohibit the Applicant's construction of his zero lot line side wall so long as his front yard setback does not conflict with his neighbor. One obvious problem the application discloses is the need for cross maintenance easements between the two parties for entry upon the premises of their neighbor to service and maintain the rear side wall of the existing structure and the contemplated front side wall of the Applicant. I would suggest you make this a part of your recommendation. It would also be appropriate to redraft the Ordinance to be more specific on the subj.ect the Ordinance tries to cover. ( JAM 1010 First Sty, et South, Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 612/935 -8474 An Equal Opportunity Employer