Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-06-23 Elizabeth Raleigh Ltr to OPH LAWSON, MARSHALL, MCDONALD & GALOWITZ, P.A. LAWYERS RAYMOND O. MARSHALL 3880 LAVERNE AVENUE NORTH JOHN SCOTT McDONALD LAKE ELMO, MINNESOTA 55042 TRACEY ANN GALOWITZ ELIZABETH A. RALEIGH TELEPHONE: (612) 777 -6960 OF COUNSEL ANNE GREENWOOD BROWN FACSIMILE: (612) 777 -8937 RODERICK A. LAWSON June 23, 1997 Honorable Mayor and Council Members CITY OF OAK PARK Oak Park City Hall 14168 57th Street North Oak Park, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mayor and Council Members: Please be informed that we represent Mr. and Mrs. James Vidana regarding their request for a variance to your setback ordinance to allow construction of a new garage on their property at 14387 Upper 56th Street North in Oak Park Heights. As you know, the Vidanas application for a setback variance was recently turned down by the Council on a 3 to 2 vote. We want to make sure the Council considered all the factors which we believe to be important in regard to this request. The Vidanas consulted with the City Building Inspector prior to turning their existing garage into a family living room in 1991. The Building Inspector at that time was Mick Koehler and he told Vidanas they still had room for a garage between the street and the family room before they went ahead with the 1991 remodeling. Mr. Koehler has recently admitted to Vidanas and to Ken and Wendy Kaiser that he made that statement and further evidence is set forth in the appraisal on the property done by Bob Lafayette which is attached. We understand that a council always has to be concerned with the precedent set by any granting of a variance. The precedent, however, is limited to future cases involving the same circumstance. It seems highly unlikely that there are many cases in the City which are like this one where the owners remodeled a garage only after receiving assurance from the City Building Inspector that they could construct a new one between the old garage and the street. Your ordinance at the time required that a 2 car garage site be shown on site plans and yet the City granted the remodeling permit where it now finds there is no room for a garage. It P Honorable Mayor and Council Members June 23, 1997 Page Two seems reasonable to conclude that the City would not have granted the 1991 permit unless the City believed a garage could be built on the site in the future. To now take the position that a portion of the house would have to be torn down to provide this site flies in the face of common sense. Certainly, the City would not allow a site plan now where the future garage site was taken from part of the house itself. We respectfully request you to reconsider this variance request based on these particular unique circumstances. Vidanas intend to take legal action to compel issuance of a building permit for the garage if a variance is not granted to them. Please reconsider this request. Sincerely, / J- O r / _ Eluzabeth A. Raleigh EAR:mas Enclosure