Plaintiff In Supreme Court Zoning Case Offers Insight To McKennan Park House Trial

Daniel Daily suggests frustration be aimed at city, not between neighbors

Daniel Daily has watched the continuing coverage surrounding the massive home trial in historic McKennan Park – an issue he’s no stranger to.

“I endured pretty much the same thing zoning-wise with the City of Sioux Falls,” said Daily.

It was a case that spanned five years. Daily, who extended the width of his driveway by seven feet in 2006, was hit with six city code violations.

“I researched them [code violations] and none of them applied, so I requested an appeal.”

He was told it was his responsibility to prove his innocence; which he did five years and $40,000 later in the South Dakota Supreme Court. But in his opinion, it should have never gotten that far.

“The city does not allow appeals in court,” he added, “They make all these rules and they can’t enforce them; they can’t take you to court.”

Barbara and Pierce McDowell and Joseph and Sarah Sapienza entered litigation after the McDowells claim the Sapienza’s home is built far too close to theirs. However, Daily says the frustration should be directed at the city who gave the green light on construction.

“The city by charter is supposed to protect citizens, and they don’t.”

The three-day trial ended late last week, but the judge in this case was unable to make a verdict. He told the court he wants to wait until he’s sifted through all the facts in the case before making a decision. He expects to do so later this summer.