res_10295 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was held on the 25th day of April, 2005, at 6:30 p.m. The following members were present: Ihlan, Maschka, Schroeder, Kough, Klausing and the following were absent: None Council Member Maschka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 10295 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A 25 FOOT LOT WIDTH VARIANCE AND A 1,820 SQUARE FOOT LOT SIZE VARIANCE TO SECTION 1004.016 OF THE ROSEVILLE CITY CODE FOR NEW PARCEL "A" PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1758 AL T A VISTA DRIVE (PF 3626) WHEREAS, Ralph and Jim Beauclaire have requested a 25 foot lot width variance and a 1,820 square foot lot size variance to Section 1004.016 (Residential Dimensional Requirements) of the Roseville City Code for a new Parcel "A" for property located at 1758 Alta Vista Drive, WHEREAS, new PARCEL "A" located at 1758 Alta Vista Drive is legally described as: The North 60 feet of the East 176 feet of Lot 16, ASYLUM OUTLOTS, Ramsey County, Minnesota. Subject to a street easement over the East 43 feet. WHEREAS, Section 11.0404 E outlines the requirements and procedures to follow when a subdivision of properties creates a total of three or less land parcels; and WHEREAS, Section 1004.016 (Residential Dimensional Requirements) establishes the minimum lot standards for residential parcels, which includes an 85 foot minimum width along a public right-of-way, a 110 foot minimum depth and 11,000 square foot minimum size; and WHEREAS, Section 1013 of the City Code grants the Variance Board authority to review/approve appropriate variances in accordance with the Code requirements, and MS 462.357, subd 6(s) provides authority for the city to hear and grant requests for variances under certain circumstances; and WHEREAS, On April 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a hearing on the Beauclaire variance and subdivision requests. One neighbor was present to support the subdivision but to caution about the private sewer and pumping systems. He recommended a new city sewer line as an alternative. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the variances and subdivision 6-0 based on the findings in Section 5 of the project report and subject to the conditions within Section 6 of the project report dated April 6, 2005, and including payment of park fee by applicant (if required after attorney review) and, if requested on the new parcel, side yard variances will be required rather than setback permits. 1