pf_02614 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

later) plaintiff applied for the building permit to begin construction of this family room addition (Ex. 2). The application itself clearly identifies this as a building permit for the family room addition. In July 1993, plaintiff's construction of not just a family room addition but a kitchen addition and surroundinq deck being built closer to the lake came to the attention of the building inspection staff. Construction was stopped until valid building permits and shoreline setback issues could be resolved. Ex. 4, pages 1 & 2; Complaint, para. 4; Counterclaim, Para. 2. Whether the 1991 building permit was for the family room addition only as clearly stated on the building permit application, or also for the kitchen addition and surrounding deck, the 1991 building permit was then invalid. Building permits are valid for one year only. Ex. 4, page 2. Plaintiff then applied for a variance to enable him to complete the kitchen addition and surrounding deck (Ex.3). The Roseville City Council followed the staff planning reports (Exs. 4 & 5) and granted plaintiff's variance as it related to the kitchen addition, but denied the variance for the surrounding deck which would have extended to within 17 feet of the shoreline of Lake Josephine (Ex. 6, Resolution 9000) . When plaintiff failed to remove his deck which was in violation of Chapter 18 of the Roseville Zoning Code, he was charged with misdemeanor violations of said Code. In this criminal prosecution, State v. Kadrie, Court File No. T9-94-613871, the Court found that the City had not proved its case beyond a 3