In a recent meeting of the Inver Grove Heights City Council, members addressed a request for a variance to allow the placement of a shed within a city drainage and utility easement at 7260 Bancroft Way. The proposal, presented by Associate Planner Boughton, was met with significant scrutiny from council members and the public.

The property in question is zoned R1C for single-family residential use and is situated adjacent to a multifamily development. The existing shed, measuring approximately 8 by 8 feet, was relocated by the homeowner to the easement area to facilitate gardening activities. However, city staff recommended denial of the variance, citing concerns that the shed could obstruct drainage and impede access to the storm sewer, which is critical for maintenance.

During the public hearing, the homeowner, Randy Markin, argued that the shed did not obstruct water flow and was more accessible in its current location. He emphasized the challenges of using the shed on the sloped terrain of his property. Support for the variance was voiced by a neighboring resident, Michael Bates, who stated that the shed did not negatively impact his property.

Conversely, Ed Igo, representing the Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Association, opposed the variance, highlighting the importance of maintaining the drainage easement as per a long-standing agreement with the city. He warned that allowing one shed could set a precedent for others in similar situations, potentially leading to further obstructions in the drainage system.

Council members expressed their concerns about the implications of approving the variance. Several councilors noted the potential for setting a precedent that could lead to similar requests from other residents with drainage easements. Ultimately, the council voted unanimously to deny the variance, reinforcing the city's commitment to maintaining the integrity of its drainage systems.

The meeting concluded with the council moving on to regular business, having addressed the significant issue of property rights versus community infrastructure needs.