My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03236
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03236
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 1:03:27 PM
Creation date
12/9/2004 6:58:07 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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 /> <br />Mr. Reichenbach clarified the garage setbacks. He explained the need for <br />storage, noting that he has studied this for over one year. <br /> <br />Member Egli asked if off-site storage was possible (previously done and <br />not acceptable nay longer). Why not a five foot setback (yes, boat doesn't <br />fit easily). <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked when the house was purchased (10 years). <br />Did the property owner to the south ask that garage be moved (no)? Is <br />there an adverse possession requirement here? (no) <br /> <br />Member Mulder noted that the one vehicle will left outside even if garage <br />is built (yes). <br /> <br />Member Wilke asked if the turn-around could be required (yes). <br /> <br />Member Olson asked if diagonal placement of the garage had been <br />considered (yes). <br /> <br />Member Egli asked if neighbors' garages were the same size (Mr. <br />Reichenbach explained that to the north - same size; to the east two <br />garages are larger). <br /> <br />There were no questions from the public. Chair Klausing closed the <br />hearing. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing asked what was the physical hardship; a 435 s.f. garage <br />could be added without variances for lot coverage. <br /> <br />Member Mulder said the driveway length and large front yard might be <br />hardships for the variance, not allowing a usable garage of750 s.L <br />However, adding the CUP request for an 832 s.f. garage is a problem. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing felt there was not an unusable or unreasonable use of the <br />site with a 435 s.f. garage. <br /> <br />Member Rhody stated the hardship is a small lot (62 feet), less than <br />normal size; the size of the garage is not outlandish to him. <br /> <br />Member Mulder stated the hardship is the 50-foot front setback that <br />creates the longer driveway than would otherwise be needed; he could not <br />justify the CUP. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.