Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />John Abeler, 2339 Roselawn, expressed concern with the setback along the south property line of <br />2 <br />Mr. Brown’s lot. He was concerned with the developer’s proposal versus a homeowner proposal. <br />3 <br />A fourth variance is the additional lot coverage of 144 sq. ft.. He opposed the large size of the <br />4 <br />garage. The home displayed by Mr. Brown will fit within the 10 foot setback. Mr. Abeler <br />5 <br />encouraged the Variance Board to hold to the side setback of 10 feet. <br />6 <br /> <br />7 <br />Chair Bakeman closed the hearing, since there were no further public comments. <br />8 <br /> <br />9 <br />Member Mulder clarified the need for staff recommendation as a basis for discussion and review <br />10 <br />by the Variance Board. He explained the history of deliberation on this site. He prefers smaller <br />11 <br />side yard variances. He prefers the old plan (1997) with only a front setback. Thomas Paschke <br />12 <br />explained the city record and pre-existing lot requirements. <br />13 <br /> <br />14 <br />Chair Bakeman said she was most concerned about side yard setbacks and lot coverage. <br />15 <br /> <br />16 <br />Motion: <br /> Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member Bakeman, to adopt a Resolution <br />17 <br />(attached) approving a 3, 5 and 9 foot Variance to Section 1004.016 (Residential Dimensional <br />18 <br />Requirements – Front & Side Yard Setbacks), a 22 foot and 5,172 sq. ft. Variance to Section <br />19 <br />1016.14B (Water Management Overlay District Lot Standards), a 39 foot Variance to Section <br />20 <br />1016.16A (Structure Design Standards – Placement of Structure on Lot), and a 143 sq. ft. <br />21 <br /> <br />Variance to Section 1016.26B1 (Storm Water Management – Impervious Surface Coverage)of <br />22 <br />the Roseville City Code for Jeff Brown, 1935 Lake Street, based on the findings in Section 5 and <br />23 <br />the conditions (as stated above) of Section 6 of the project report dated March 2, 2005. <br />24 <br /> <br />25 <br />Motion: <br /> Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Boerigter, to amend the motion to allow <br />26 <br />a 1 foot south side yard setback variance (allowing the principal structure to be 9 feet from the <br />27 <br />property line) and a 7 foot north side yard setback variance(allowing the principal structure to be <br />28 <br />3 feet from the property line). <br />29 <br /> <br />30 <br />Ayes: 3 <br />31 <br />Nays: 0 <br />32 <br />Amendment Motion carried. <br />33 <br /> <br />34 <br />Original Motion: <br /> <br />35 <br /> <br />36 <br />Ayes: 3 <br />37 <br />Nays: 0 <br />38 <br />Motion, as amended, carried. <br />39 <br /> <br />40 <br />5. Consider establishing a special meeting to hear and decide on County Road C <br />41 <br />Residential Privacy fence Issues relating to the widening and reconstruction of the <br />42 <br />north side of County Road C from Hamline Avenue to Pascal Street. <br />43 <br /> <br />44 <br />Motion: <br /> Chair Bakeman moved, seconded by Member Boerigter, to hold a special meeting at <br />45 <br />5:00 p.m., on Wednesday, March 23, 2005, in City Hall, to hear and decide on County Road C <br />46 <br />Residential Privacy fence issues relating to the widening and reconstruction of the north side of <br />47 <br />County Road C from Hamline Avenue to Pascal Street. <br />48 <br /> <br />49 <br />Ayes: 3 <br />50 <br />Nays: 0 <br />51 <br />Motion carried. <br />Page 5 of 6 <br /> <br />