Laserfiche WebLink
<br />reasonable doubt and found Kadrie not guilty of a setback violation <br /> <br />of §18.100(2) (C) or a substandard use violation of § 18.250 of the <br /> <br />Shoreland Management Ordinance. <br /> <br />Plaintiff then applied for a <br /> <br />building permit to enable him to complete his deck; no such permit <br />issued. Complaint, Para. 15. Plaintiff then brought this action <br /> <br />to compel issuance of this permit and the City counterclaimed to <br /> <br />compel removal of the offending partially completed deck. <br /> <br />STATUTORY BACKGROUND <br /> <br />In 1978, the City of Roseville adopted the Shoreland <br /> <br />Management Ordinance, as part of its Zoning Code. Roseville City <br /> <br />Code, Chap. 18. Roseville City Code § 18.100 (2) (c) requires that <br /> <br />structures be setback at least 75 feet from the normal high water <br /> <br />line. <br /> <br />The Shoreland Management Ordinance "grandfathered" in <br /> <br />structures which did not meet lot area, setbacks and other <br /> <br />dimensional requirements of the Ordinance when it was adopted. The <br /> <br />Ordinance labels these as substandard uses (commonly called <br /> <br />nonconforming uses). Roseville City Code § 18.250. This section <br /> <br />further forbids "any structural alteration or addition to a <br /> <br />substandard use which will increase the substandard dimensions . <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />The Shoreland Management Ordinance supersedes any City Zoning <br /> <br />Code provision that relates to shorelands, with this proviso: <br /> <br />However, the provisions of the existing City <br />Zoning Code and map of the City of Roseville, <br />Minnesota are hereby incorporated by reference <br />and shall, to the extent of greater <br />restrictions only, be made as much a part of <br />this chapter as if the matter described were <br />fully set out herein. <br /> <br />Roseville City Code § 18.050. <br /> <br />4 <br />