My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03781
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3700
>
pf_03781
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2014 12:34:14 PM
Creation date
7/3/2013 11:36:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3781
Planning Files - Type
Variance
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
126
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
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION <br />Department :lpproval: <br />TP <br />Ciry �Ia�ager Appxoval: <br />DATE: 08/ 14/06 <br />ITEM NO: 4.j <br />Agenda Section: <br />CONSENT <br />Item Description: Request by City o�eville for a 60-day plan review extension <br />regarding the VARIANCE request of Charles & Suzzane Weleczki for <br />the trian�ular property at Dale Street and Dale Court (PF 3781). <br />1.0 REQUESTED ACTION: <br />1.1 The City of Roseville Planning Division is seeking an extension to the 60-day review <br />deadline from September 11, 2006 to November 10, 2006 for the VARIANCE <br />application by Charles and Suzzane Weleczki for their vacant property at Dale Street and <br />Dale Court. <br />2.0 <br />2.1 <br />BACKGROUND: <br />The application was submitted to the Community Development Department on July 13, <br />2006 and would be considered incomplete due to the lack of a check to cover the <br />processing fee. However, the City Planner has not had an opportunity to review the <br />application thoroughly with the City Attorney due to numerous scheduling conflicts. <br />2.2 Back in 2005, the subject parcel received a VARIANCE to the minimum standards of the <br />City Code for lot size dimensions due to its unique design and was split off from the <br />parent parcel. At that time staff supported the land division but did not support structure <br />setback variances. <br />2.3 The Planning Division needs adequate time to discuss the request with the City Attorney <br />and the applicant before rendering a decision and forwarding a recommendation to the <br />Planning Commission (and City Council) for action. <br />3.0 <br />3.1 <br />SUGGESTED ACTION: <br />ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING up to a 60-day extension of the Charles and <br />Suzzane Weleczki VARIANCE request. <br />PF3781_RCA_60DayExtension_081406.doc Page 1 of 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.