2003_0602_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

6.0 STAFF COMMENDATIO ■ 6.1 Based on the information provided and the findings in Section 5 of ` this project report, staff' recommends approval of a 70 foot variance to Section 1004.01 A7 and allow a joint 75 foot long driveway to remain Section 703.04B2 of the Ro evi 11c City Code for James ueffer to allow construction of a detached accessory building at $96 Parker Avenue, subject to the following conditions: A. The applicant using the lot's survey and property pins and based on that, supplying a scaled site plan with dimensions for structures and driveway for building permit application, thus allowing the Community Development Dcpartment to verify the setbacks, driveway locations as per the variance request, and size of new structures. B. The detached accessory structure being setback a minimum of 10 feet from the west (side yard) property line and 69 feet from the parker Avenue property line. C. The joint existing driveway, varying from zero (o) feet to a 2 foot setback from the east property line} is allowed to remain to a point 75 feet south of the front property line along Parker Avenue. As part of the building permit application, Mr. lue fifer must provide and show a County Recorder's recorded copy of a p e rp etua l access easement in favor of the adjoining property owner to the east for access use the ,joint driveway, D. The existing garage and driveway being removed within one year of the approval date of the variance. The slope and drainage must be redesigned and re- landscaped to reduce and/or retain surface run -off and roof drainage on the Iueffer lot by creating on site infiltration areas. E+ A landscape plan being provided that illustrates how new plantings will visually soften and partially screen the proposed garage from the Parker Avenue frontage. F. The review and approval of a building permit being consistent with the approved plans and variance. The new building to match the existing building in color and/or materials. 7.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: 7.1 On May ay 7, 2003, the Roseville Planning Conunission held the public Bearing regarding the I ue ffer request. At the hearing, no citizens were present to address the Commission. The property owner and City Planner were present to answer any questions of the Commission. 7.2 The Commission voted (4 -o) to recommend approval of the request by Mr. Kueffer for VARIANCE to Section 1 004.01 A7 and Section 703.04B2 of the Roseville City Cod &a' based on the findings in Section 5 and conditions in Section 6 of the project report dated. May 7, 2003. PF3469 - RCA 06/02/03- Page 5 of 6