Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />1 Extract of Draft Minutes, Plannin2 Commission Meetin2, June 5, 2002: <br />2 <br />3 d. Plannin2 File 3399: Request by Robert Lindholm for a variance to <br />4 exceed the 30% lot coverage requirement of Section 1004.01A6 of the <br />5 Roseville City Code for property located at 2959 Matilda Street. <br />6 <br />7 Chairman Duncan opened the hearing and requested City Planner Thomas <br />8 Paschke provide a summary of the project report dated June 5, 2002. <br />9 <br />10 Robert Lindholm has submitted an application for a 533 square foot or 5% <br />11 percent variance to Section 1004.01A6 (Maximum Total Surface Area) to allow <br />12 the construction of a 864 square foot detached accessory structure (garage) in the <br />13 rear yard adjacent to the home and slightly expand the driveway by matching into <br />14 the existing driveway with a two foot wide by 24 foot wide (48 sq.ft.) apron. <br />15 The house was constructed in 1963 on the 90-foot by 122 foot or 10,980 square <br />16 foot parcel; the principal structure and tuck-under garage have a footprint size <br />17 (based on applicant site plan information) of 55 feet by 25 feet or 1,375 square <br />18 feet. <br />19 <br />20 The tuck under garage is estimated (City Staff) to be 16 feet deep by 25 feet wide <br />21 or 400 square feet and is proposed to be converted into living space. <br />22 <br />23 Thomas Paschke explained the variance requirements and hardship on the site. <br />24 Staff recommended approval with conditions. <br />25 <br />26 Member Mulder asked if there was discussion to narrow the driveway. If the <br />27 driveway had to be redone, a permit would be required. <br />28 <br />29 Mr. Lindholm said the hardship is that he cannot park his current vehicles in the <br />30 tuck-under garage. <br />31 <br />32 Member Peper asked for additional comments from adjoining neighbors (verbal <br />33 support only). <br />34 <br />35 Member Mulder asked why the peak was oriented parallel to the north property <br />36 line (same as three other neighbors). <br />37 <br />38 Member Cunningham asked for clarification on the amount of pavement. <br />39 <br />40 There being no further discussion Chair Duncan closed the hearing. <br />41 <br />42 Motion: Member Cunningham moved, seconded by Member Bakeman to <br />43 recommend approval of a 533 square foot (5%) variance to Section <br />44 1004.01A6 of the Roseville City Code for Robert Lindholm, 2959 Matilda <br />45 Street, to allow total impervious surface coverage on the parcel to be 3,827 <br />46 sq. ft., subject to the findings of Section 5 and conditions of Section 6 of the <br />47 project report dated June 5, 2002. <br />48 <br />49 Ayes: 5 <br />50 Nays: 0 <br />51 Motion carried. <br /> <br />