Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1586 <br />September 12, 1990 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />The current owner of the property has a limousine service <br />in another City and drives the limousine home. The addition to <br />the garage is to allow applicant tc park the limousine within the <br />garage structure rather than having it parked within the front <br />street yard. <br />Please review Exhibit D, the owner of the most impacted <br />property has submitted a letter approving the proposed variance. <br />Of the three after-the-fact applications, Mr. Buranen appears to <br />be the only one who recognized the need to file a penalty fee. <br />Staff is not aware x. the applicant wishes to appeal the penalty <br />fee. In any case, such an appeal would have to be presented by <br />the applicant. <br />As for which of the setback lines should be used to <br />determine the specific setback variance to be granted, staff will <br />seek direction from the City Attorney's office prior to your <br />meeting. <br />Options of Action - <br />1. Denial. Please refer to the necessary findings <br />10.08, Subdivicion 3 (A)l-12? or <br />in Section <br />2. Approval. Please refer to the same necessary findings. Such <br />approval should be subject to the following conditions; <br />A) Based on the substandard setback of the north wall <br />of the attached garage, a fire wall shall be installed <br />along the north side of the existing garage and <br />proposed addition. <br />B) Applicant to obtain a penalty building permit for <br />proposed construction.