Councilmember Tieden pointed out that 86th Street in Victoria was black-topped a section at a time.  "It seemed like a policy that had some value," he said.  "Everybody wants gravel roads outta here.  Now we have an opportunity to move ahead."
He added, "My concern is that we have policies in place.  If we deviate, others can do the same thing.  We listened all summer to people with water and dust problems.  We're compromising the direc-tion we've taken for fairness, for prece-dence."
Councilmember Dave Lindgren pointed out there's a gravel road in Vic-toria where Bruce spent $7,000 to $8,000 in maintenance.
Mayor Jerry Bohn said, "This is a special case" because only two new lots will be accessing Aster Trail.
The developer shall pay the City of Victoria $21,450 for park dedication fees, according to city policy.

GARDEN SHED HAS GOTTA GO
TO A DIFFERENT SPOT ON THE LOT
Councilmembers voted 4 to 1 to deny Dan and Barb Koehnen the ability to keep a garden shed where they placed it on their property in Kirke-Lachen without receiving city approval.  The Victoria Planning Commission had also recom-mended that the Koehnens' request be denied. 
The garden shed does not meet side yard setbacks as required under city or-dinance.  The applicant had begun con-struction on the 96-square foot garden shed prior to obtaining a permit and con-tinued construction despite not receiving a variance to the sideyard setback.  It is a movable building.
In the language of City Planner Mark Kaltsas, "The petitioner completed a shed that is not a conforming shed.  The Plan-ning Commission said there is no hard-ship and no undue circumstances to grant a variance.  The intent of the ordinance is not to perpetuate a nonconforming struc-ture.  There were complaints, that it's too visible to the public."
Stated Dan Koehnen, "Every house in the neighborhood is practically illegal with the 35-foot setback.  This is a 20-year old neighborhood ... We pay over $4,000 in property taxes and can't use our property.  Regardless of where we put that shed, it'd be illegal ... It's the only lot in all of Kirke-Lachen, Kelzer's Pond, and Watermark surrounded by three streets ... I called an attorney for a legal opinion.  It was his opinion to go ahead with the shed."
Stated Barb Koehnen, "We didn't arbitrarily place the shed here.  It's not an eyesore in this location.  We are the only house in the neighborhood with roads on three sides of us ... The shed is not on the main drag ... We didn't realize we needed a permit for a movable garden shed ... It's not the Taj Mahal.  It's an 8-foot by 10-foot garden shed ... I've lived here 17 and a half years ... When my first husband and I moved here, we never thought about things like this.  Now I'm married to a carpenter and he built a garden shed ... Other cities don't require a permit for that.  It will truly stick out with no camouflage if we put it where the Planning Commis-sions says."
Stated Mayor Jerry Bohn, "I certainly think it changes the character of the neighborhood.  It sticks out ... I think there could be a fine for people who violate the ordinance ... It does not consti-tute a hardship.  The city did not create the lot nor the situation."
Councilmember Terry Bishop spoke to the Koehnens, "I'm sympathetic, but I don't like it that you thumbed your noses at the city.  You put us in a difficult posi-tion ... I'm not mad at you.  I'm mad at your lawyer.  We're in a tough spot ... If others do it, I'm not going to be so sympathetic.  I'll vote for this because I would have voted for it if you would have done it the right way."
"It bothers me too," said Council-member Mary Thun.  "The city also has an attorney who may have been able to help the situation, but you went ahead and violated the city ordinance ... We want to help you but we're in such an untenable position."
Replied Mr. Koehnen, "Yes, maybe I did violate the rules ... I'm sure that we're not the first ones to do that.  You should go through the neighborhood and cut out some of the other illegal activities."
"It's a beautiful shed," said Council-member Dave Lindgren, who is a resident at Kirke-Lachen.  "This is probably the most uncomfortable I've felt in 11 years."  Dave has been a Victoria city council-member for 11 years.
Four of the councilmembers voted to deny a variance for the shed; Terry Bishop didn't support the vote.  The city planner offered to meet with the Koehens and help find a different spot on the steep lot where the shed might be relocated within city requirements.  Otherwise it could be sold to someone else.

OVERLOOK AT TAMARACK LAKE
ANOTHER NEW SUBDIVISION IN VICTORIA
On October 9th, Council approved a minor subdivision for property located at Rolling Acres Road in order to correct legal descriptions.   The request was made by Charles Jensch on behalf of Allan Sauter, who was in the process of selling this property to Plowshares Development for the development of a single family subdivision which abuts Lake Tamarack.

On October 23rd, Council approved a preliminary plat for this subdivision which is to be known as "Overlook at Tamarack Lake."
According to City Planner Mark Kalt-sas, the single family residential develop-ment will consist of 17 lots under a PUD for the 13.9 overall acres.  A strip of land 100 feet wide along Tamarack Lake will be dedicated to the city to be used strictly for preservation.  Buyers of lots in the subdivision will receive letters stating this strip of land is not to be mowed or mis-used.
Four of the 17 lots will be on the west side of Rolling Acres Road.  The city is accepting $100,835 cash in lieu of parkland dedication.  It amounts to $2,645 per lot.
Steve Kroiss informed councilmem-bers that Kroiss Development is a con-struction company that will be building all of the homes in the development.  "These will be quite expensive homes," he said.

Click here for more City Scoop.