Laserfiche WebLink
Chair Harms asked if written record was found regarding staff direction to <br />Heffernan in the past (No). Chair Harms also asked for clarification of coverage <br />issues. <br />Mike Heffernan, owner of hte property at 2042-2044 Dale, stated that he bought <br />the property 1½ years ago. He lives on the site. Heffernan stated that he called <br />the “City” to build a second garage. He proposes to store street rod collector <br />cars. He felt the staff interpretation of the 70' lot would not allow for a two car <br />garage. He owns nearly ½ acre and feels it is appropriate to have another three <br />car garage on the site for storage of equipment, cars and street rods. <br />Member Cunningham asked if the staff report compromise is adequate to <br />support his needs (No). <br />Member Olson asked for clarification of the rear setback from the proposed new <br />structure. Heffernan felt it was over 100 feet. <br />Chair Harms asked what was the hardship if storage of collected vehicles is the <br />use. There already is storage space. <br />Member Rhody asked what Heffernan’s interpretaion of the Code was. <br />Heffernan’s reasoning was that the 30 feet times the width is too narrow or small <br />for large lots. <br />Member Rhody asked how the new accessory building ordinance would treat the <br />site. Kim Lee explained the new ordinance and the staff recommendation. <br />Member Cunningham asked for clarification regarding the definition of “required <br />rearyard”. Kim Lee explained the comparison between Heffernan and City <br />interpretaions <br />Heffernan stated that the hardship is two families using one garage. He stated <br />that in the City there are at least 20 properties with more than one accessory <br />building. He has neighbors with pole barns in the rear yard. <br />Member Wilke asked if neighbors had signed off on the minor variance? Dean <br />Buchus (2056 Dale), Tom St. Martin (593 Shryer) and John Bedner (2036 Dale) <br />approved of the minor variance. <br />Member Olson asked for setback clarification. Chair Harms asked if staff has <br />interpreted this differently. <br />Member Cunningham asked what is the change in the coverage of the rear yard. <br />Member Klausing asked whether another building could be constructed without <br />3 <br />