pf_03556 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Subject: Variance Application by Vernon Albertson, 3103 Asbury St (PF3556) Dear Mr. Paschke My name is Greg Larson and I own the property at 3077 Asbury St. My lot is the third one south of the subject property. I believe I tmderstand the reason for the variance request and respect the Albertson's desire to maximize the value of their property for sale and let prospective owners know if the lot can be subdivided. However, I am writing to express my opposition to creating a substandard residential property. I offer the following reasons: There is no undue hardship: State Statute 462.357,subd. 6(2) states that a variance may be granted if "strict enforcement would cause tmdue hardship". The Roseville Variance Application, paragraph 8. A. states: "The inability to put the property to its highest and best use is not considered a hardship". This is not a case where an existing homeowner needs a few foot variance to put up a garage in a small lot or add a room to modernize an old rambler. The primary reason here is to simply increase the value of the property for sale. 2. Bad precedent: I don't think the city wants to set a precedent where any homeowner can get a variance to subdivide a large lot simply to increase the property value when they want to sell their house. I'm sure there are numerous lots in Roseville that could be subdivided into 69-foot lots. I don't think we want to get in the habit of subdividing them simply because we can. 3. Significant Variance: Creating a substandard lot with a width of only 69 feet is a significant reduction in a neighborhood where the standard lot width is much larger. All lots on the west side of Asbury are 100 feet. The substandard lot would certainly be out of place in this secluded self- contained neighborhood. 4. Decrease in average property values: While the total value of the neighborhood properties would probably increase with the additional house, the average value would probably decrease due to the higher density. I recognize that in reality it may not be significant for those not immediately adjacent to the property. However, it is likely this would have a significant impact on those properties next to the substandard lot. In particular, the property immediately south will trade a view of open space with mature spruce trees for a structure a few feet away. 5. Changes the character ofthe neighborhood: The Roseville Division of Land Application states in Paragraph 7.A.: "the city is particularly interested in determining that the lots to be created will be consistent with the character of the surrotmding area." Large and uniquely shaped lots are a unique and desirable characteristic of this isolated Roseville/ Arden Hills neighborhood. It was one of the primary reasons I bought here in 1987 and I am sure it is a significant reason why existing homeowners stay here and new people want to move here. Creating a 69-foot lot changes the essential character of this neighborhood and makes it less desirable. Thanks for allowing me to comment on this proposed variance. Grego a Homeowner 3077 Asbury St. Roseville, MN 55112 651-633-6281