Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 Extract of Minutes from Planninf! Commission 11.08.00 Meetinf!: <br />2 <br />3 a. Plan nine: File 3272: A request by Natalija Ericksen, 2376 Cohansey Street, for <br />4 a 264 square foot variance from Section 1004.01A6 (Accessory Buildings in <br />5 Residential Districts) of the Roseville City Code. <br />6 <br />7 Chairman Craig Klausing opened the public hearing and requested Community <br />8 Development Director Dennis Welsch to provide a verbal summary of the staff <br />9 report dated November 8, 2000. <br />10 <br />11 Dennis Welsch explained that the site is surrounded by R-I zoned property. <br />12 There was a deteriorated shed that was removed. The lot is large (27,791 <br />13 sq. ft. total) and unusually deep. The new shed would be for storing lawn <br />14 equipment and for a playhouse. Welsch illustrated the site existing conditions and <br />15 location of footings for proposed shed and the elevations of the shed. <br />16 <br />17 Welsch presented staffs recommendations and findings regarding the proposal <br />18 and the staff recommendation to deny the variance because of the lack of a <br />19 physical hardship for the increased size of the structure, and because alternatives <br />20 do exist. <br />21 <br />22 Chair Klausing asked for details regarding the existing tool shed and detached <br />23 garage; how many bildings are allowed? (two). <br />24 <br />25 Member Mulder wanted details on the new foundation under construction - what <br />26 is the history? Member Mulder asked what was the maximum square footage <br />27 allowed and does the garage meet this standard? <br />28 <br />29 Member Olson asked what the maximum playhouse size could be and how the <br />30 city treated it (a detached structure). <br />31 <br />32 Member Wilke asked what hardships the applicant identified. <br />33 <br />34 Member Mulder asked if the applicant could fix up the old shed instead of tearing <br />35 it down. <br />36 <br />37 The applicant, Ms Ericksen, said she felt the application was not presented very <br />38 clearly. She felt the application and interpretation of the Code was confusing. Ms. <br />39 Ericksen said the original shed was an eyesore and falling down. The yard is <br />40 large. There is lots of equipment now outside the garage. The garage would be <br />41 replaced in the next year. <br />42 <br />43 Chair Klausing stated the size of the structure is a concern to the Commission. He <br />44 asked if a large garage could be constructed and a smaller shed building. <br />45 <br />