My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02614
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2600
>
pf_02614
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:59:13 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 12:12:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2614
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
1281 JOSEPHINE RD
Applicant
KADRIE, CHUCK
Status
APPROVED
PIN
032923120007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
174
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
<br />MEMORANDUM <br />On May 13, 1994, the defendant, Charles Kadrie was cited with <br />two misdemeanor violations contrary to the Roseville Zoning Code. <br />Specifically he is charged with a set-back violation allegedly <br />contrary to section 18.100 (2) (c) of the Shore Land Management <br />Ordinance and a substandard use violation allegedly contrary to <br />Section 18.250 of "the Shore Land Management ~rdinance. <br />The parties essentially agree to the facts which gave rise to <br /> <br />these two citations. <br /> <br />The defendant owns a home located at 1281 <br /> <br />Josephine Road, Roseville, Minnesota. This home was built in 1967 <br />and was constructed with two decks, one at grade level and one on <br />the first floor level. The residence is located thirty-seven (37) <br />feet from the shoreline and the at grade deck is located fifteen <br />(15) feet from the shoreline. In 1988, the defendant received a <br />shoreline permit to locate an addition between the house and the <br />then free standing garage. This addition did not bring the <br />structure closer to the shoreline but it was closer then seventy- <br />five (75) feet from the shoreline and as such is in violation of <br /> <br />the Shore Land Management Ordinance. <br /> <br />section 18.100 (2)(c) <br /> <br />requires that all structures be setback from the normal high water <br /> <br />line by a distance of seventy-five (75) feet. However, this <br /> <br /> <br />ordinance did not apply to the defendant at that time since his <br /> <br /> <br />property qualifies as a substandard use as defined in section <br /> <br />18. 250 of the ordinance. This property is a substandard use <br /> <br /> <br />because it was already located too close to the high water mark at <br /> <br /> <br />the time the ordinance was passed. Therefore, a variance was not <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.