Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3.0 STAFF COMMENT & FINDINGS <br /> <br />3.1 Susan Bruhn applied for and the City held a hearing on a Setback Permit on August 3, <br />2000 to replace the porch enclosure. However, after verifying property lines, it was <br />determined a variance was necessary. <br /> <br />3.2 Section 104.02D, Dwelling Dimensions and Appearances and Height, Frontage, Yard <br />and Lot Area Requirements in R-l Districts, requires all principal structures to be set <br />back a minimum of 30 feet from the rear property line. <br /> <br />3.3 Ms. Bruhn's was constructed in 1951 having the principal structure set back 84 feet from <br />the front property line (adjacent to Cleveland Avenue) and 27 feet from the rear property <br />line. The screen porch addition was constructed to be 17 feet from the rear property line. <br /> <br />3.4 Ms. Bruhn's exiting home and screen porch is considered pre-existing non-conforming <br />uses that require variances in order to modify or replaced (Section 1011.02 Roseville City <br />Code). <br /> <br />3.5 Ms. Bruhn purchased the home with the screened porch, not knowing the porch location <br />did not conform to the Roseville City Code. (i.e., She did not cause the situation.) <br /> <br />4.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />4.1 Staff has determined that unique hardships are present and warrant the granting of a <br />variance to Ms. Bruhn as outlined in Section 3 of the project report. Staff recommends <br />approval of the 13-foot variance for the replacement of a screened enclosure by the <br />Roseville City Council. <br /> <br />5.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> <br />5.1 On September 13,2000, the Roseville Planning Commission held the hearing regarding <br />the Susan Bruhn variance request. Except for the adjacent property owner, At the <br />hearing no citizens were present to address the Commission. Staff indicated that it <br />received a few calls on the request, all supporting the variance. <br /> <br />5.2 The adjacent property owner indicated to the Commission that the original parcel was <br />600 plus feet deep. When the property was divided a number of years ago, the approval <br />of the subdivision created the non-conforming porch. <br /> <br />5.3 The Commission voted (6 - 0) to recommend approval of the variance requested by <br />Susan Bruhn, 1983 Cleveland A venue, for a 13-foot rear yard setback variance allowing <br />a replacement of a screened porch enclosure. <br /> <br />PF3252 - RCA (092500) Page 2 of 3 <br />