Laserfiche WebLink
<br />;11.1. <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 1-23-95 <br /> <br />ITEM NO.: E- 3 <br /> <br />Department Approval: <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Agenda Section: <br />Report and <br />Recommendation <br />Ken Kath request for interpretation of Section 8.235 of the City <br />Code - Night Watchman's residence for his retail center in the <br />southwest quadrant of Hamline Avenue and County Road C. <br /> <br />Manager Reviewed: <br /> <br />~~ <br /> <br />Item Description: <br /> <br />Background <br /> <br />1. ill the summer of 1994, Mr. Kath began construction on a spec retail building <br />that is approximately 20,000 sq. ft. in size on the property located in the <br />southwest quadrant of Hamline Avenue and County Road C, The property is <br />zoned B-3 General Business District and most retail uses are permitted uses <br />in that district. Mr. Kath recently submitted construction plans for tenant <br />finish out for his building that call for a single family residential unit that is <br />approximately 1400 sq. ft. in size with an 866 sq. ft. garage attached to the <br />space. Mr. Katb is calling this space a night watchman's residence and under <br />Section 8.235 of the Roseville Zoning Ordinance, feels that it is a permitted <br />accessory use in business districts. <br /> <br />2. When the plans for the building were first presented for building permit <br />application, the night watchman's residence was shown as a part of that <br />application. At that time, staff indicated that we could not interpret this space <br />as simply a night watchman's residence. At that point, in order to receive a <br />building permit, Mr. Kath removed the residence plans from his application <br />and the permits were issued. The building shell is now' up and Mr. Kath has <br />returned to the City seeking a pennit for the residential portion of his plan. <br />Staffhas again indicated to Mr, Kath that we do not think this could be <br />legitimately described as a night watchmants residence but explained that he <br />had the right to appeal this interpretation to the City Council. He has asked <br />for this now and discussed this issue with the Planning Commission at your <br />meeting of January 11, 1995. <br /> <br />3. To facilitate this discussion, staff asked the City's legal counsel for an opinion <br />on this code issue, This opinion is attached will be presented at Wednesday's <br />Commission meeting. <br />