My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-11-05_VB_Agenda
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Variance Board
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2014 Agendas
>
2014-11-05_VB_Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/22/2014 11:52:30 AM
Creation date
12/22/2014 11:52:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Variance Board
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Variance Board Meeting <br />Minutes –Wednesday, October 8, 2014 <br />Page 2 <br />was already there when CityCode was initially adopted; and that this variance would serve to <br />46 <br />improve worker and product safety, as well as the safety and well-being of the entire community. <br />47 <br />Chair Boguszewski applauded staff’s efforts to ensure this tiny structure was attractive even <br />48 <br />though surrounded by a field of oil tanks; and asked if the actual language of the draft variance <br />49 <br />resolution met staff’s requirement for stucco-like materials; and provided sufficient flexibility for <br />50 <br />staff discretion in enforce the materials to be used by the applicant. <br />51 <br />Mr. Lloyd confirmed that the language was sufficient and provided several examples of the <br />52 <br />material identified as “tough aggregate.” <br />53 <br />Specific to the concerns expressed by Member Cunningham regarding setting a precedent, Mr. <br />54 <br />Paschke advised that, while this product could be perceived as such, each variance request was <br />55 <br />judged on its own merits.Mr. Paschke noted that this was a unique situation with a large tank <br />56 <br />farm versus a smaller industrial site next to an office or commercial use; but confirmed Mr. Lloyd’s <br />57 <br />findings in this case as addressed. <br />58 <br />Chair Boguszewski closed Public Hearing at 5:50p.m.;no one spokefor or against. <br />59 <br />Member Murphy spoke in support of the variance in an effort to boost safety and provide a vast <br />60 <br />improvement with this new structure. <br />61 <br />MOTION <br />62 <br />Member Murphymoved, seconded by MemberCunninghamto adopt Variance Board <br />63 <br />Resolution No. 108(Attachment D) entitled, “A Resolution Approving aVariance to <br />64 <br />Roseville City Code, Section 1006.02(Industrial Design Standards) of Roseville City Code <br />65 <br />at 2451 County Road C PF14-0260;” to allow an accessory structure to utilize prefinished <br />66 <br />metal siding on more than 10% of the structure at 2451 County Road C;based on the <br />67 <br />comments and findings outlined in the staff report dated October 8, 2014, as conditioned. <br />68 <br />Ayes:3 <br />69 <br />Nays:0 <br />70 <br />Motion carried. <br />71 <br />5.Adjournment <br />72 <br />Chair Boguszewskiadjourned the meetingatapproximately 5:50p.m. <br />73 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.