My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2003_0616
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2003
>
CC_Minutes_2003_0616
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2008 1:54:00 PM
Creation date
4/4/2006 11:56:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/16/2003
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Minutes - 06/16/03 <br />Minutes -Page 22 <br />attempt to see that the variances were defeated and send a <br />message that this massive home was not in keeping with <br />the characteristics of the neighborhood and was <br />inappropriate. <br />Mr. Wilke provided comparisons and neighboring views <br />from front, back and side elevations; opined that use of <br />taxpayer monies to encourage this massive of a renovation <br />for a home was not acceptable; and further opined that <br />something of this magnitude should be brought to the <br />neighborhood's attention for their inclusion in the <br />discussion; and expressed his concern that the applicant <br />had not communicated with the neighborhood regarding <br />her proposed plans. for the property. <br />Sandy Wondra, 413 Terrace Drive <br />Mr. Wondra commented extensively on her opposition to <br />the proposed project; opining that the purpose of the <br />Rambler Beautification Program was to try to improve <br />homes that were not livable (i.e., single car garage not <br />available without variance for two-car garage; additional <br />bedroom space; and other logical reasons). Ms. Wondra <br />opined that the applicant shouldn't have purchased a <br />property that was not viable to her needs. <br />Ms. Wondra conunented on the improvements made to <br />neighboring properties within the confines of the code, <br />following the tornado several years ago. Ms. Wondra <br />questioned the exiting water drainage problems in the area, <br />and the potential for further problems given runoff from <br />the massive roof proposed, opining that this concern was <br />not adequately addressed by the Planning Commission <br />when brought up at the Public Hearing for this request. <br />Ms. Wondra further corrlmented on the 70/30 impervious <br />material ruling that was adopted in 1999 by the City, <br />opining that there must a valid reason for adopting the <br />code, and questioned rationale for varying those rulings. <br />Steve Wrangle, Architect representing Ms. Sieferman <br />Mr. Wrangle clarified the variance request; citing existing <br />landscape pavers on the site and the proposed pool <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.