090308_VB_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Variance Board Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, September 03, 2008 Page 3 rationale was that the parking difficulty did not arise to the level of “hardship” as defined by State Statute and City Ordinance for issuing a variance. Mr. Lloyd noted that staff advised Mr. Fishback to withdraw the variance application and instead apply for an administrative deviation to allow a two foot (2’) driveway setback with the need to find a hardship. Mr. Lloyd further noted staff’s recommendation for denial was based on allowing a paved driveway less than two feet (2’), as it would prevent or reduce snowmelt and rain water problems being mitigated on the subject property rather than on adjacent properties due to the lack of separation; and would require staff to monitoring enforcement of snow removal to the interior of the lot, as proposed by Mr. Fishback. Discussion included proposed width of the driveway, assumed at ten feet (10’) in width with a turnaround of the same width; right-of-way considerations; location of trees in the immediate expansion area; and definition of the apparent structures indicated in the rear yard and their impacts to impervious surface calculations. Applicant, Mr. Michael Fishback, 2895 N Hamline Mr. Fishback advised that he had requested a variance to the property line to allow for a second driveway to provide ample parking for his family and multiple drivers at this time. Mr. Fishback advised that he and his family had lived at this location for over twenty (20) years, and had chosen to remain in the property and make a substantial remodel of the structure, through addition of a second story, based on the encouragement of the City in retaining families in the community. Mr. Fishback advised that an immediate concern was in providing safe and adequate drop off area and turnaround for clients of his wife’s licensed daycare in the home, given traffic on Hamline Avenue during peak hours; and reviewed his concerns for staff’s suggestion of an administrative deviation. However, Mr. Fishback advised that such an option created concerns with access to an existing egress window well; potential issues with an existing gas line and new gas valve recently installed; and aesthetic appeal of the driveway on the property. Mr. Fishback anticipated that this variance would most likely be temporary once his three (3) teenage drivers were no longer in the home. Mr. Fishback provided a bench handout, attached hereto and made a part thereof, of a petition of support from adjacent property owners, dated August 29, 2008. Further discussion included preservation of existing trees on the lot; definition of apparent structures in the rear yard; location of the gas main; and recognition of the County right-of-way situation. Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing, with no one appearing for or against. Commissioner Doherty opined his support for a resolution to DENY the variance, based on the recommendation of staff, and historical consistency in the Variance Board not allowing driveways up to edge of the property due to drainage concerns. Commissioner Doherty opined that there were alternatives available to the property owner without a variance. MOTION Member Doherty moved to APPROVE Variance Board Resolution No. 82 entitled, “A Resolution a Five Foot (5’) VARIANCE to Roseville DENYING City Code, Section 1004 (Residence Districts) for Michael Fishback, 2895 Hamline Avenue PF08-038);” based on the comments and findings of Section 5 and the recommendation of Section 6 of the project report dated September 3, 2008. Chair Boerigter opined that this was a difficult situation, but that he was inclined to support the Variance, considering the City’s perspective, as well as the property