Laserfiche WebLink
our <br />plans conform to this requirement. In our second review with the <br />Planning Commission we were disallowed the variance even though we <br />conformed with their request. It should be noted here that only 4 of the <br />7 members of the Planning Commission were present <br />2) We are attempting to make this property more conforming to building <br />codes. We are requesting one new variance but we are ehminating a <br />nonconforming foundation and we are upgrading the basement ceiling <br />height to code. We are also attempting to provide better security for o <br />person^ property. <br />3) In Minnesota we feel it is a necessity to have a garage to protect our cars <br />in the winter months. A one-car garage has been approved but it does <br />not meet our need to house two cars and to provide adequate storage. <br />Your approval of Items 1&2 will eliminate two non-conforming structural problems ^ <br />(the foundation and the basement ceiling height) and will also provide greater secunty <br />tor this property. <br />Joseph P Rauschendorfer <br />Sandra L Rauschendorfer