CC PACKET 03241987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-5- • 1- -indicated they, had a prospective buyer. who had 2. not been told about the .Nelson' s plans for a 3 garage but no purchase agreement had yet been . 4 signed. 5 6 Neighbors Who Were Not Opposed . But . Had "Some Concerns About the 7 - Project % 8 9 Leroy Genaw, 3404 Roosevelt Street N.E. (next to Mrs . Ittner ' s 10 property) : 11 12 -noted the procedures followed that evening were a lot more 13 formal than when he had served on the Planning Commission 32 14 years ago; 15 16 -said 15 yard setbacks were also required at that time but most 17 people could only afford one car so single garages were -common- 18 place; 19 20 -speculated that the double garage on Bjorklund' s property had 21 been built along with the house in 1954; 22 23 -stated that the fact that he had not signed the petition approv- 24 ing the garage addition had not meant he was opposed to it, but 25., rather, 26 27 -said because he had lived next door to Mrs. Ittner for so 28 many years ,- he was interested in what she wanted done; 29 30 -suggested a delay of a- month or •two on the Nelson's part might 31 not be out of order. 32 33 Lou Novak, 3412 Roosevelt Street N.E. 34 35 -said he had originally only come to listen to what was said at 36 the hearing, but 37 38 -thought the drainage problem could be remedied by draining the 39 runoff from the eaves down the driveway; 40 41- _expected there might be less problems after the construction 42 than there- had been in the past; 43 44 Commissioners ' Responses to the Variance Request 45 46 Werenicz -was concerned about leaving only 7 feet between the 47 overhangs on the Nelson and Ittner homes because of 48 the potential for two rather than just one fire if 49 either caught fire; 50 51 -wasn' t clear. .in . his own mind how he would vote on the • 52 request because he peceived with all the houses on 53 that street with single garages, the City might end up 54 with "houses on top of houses" if the precedent for 55