CCP 05-23-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. June Minutes Page 13 06/01/94 The applicants have been working with a real estate attorney and have prepared what is called a Boundary Line Agreement. It is a legal document which changes the boundary line of the property but not ownership. Jerry Filla, the City's Attorney, has written a letter to the Planning Commission and found this agreement to be acceptable within the City's ordinances. Another question, which has been raised, is the correct street right-of-way. Staff had given the applicants a copy of the half section map. Both the abstract of title and the half section map show a 30 foot right-of-way. However, the legal description of the property and the legal descriptions at Ramsey County state, a 33 foot right-of-way. There is no documentation with the Ramsey County which explains where the extra three (3) feet came from. Mr. Fritsinger then went on to explain the existing set backs of the adjacent homes and the City's history of denying front yard variances. However, the confusion on the right-of-way and the neighbor's willingness to support the request lend rationale to the granting of the variance. . Christine Anderson, applicant, presented to the Planning Commission pictures of neighboring properties. Their attorney indicated if the planning Commission were to make an addendum to this agreement, the already proposed boundary line agreement would be invalid. The proposed agreement will eliminate all the court costs of clearing up the boundary disputes. Mr. Rye asked if the house were located as shown in the original building permit and the extra feet from their neighbor were allowed by the boundary line agreement, would a variance be necessary. Mr. Fritsinger stated no. Christin~ Anderson asked if when new homes are built in Arden Hills, does the building inspector look at the placement. Mr. Fritsinger stated yes. .