2000-01-26 Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of the Meeting of June 24, 1999 Page 14 Councilmember Daniels concurred and stated she supported the City Forester's recommendation for a location to the rear of the house, which requires no variance. Councilmember Clark asked if there was a wetland boundary in the rear of the lot. The Community Development Director stated it was not relevant. Gene Bebeau, 4800 125th Avenue NE, applicant, stated his land slopes down to the wetland so more fill would be needed and if the shed was located to the rear of his house, it would impact more trees, and result in a 50 foot driveway. He noted the City Forester's report references four trees, one being large but it was rotting through the center and needs to be removed. Of the other three, one was a poplar tree and the others were two eight -inch diameter basswood trees. Mr. Bebeau stated he wants to be able to back his boat into the garage but if the orientation were rotated, he would not be able to access the building. He stated he wished the Building Inspector would visit the site. He stated for the building to be viable, it needed to be located as proposed. He stated he will remove a flowerbed and fence for his preferred location and wanted to keep the driveway length to a minimum. The City Manager stated the City Forester's letter recommended even if the location behind the house was used, the driveway would still go through which would impact those same trees. Mr. Bebeau concurred and stated the oak trees are, to him, very valuable. Councilmember Daniels asked if the altemate site would still require a variance. The Community Development Director stated the City Forester indicated the alternate site would have less impact but she understood the property owner strongly preferred his location. Councilmember Rose stated she was recommending the location farther back so the building would not be pivoted and could be accessed. Mr. Bebeau stated that location would result in more trees being impacted, a driveway that was 50 feet longer, and he and his two neighbors would have a view of the pole barn. Councilmember Kolb agreed that the only hardship was the length of the driveway. She stated she understood this was a significant financial hardship but she could not support it as a true hardship. Councilmember Kolb stated she was unable to support the variance due to the lack of a hardship. Mayor Ryan stated this was not a typical situation since the building would be over 400 feet off the road. Councilmember Daniels stated the Council was not satisfied with this plan and was asking the applicant to come back with an altemate plan. Mr. Bebeau stated this was a pole bam and there were no alternate plans. Councilmember Swanson asked if there would be a benefit to having the Building Inspector view the site and add his recommendation. The City Manager stated his concern was that there has been a number of other more substantial variance requests that were denied due to lack of a hardship. Councilmember Clark stated that while he would like to consider approval, the Council needs to have rationale to base that decision on. Mr. Bebeau stated he was not in a hurry to construct the building and would prefer the delay to obtain another opinion.