2015-07-01_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Variance Board Meeting City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive Draft Minutes–Wednesday, June 3, 2015–5:30p.m. 1.Call to Order 1 Member Murphycalled to order the Variance Board meeting atapproximately 5:30p.m.and 2 reviewed the role and purpose of the Variance Board. 3 2.Roll Call & Introductions 4 At the request of Member Murphy,City Planner Thomas Paschke called the Roll. 5 Members Present: ChairRobert Murphy,Vice Chair James Daire, and Commissioner Chuck 6 Gitzen 7 Others Present: Alternate Variance Board Member Michael Boguszewski 8 Staff Present: CityPlanner Thomas PaschkeandSeniorPlanner Bryan Lloyd 9 3.ReviewofMinutes 10 MOTION 11 Member Dairemoved, seconded by MemberGitzento approve meeting minutes of May 6, 12 2015as presented. 13 Ayes:3 14 Nays:0 15 Motion carried. 16 4.Public Hearings 17 Chair Murphy reviewed the protocol for public hearings and subsequent process. 18 a.PLANNING FILE No. 15-006 19 Request by John Snell, owner of the property at 887 Parker Avenue, for variances 20 to Roseville City Code, Sections 1004.05 (Residential Design Standards), Section 21 1005.08B (Residential Setbacks, and Section 1004.08C (Improvement Area), to 22 allow a proposed garage and home addition. 23 Chair Murphy opened the public hearing at 5:34p.m. 24 Senior Planner Bryan Lloydsummarized andreviewed the request as detailed in the 25 project report dated June 3, 2015and attachments.Mr. Lloyd reviewed various code 26 requirementswith therequested variances, and provided staff’s analysis of those 27 specifics as a prerequisite for approval. 28 In general, Mr. Lloyd advised that the proposal involveda room addition on the rear of the 29 home;expansion of the attached, tuck-under garage at the front of the home;and 30 conversion of part of the existing basement into additional tuck-under garage space, with 31 atotal vehiclestorage space that could house up to a minimum of fourteen cars.Mr. 32 Lloyd noted that the current owner, Mr. Snell,is a classic car broker, and while not 33 related to the variance applications,suggested it bore noting that while residential office 34 space is a viable home occupation, zoning code would not allow commercial inventory to 35 be stored at aresidential propertysuch as this.Mr. Lloyd advised that the owner is aware 36 of this, and has stated to staff that this proposal is partly intendedto create enough 37 garage space to move his personal vehicles and trailers inside versus on-street parking. 38 Based on staff’s analysis and review of variance criteria according to State Statute, Mr. 39 Lloyd advised that staff recommended DENIAL of the requested variances as indicated 40 within the project report and to avoid further noncompliance for the property. 41 Member Daire asked if the number of vehicles represented only the applicant’s personal 42 vehicles, whether there were other items beyond classic cars intended to fill this garage 43 space, verified that there was another detached garage already located on the property 44