090606_VB_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Variance Board Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 06, 2006 Page 4 Applicant’s Representative: Todd Iliff, son-in-law of property owners, Charles and Suzanne Welecski Mr. Iliff noted his relationship to the applicant, and his role in assisting them with the variance request and process. Mr. Iliff reviewed his narrative description of the property dated July 13, 2006, attached to the staff report dated September 6, 2006. In the narrative, Mr. Iliff reviewed the practical difficulties of the lot in accommodating typical and/or standard home design plans; reviewed a schematic of a possible footprint for a single-family home for the new lot; and the design’s consistency with neighboring properties and sight lines. Discussion setbacks of adjoining properties at thirty feet (30’) from the property lines; easement and utility locations; and staff’s interpretation of the variance allowing for the encroachment of the principal structure or garage to provide more flexibility and to make the design more functional and aesthetically pleasing and so the garage didn’t become a sole design feature with greater visibility than the main structure. Chair Bakeman noted discussion held at the time of the Minor Subdivision approval, and the Commission’s reluctance to consider any future variance requests. Mr. Iliff advised that they had previously sought several variances, but in order to minimize encroachments and to achieve a more traditionally-sized and designed house on the lot, he was supportive of staff’s recommendation for one (1) fifteen foot (15’) variance. Public Comment Mike Radovich, 1820 Dale Court (2 houses down from proposed lot) Mr. Radovich expressed frustration that, while the Public Hearing Notice post card had stated that more detailed information was available on the City’s website, he had not found it. Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd apologized to Mr. Radovich, the Commission and public, noting that it was only discovered on Monday that a link to the planning report was not working properly; and had since been corrected. Mr. Radovich requested that the Variance Board postpone the case to allow the public adequate time for review and comment regarding the requested variance. Mr. Radovich noted his concerns with site lines and traffic safety at the intersection; need for landscaping restrictions on the property to allow adequate site lines; consideration of granting variances to a speculative builder; desire for a specific proposal by a builder; and opined that that the property owners had created the circumstances and hardships on their own by subdividing the original lot. Mr. Radovich addressed the group home on the original homestead, additional traffic and cars parked in the driveway and the cluttering of the neighborhood, creating declining property values. Additional discussion included review of proposed designs by the Design Review Committee (DRC) and whether the public could participate in that process, with staff advising that, while not normally noticed, if the Variance Board applied that as a condition to the request, staff would comply. Mr. Radovich concluded his comments by opining that Roseville needed to show caution, as a first-ring suburb, in future development, property value considerations, and end results sought. Tim Garvin, 1812 Dale Court Mr. Garvin reiterated the comments of Mr. Radovich; opining that tonight’s request was a direct result of a decision made by the property owner last year in subdividing the property, creating the unique lot requiring a variance. Mr. Garvin further opined that the need for a variance was only the beginning, and the neighborhood would be watching closely for any