pf_02715 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

r, , . January 13, 1995 Mr. Leroy C. Rees 600 W. Ryan Avenue Roseville, MN 55113 Re: House Construction at 1960 N. Dale Street Dear Mr. Rees: As the City Planner, I have been asked to respond to your letter regarding the construction of a house at 1960 N. Dale Street in Roseville and the 10 foot setback variance that was granted prior to the issuance of a building permit. As I indicated to you in our recent telephone conversation, the minor variance review process typically involves notification of all affected contiguous land owners and that the application for a variance is judged on issues of hardship particular to the property in question. I also indicated to you that the reason I missed notifying you of this application was the result of this lot being a comer lot and the Minor Variance Committee redefining the front yard of the property. To understand the zoning code, it typically defines the front yard of any comer lot as that yard that has the shortest dimension. In this case, that would have been the ftontage along the Carlisle Avenue right-of~way. The setback along the Carlisle right~of~way would have been 30 feet, the rear yard between the proposed house and your neighbor to the west would have been 30 feet and the side yard setback, between your property line ~nd the property line at 1960 Dale, would have been 5 feet. With this in mind, notice was sent to your neighbor because the rear yard setback variance would have taken place in the area between your neighbor's south wall and the north wall of the proposed house. As you are aware, although the right~of.way for Carlisle Avenue is platted, the street has not been constructed. Therefore, the lot under consideration will take its access onto Dale Street, and the owner has designed the house to face Dale Street. Given this, the Minor Variance Committee felt that the real front yard of the lot was the Dale Street ftontage and that the house could be situated on the lot facing the street and still provide a limited rear yard. The advantage of this configuration to you is that the house is located 15 feet further ITom the property line than is legally required by the zoning ordinance or to be considered as a side yard. The new house is in a line with your existing neighbor to the east, in a way that provides for consistent setbacks along Dale Street. Again, I apologize that you did not receive notice of this application for a variance. If Carlisle Avenue existed, I would not have made this mistake in notification. Please note, however, that if Carlisle was considered the tront yard, the building could have been built legally within 5 feet of your property line. To the concerns raised in your letter, let me point out that decks above the 2660 CIYIC CENTER DRIVE. ROSEVILLE · MIJ\'NESOTA · 55] D-1899 612-490-2200 · TDD 612-490-2205