pm_010711 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Nays: 0 Motion carried. 6(e) Planning File 3327: A request by Bauer Homes a Variance from Section 1004.02D5 of the Roseville City Code for property located at 691 Heinel Drive Chair Rhody opened the hearing and requested Thomas Paschke to provide a verbal summary of the project report dated July 11, 2001. Thomas Paschke explained that Bauer Homes has requested a variance from Section 1004.02D5 (setbacks) from the Roseville City Code to allow the demolition and replacement of the existing single family residence structure at 691 Heinel Drive. Bauer Homes proposes to locate the new residential structure 10 feet from the rear yard (east) property line on this corner lot, requiring a 20-foot variance. Mr. Paschke further explained the definition of front and side setbacks. He also explained that the Code is currently being reviewed by staff to improve the language. Member Olson asked if the owner must meet the 25% lot coverage requirements (Yes). Member Mulder asked if the Public Works staff has preference on driveway location (better on Circle, but could be on Drive). Member Traynor asked for details of site lines from the residences south of Heinel Drive. Member Duncan asked if the owner could otherwise block the view with vegetation or fences (Yes). Steve Stravisky explained the intent of the Bauder design. He noted no actual house is designed at this time. Member Mulder asked if there are options to build without a variance. Typically, the Planning Commission would not recommend without a design. The Planning Commission normally states there are no other options. (Thomas Paschke noted that conditions could be added. He noted the unique nature of the site; there are limitations to the lot regarding the view of the lake). Member Mulder asked if this request was creating a precedent for future variances (Thomas Paschke noted that each project must meet the Code on its merit). Member Mulder asked if another review should occur (Yes, staff will review this site and building plan at a Development Review Committee meeting). Member Olson asked if the Certificate of Survey, noting that a 20-foot rear yard variance, would allow the structure to be set within ten feet of the east property line (yes) and 30 feet from the north property line (closer, up to 5 feet). Keith Pederson, 685 Heinel Drive, explained that the distance from his house to the proposed house is 15 feet. The proposal will block all others' views, the concern of the neighbors south of Heinel Drive. Member Mulder asked what was the separation between units to the northeast (24 feet between Pederson home and neighbor). Mr. Pederson requested that the Planning Commission ask for details of the house. Member Wilke asked for further details of the setback. Member Mulder asked if 15 feet on the northeast would be acceptable and a condition that the northwest line would be a 25-foot setback (Steve Zier, yes). Mr. Pederson suggested setbacks on the northeast and northwest should be equal. There being no further comment, Chair Rhody closed the hearing. Motion: Chair Rhody moved, seconded by Member Mulder, to table the request of Bauer Homes for a variance to the Planning Commission meeting of August 8, 2001, when the applicant will return with draft designs for the site. Chair Rhody also encouraged the applicant to meet with the neighbors.