My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03012
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3000
>
pf_03012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:29:44 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 2:46:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3012
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
2044 DALE ST N
Applicant
HEFFERNAN, MIKE
PIN
132923220029
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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 />. <br />'" <br /> <br />ffi~~/'~ <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br /> <br />Manager Approved: <br /> <br />DATE: 04/27/98 <br />ITEM NO: <br />Agenda Section: <br />LAND USE <br /> <br />Mike Heffernan, 2044 No. Dale S1.: <br />Appeal of Administrative Decision (PF#3012) <br /> <br />1.0 BACKGROUND <br /> <br />1.1 Mike Heffernan, 2044 Dale, has requested a Council review of the staff <br />interpretation of provisions in Section 1004.01 of the City Code relating to accessory <br />buildings. <br /> <br />1.2 Mr. Heffernan currently has one detached 480 s.f. garage in the rear yard of his <br />property. He proposes to construct a second garage of approximately 600 s.f. <br />(3 cars) to store collector vehicles. <br /> <br />1.3 The staff has interpreted the Code (Section 1004.01- attached) as follows: <br /> <br />An accessory building can only be placed in the back yard of a lot and the accessory <br />building can only occupy a maximum of 25% of the reauired rear yard, this amounts <br />to 25% of the area contained within the 30 foot required rear yard setback atimes. the <br />lot width (normally 80 to 85 feet). <br /> <br />For example: 30' x 85' = 2,550 s.f. <br />2,550 s.f. x .25 = 638 s.f. bldg. <br />Therefore, based on the staff Interpretation, a normal lot could have an accessory <br />building no larger than 638 s.t.. <br /> <br />1.4 Mr. Heffernan believes this Code interpretation is too restrictive and additional <br />buildings and square footage of accessory buildings should be allowed. His <br />interpretation is that any accessory building placed in the rear yard could be 638 s.f, <br />or more, depending on the size of the lot. <br /> <br />1.5 Mr. Heffernan has found other locations with a detached garage and a garden shed <br />or additional building. <br /> <br />2.0 PREVIOUS INTERPRET A T/ON <br /> <br />2.1 In 1994 the Council reviewed an accessory building request at 220 West Burke <br />Avenue. In this case the owner proposed a large metal accessory building within <br />which a boat was to be constructed. The Council's determination at that time was <br />that large (up to 1,000 s.f.) accessory buildings would only be allowed on parcels <br />of more than one acre. Buildings over 1,000 s.f. would require a Council decision. <br /> <br />PF#3012- RCA (04/27/98) - Page 1 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.