Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Appeals (05/24/2000) BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MAY 24,2000 PRESENT: Cheryl Hentz, Randy Husman,John Schorse, and Rein Roehlig; Vice Chairman EXCUSED: Fred Dahl, and Don Krueger STAFF: John Bluemke, Principal Planner; and Vickie Rand, Recording Secretary Vice Chairman Roehlig called the meeting to order. Roll call was taken and a quorum declared present. The minutes of May 10, 2000 were approved as mailed(Schorse/Husman) unanimous. I: 912 LARK STREET Ray Fores, applicant and owner, requests a variance to allow a 20' by 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. Ray Fores, 912 Lark Street, stated he had bought the property with an existing garage on it. He explained he went to the appropriate offices in City Hall to ask what would be needed to bring the garage up to code, and considering the condition of the garage he decided to get a permit to tear it down. He went on to explain when he returned to get a permit for a new garage he wasn't able to because there wasn't a driveway to the garage. He stated he was never told of this stipulation. He stated he didn't need a driveway, and intended to use the building for storage of maintenance equipment only. He stated his proposal calls for constructing a garage in a different location because the previous garage was in a low lying area. He explained he would need to take down a tree in order to install a driveway, which would also take away from the green space and run off conditions. He stated he could add onto the existing garage, however,he would be building over tree roots. He noted the clutter in the neighborhood, and stated he wants to put up a storage shed to minimize the clutter on his own property. He stated he was only asking for what he had before,which would be beneficial for the entire neighborhood. Mr. Schorse questioned if Mr. Fores asked about replacing the garage and if so had the conditions been explained to him. Mr. Fores stated he told the clerk he intended to replace the garage and was given no explanation of any conditions that would apply. Mrs. Hentz asked how big the previous garage was. Mr. Fores stated it was 14' x 20' and was an eye sore in the neighborhood. Mr. Schorse asked how the garage came to be there in the first place. Mr. Fores stated it probably has been there since the 60's and used for a garden shed. Mr. Roehlig asked if the previous garage was constructed with a wood frame or metal materials. Mr. Fores stated the garage was a wooden frame style,one car garage, and he was proposing to build the same style according to code. He proceeded to pass around a blueprint of the proposed garage. Mr. Bluemke asked if it would have a regular garage door. Mr. Fores stated it would. Mr. Bluemke stated that George Mohr, a neighbor at 917 Dove Street, had called the Planning office stating he had no opposition to Mr. Fores request. Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes Page 2 May 24, 2000 • Mr. Schorse asked if Mr. Fores was required to take down the garage. Mr. Bluemke stated he was required to get a permit to take down the garage, however,he didn't know why he couldn't have left the garage up. He explained the garage was nonconforming and couldn't be on a lot without a principal structure. Discussion continued regarding the difference between a garage and a shed, and the fact that he could have a garage if he put in a driveway. Mr. Bluemke also stated Mr. Fores has alternatives to either add onto the existing garage, construct a 100 square foot utility shed, or both. Mr. Roehlig stated he was having difficulty finding a hardship, even though he was asking to replace an existing structure. Motion by Hentz for approval of the variance to allow a 20' x 14' or 280 square foot utility shed in the rear yard. Seconded by Schorse. Motion carried over 3-1. Nay: Roehlig II: 14 BOWEN STREET Mark Radl, applicant and owner, requests a variance to allow a 20' by 12' or 240 square foot utility shed in the rear yard setback whereas Section 30-17 (B) (4) (e) (iii) allows for utility sheds up to 100 square feet in size. This item was carried over to the next meeting since it was necessary for one member of the Board of Appeals to abstain from voting on this item. III: 3135 9TH AVENUE Julie Loker, applicant/owner,requests a variance to construct a driveway addition that would make the driveway exceed the width of the garage whereas Section 30-36 (C) (5) (b)requires that driveways not exceed the width of the garage. Julie Loker, 3135 9th Avenue, stated she disagrees with the Staff Report, which states "there is nothing unusual or unique about the property,which creates a hardship." She stated her property lies west of Oakwood Road and has no curb or gutter. She explained it is a highway road,the traffic is fast, and will increase in the near future because of the new hospital opening in the area. She stated she is requesting this variance to provide a turnaround out of a safety concern for people exiting her driveway, and a safe place for people to park when visiting. She stated she physically needs to direct people when they are backing out of her driveway so they don't back into the ditch or into heavy traffic, since occasionally the high grass will also cause vision difficulties. She stated creating a turnaround would make exiting her driveway much safer. She stated her driveway is smaller than her neighbors at a width of only 20' compared to her neighbors who have 24' driveways. She stated she also felt this was the least possible needed to remove any hardship,because if the addition would be shortened, there wouldn't be enough room to allow for opening of the car doors. She also stated the area is landscaped and a fence provides screening on the lot line. Mr. Bluemke asked if the fence was on her property or her neighbor's. Ms. Loker stated the fence belonged to the neighbors,but would put up her own fence if that was needed for this variance to be approved. Mr. Bluemke stated the safety issue could be a concern as it was a town road and would probably stay that way for awhile, without having the curb and gutter as required on city streets.