pf_03095 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

2. The addition ofthe 968 sJ. detached accessory building on the site complies with the total allowable coverage of the site requirement (30% or 3,037 s.f.) when including the house (1,164 sJ.) and the expanded driveway (900 s.f.). 3. The proposed detached accessory building meets the side and rear setback requirements of 5 feet. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Roseville, Minnesota, a Ramsey County, Minnesota, that a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a 22' x 44' (968 sq.ft.) four-stall detached garage on property located at 2330 Auerbach Avenue North, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The hard surface driveway extension, if not five feet from the property line, must either comply with the 5-foot setback or the applicant must apply for a setback permit. 2. All roof drainage created by the new structure must be collected in gutters and channeled to the natural drainage way within the applicant's property. 3. The exterior of the building must be of a stucco material which matches the existing materials on the house in color and materials, or the exterior materials must be of a maintenance free material which matches the color and trim of the house. The building must be landscaped to screen the size (44 feet in length) and bulk from adjoining properties. A landscape plan will be required as part of the building permit review. 4. Because of the size ofthe new structure (968 s.f.) no other accessory building or tool shed may be permitted on the property. 5. The maximum height (as defined in Section 1004.01) shall be 15 feet. 6. The existing detached accessory structure must be removed from the site. 7. Prior to issuance of a building permit, and within 60 days after approval of the conditional use permit. the applicant must record the conditional use permit with the Ramsey County Recorder. 8. This conditional use permit shall expire 6 months after approval if a building permit has not been issued. (Section 1013.03) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member Wiski, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Wiski, Maschka, Mastel, Wall and the following voted against the same: None WHEREUPON, said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.