pf_03781 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Appeal Letter to the City of Roseville September 15,2006 Page 2 In order to facilitate selling their homestead at 1822 North Dale Court, the Weleczlcis applied for and received a Minar Subdivision approval in 2005 (Per Resolution No. 10327) whereby the subject lot at 1828 North Dale Court was split from the original homestead at 1822 North Dale Court. The Weleczkis then sold their homestead and moved to their apartment in late summer 2005. The Weleczkis have had the subject lot listed with a real estate company since the Minor Subdivision was approved in 2005. They have had numerous interested parties and not less than six (6) purchase agreements have been submitted by potential buyers. Presently, several parties have expressed an interest in building a home on the lot, but are awaiting the results of the Applicants' request for a variance. Unfortunately, due to the unique triangular shape of the subject lot, the buyers have had difficulty in developing practical plans for a home design that can be built on the site without the need for setback variances. This has resulted in all purchase agreements being cancelled or rescinded. To date, the Weleczkis have been unable to sell the lot due to these practical difficulties in making a design nlan for a home without setback variances. The potential lot buyers have indicated that the current unique shape cf the lot imposes practical diffieulties on the horzle design such that a typical standard home design plan will not work. Potential buyers are unable to design hallways and rooms on the unique triangular site such.that the new home would be practically useable. The Weleczkis are zaot home builders or real estate developers and to date they have merely sought to sell the lot to someone who can make good use of it. However, they have now concluded that in order to sell the lot and in order to overcome the practical difficulties of ineeting all setback requirements on the unique triangular shaped lot, the best option is to seek a setback variance so that a home with a traditional design plan and layout may be constructed on the lot. This is not a case where the Applicants tried to "sneak through the Minor Subdivision process by using subterfuge and now are coining back after the fact to "sneak through" a variance that might have been denied had they sought it at the time of the Minor Subdivision. � Applicants submitted a hozne design schematic at the time of the Minor Subdivision application in July 2005, showing a home design footprint that would have required a variance. They did not wish to build a home at that time, but only sought to show that it could be done. The Applicants were up front and straightforward in their dealing with City Staff and did not seelc to hide the fact that there likely would be a need for a variance on the lot at some point. As mentioned above, the applicants are seeking a variance now due to the practical difficulties in selling the lot due to the practical difficulties of potential buyers to design a home on the site.