030508_VB_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Variance Board Meeting City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive Minutes - Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1. Call to Order Chair Daniel Boerigter called to order the Variance Board meeting at 5:00 p.m. and reviewed the role and purpose of the Variance Board. 2. Roll Call & Introductions City Planner Thomas Paschke called the Roll. Members Present: Chair Daniel Boerigter; Commissioners Barbara Martinson; and Mary Bakeman. Staff present: City Planner Thomas Paschke; City Engineer Debra Bloom; and Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd. 3. Approval of Minutes MOTION Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member Martinson, to approve meeting minutes of February 6, 2008 as presented. Ayes: 2 Nays: 0 Abstentions: 1 (Bakeman) Motion carried. 4. Public Hearings a. PLANNING FILE 08-006 Request by Elizabeth Braunlin, 358 S McCarrons Boulevard, for VARIANCES to Roseville City Code, §1004 (Residence Districts) to allow a principal structure encroachment into the required setback from the front property line and impervious coverage exceeding allowable limits. Chair Boerigter opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 08-006. Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the request of Ms. Braunlin, noting that the published notice for the application was inconsistent with the above “Item Description,” that indicated the request for variances to Section 1004 of City Code. Mr. Lloyd advised that, while standard residential setbacks and impervious coverage limits were established in that chapter of the Zoning Ordinance, the proximity of the property to McCarrons Lake triggered the heightened coverage requirements of Section 1016 (Shoreland Requirements) of City Code. Mr. Lloyd noted that no variance was necessary for the location of the garage related to the front property line, so Ms. Braunlin seeks a the current request was more appropriately summarized as follows: VARIANCE toRoseville City Code, §1016 (Shoreland Requirements) to allow impervious coverage exceeding allowable limits. Mr. Lloyd advised that the Planning Department continued to enforce a provision of the zoning ordinance (formerly in Section 1004.01D5a) allowing an attached garage to project three feet (3’) into the required front yard when no living area exists above the garage, despite the fact that this provision was inadvertently omitted when the ordinance was most recently re-codified. Mr. Lloyd reviewed staff’s analysis of the request, noting that the property was platted in the 1930’s, well before the establishment of current lot size requirements, and at 6,935 square feet was considerably smaller than most residential lots in Roseville. Mr. Lloyd further noted that the property only had 2,865 square feet of impervious surface area covering 41% of the property. Mr. Lloyd advised that the proposed addition of 507 square feet would increase the impervious coverage to 48.6%, due to the expansion of the driveway to better serve the garage and the creation of a sidewalk/patio on the eastern side of the garage.