My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03228
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03228
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 1:03:03 PM
Creation date
12/9/2004 6:55:13 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />j9 <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked for details of the east side walkway. Why <br />was the deck not rearranged to the west to allow the driveway on the east. <br />Mrs. Kate- Wolf Jenson explained that the east side is the wheelchair <br />access to the house. Mrs. Jenson said it could be placed on the east side <br />but a driveway will still need a variance. A sidewalk will be needed from <br />the east side to the street. <br /> <br />Thomas Paschke explained the decking creates a problem on the east. A <br />variance would be necessary on either side. <br /> <br />Member Mulder stated that both adjoining properties have bedrooms on <br />the side toward the Jenson property. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked if the driveway needed pavement (yes). <br /> <br />Chair Klausing noted that an ambiguity in the ordinance points to the <br />minimum distance at the property line must be six feet; it is not clear that <br />this must exist in all areas. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing asked about drainage and if it affected the east side. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked if a condition of the variance was to remove the <br />existing driveway and curb cut(yes) and indicated that it appears the <br />existing driveway is non-conforming with two curb cuts (1997 Pavement <br />Management Plan). <br /> <br />Member Mulder questioned the safety of the configuration with the gas <br />utility on the side of the house, and also indicated there were three <br />accessory buildings on the site (two allowed - the three considered pre- <br />existing condition). <br /> <br />Chair Klausing requested the staff to report on required dimensional site <br />plan and/or survey (either would do). <br /> <br />Member Egli asked how far the house was from the property line (not <br />listed). <br /> <br />Kate Wolf-Jenson indicated they were not living in the house and found <br />out about the meeting on the lth of July; the west property line is 12 feet <br />from next house; impervious surface was included on the handout given to <br />the Planning Commission; a survey was done. Ms Jenson further indicated <br />that they would use the detached garage as it is not possible to operate a <br />lift in the attached garage and further that the paved surface was needed to <br />access the garage with the scooter. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.