2016-11-02_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Variance Board Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 14, 2016 Page 3 Therefore, Mr. Lewis opined that he got it from both sides, and could be alleviated 99 with a larger garage on his property that incorporated a retaining wall to remove 100 erosion. 101 Mr. Lewis noted City Planning staff was unable to find records or plans on file for 102 the larger garages on West Owasso; but asked the Variance Board to observe the 103 garages along the street, as he noted previously. Mr. Lewis opined that of the 104 forty plus homes, twenty-five had oversized garages of at least three stalls, 105 several with living quarters above, and numerous auxiliary buildings on their 106 parcels as well. 107 Mr. Lewis clarified that it was not his intent to request a variance that was out-of- 108 line for his neighborhood. However, Mr. Lewis noted his existing garage was 109 made out of sticks, and ne needed a larger garage to get his vehicles, including 110 his extended cab pick-up truck, off the street, while meeting other practical 111 difficulties as he previously mentioned. Mr. Lewis opined that city code didn’t 112 sufficiently address practical challenges through standards written for generalities, 113 including for standard lot sizes in Roseville over 1100 square feet. Mr. Lewis 114 noted that, while his lot is considered oversized due to its depth from street to 115 lake, city code didn’t recognize the challenge of the skinny width and steep hill. If 116 the lot was a standard size, Mr. Lewis opined that an attached garage would be 117 possible. However, since a detached garage was required, Mr. Lewis noted the 118 challenges with the shape and size of the lot to accomplish that, in addition to the 119 55’ drop in the lot and inability to construct an attached garage. Mr. Lewis asked 120 the Variance Board for their consideration to allow him to utilize his property to its 121 full extent. 122 Questions of the Applicant from the Variance Board 123 Member Daire requested approximate sizes for the proposed garage; standard 124 garage stall size; storage needs in addition to vehicle storage; and boat launching 125 from the public ramp in Shoreview versus being able to launch from his property 126 due to the topography of the parcel. 127 At the request of Member Daire, Mr. Lloyd reviewed city code parameters when 128 initially written in 1956 as well as those standards now in place when the code 129 received a universal amendment in 2009. At the further request of Member Daire, 130 Mr. Lloyd reviewed rationale for the current 1,008 maximum square footage for a 131 garage and whether it applied to the footprint or total building square footage. Mr. 132 Lloyd opined it was that the intent was for overall area versus the actual footprint. 133 Mr. Lloyd further noted detached storage buildings were limited by the building 134 code and limited to up to 85% of the home’s footprint, but at no more than 1,008 135 square feet, ensuring the residence remained the primary structure versus any 136 storage buildings. 137 Member Daire further addressed Mr. Lewis related to his plans related to setbacks 138 based on his personal observations of the site; and location of the north 139 foundation wall of the proposed garage and number of stories intended, or that 140 could be considered for construction and cost feasibility. 141 Mr. Lewis read through city code and his interpretation of its intent to limit 142 accessory structures from that of the primary structure while allowing adequate 143 storage space for typical household needs. Mr. Lewis noted this also ensured that 144 the property clearly remained residential, and didn’t allow running a business from 145 a garage or detached building. Mr. Lewis assured the Board that this request 146 wasn’t attempting to do anything not in line with the intent of city code. However, 147 given the challenges of the site, Mr. Lewis opined that this provided the best 148 option based on his experience as a contractor for the last 35 years, as well as 149 advice of other contractor peers he had consulted. 150