2006_0925_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

SEPTEMBER 6,2006 DRA.FT MINUTES VARIANCE BOARD Commissioner poherty was not supportive of the application; noting previous discussions and his original skepticism at the time the Minor Subdivision was granted, and the Commission's comments at that time related to development of the lot. Commissioner Doherty addressed the pra�sletns with a reduced-length driz eway and cars parked on the driveway creating safety issues and impediments to drivers' views of children playing in the area; and other visibility issues it would create. Commissioner poherty noted that he may be supportive of a smaller variance specific to a garage, but ten or fifteen feet (10-15'� was too close for the entire structure and out of characterwith the neighborhood. Commissioner Boerigter opined that this was a difficult decision, but specifically recalled the meetings when the Minor Subdivision was reluctantly granted by the Planning Commission, and comments that the applicant shouldn't expect to receive any variances to get the triangular lot to wark. Commissioner Boerigter further opined that a home could be made to work on the lot, but it would not support a traditionally-designed home and would require creativity. Commissioner Boerigter concurred with comments of the neighbors that the plight of this landowner was due to the lot split, and had the existing home been moved to make this lot larger, it would be buildable. Commissioner Boerigter noted that the owner had elected not to move the existing structure, thus creating a lot they couldn't sell due to prospective l�uilders/buyexs not being able to site a home. Commissioner Boerigter opined that a fifteen foot (15') variance was too much, and without a specific design or plan to consider further, justification of a variance would not be applicable; thus he could not support the request. Chair Sakernan, while posaibly considering a ten foot (1 Q') variance request; she could not support this request. MOTION Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member poherty, to DENY a Variance to �10�4 of the Roseville City Code for Charles We�eczki, 1822 Dale Court (PF 37$1), to allow a future home/attached garage encroachment into the required front yard setback for the vacant parcel at Dale Court and Dale Street. Ayes: 3 Nays: 0 Motion carriec��request DENIED. Chair Bakernan ad�ised the applicant of the appeal process timeframe.