Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting City <br />Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was held on the 21st day of October, 2002, at 6:30 <br />p.m. <br /> <br />The following members were present: Kough, Maschka, Klausing, Schroeder, Kysylyczyn <br />and the following were absent: None <br /> <br />Council Member Klausing introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 10043 <br />A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO SECTION 1004.01A11 AND <br />SECTION 1004.02D4 (SIDE YARD SETBACK ADJACENT TO PUBLIC STREET) OF <br />THE ROSEVILLE CITY CODE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT <br />./388 SOUTH MCCARRONS BOULEVARD (PF 3430). <br /> <br /> <br />13.5 foot variance to Section 1004.02D4 (Side Yard setback Adjacent a Public Street) to allow <br />construction of certain home improvements and an attached garage to the principal structure at <br />388 South McCarrons Boulevard. <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Mack Meade has requested a variance to Section 1004.02D4 (Side Yard <br />Setback Adjacent to Public Street) in order to construct an attached garage and living area <br />improvement to his home; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Meade parcel is located at 388 South McCarrons Boulevard and legally <br />described at as: <br /> <br />limits a comer lot to a setback requirement of 30 feet <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CORRECT LEGAL <br />P ID Number: <br /> <br />from each public right-of-way; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Mack Meade desires to construct an attached tuck under garage and living <br />area improvement 16.5 feet from the eastern property line (adjacent to Western Avenue); and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the placement of the addition to the existing home requires a 13.5 foot <br />variance to Section 1 004.02D4 of the Roseville City Code; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, said addition requires 1.5 foot variance for the garage to Section <br />1004.01All of the Roseville City Code; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Roseville Planning Commission held the public hearing regarding the <br />Meade variance request on October 2,2002, and recommended (5-0) approval of the request, <br />based on findings outlined in Section 5 and conditions of Section 6 of the project report dated <br />October 2, 2002. <br /> <br />1 <br />