My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2021_0222_CCPacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2021
>
2021_0222_CCPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/13/2022 2:14:46 PM
Creation date
1/13/2022 2:06:14 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
778
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
Page 1 of 2 <br />EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE <br />CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of 1 <br />Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was held on the 22nd day of February 2021 at 6:00 p.m. 2 <br />The following Council Members were present: _________; 3 <br />and _____ were absent. 4 <br />Council Member _____ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 5 <br />RESOLUTION NO. ___ 6 <br />A RESOLUTION APPROVING SETBACK VARIANCES IN THE ‘THE ENCLAVE AT 7 <br />MCCARRONS LAKE’ PLAT (PF20-029) 8 <br />WHEREAS, Airborne McCarrons, LLC, has submitted a valid application for approval of a 9 <br />setback variance on behalf of the property owner, Matthias Schlosser; and 10 <br />WHEREAS, subject property is legally described as: 11 <br />Lots 1 – 20, Block 1, The Enclave at McCarrons Lake, Ramsey County, Minnesota 12 <br />WHEREAS, City Code §1004.10.B (MDR Setbacks) requires principal structures to be set back 13 <br />a minimum of 5 feet from side property lines; and 14 <br />WHEREAS, Airborne McCarrons, LLC has requested a variance to §1004.10.B to allow certain 15 <br />principal structure to encroach up to 5 feet into the required setback; and 16 <br />WHEREAS, City Code §1009.04 (Variances) establishes the purpose of a variance is "to permit 17 <br />adjustment to the zoning regulations where there are practical difficulties applying to a parcel of land or 18 <br />building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by the zoning;" and 19 <br />WHEREAS, the Roseville Planning Commission held the duly noticed public hearing for the 20 <br />request on February 3, 2021, and having closed said public hearing, voted unanimously to recommend 21 <br />approval of the requested variances based on the public record and the Planning Commission’s 22 <br />deliberation with certain conditions; and 23 <br />WHEREAS, the Roseville City Council has made the following findings regarding the general 24 <br />standards and criteria established in §1009.04: 25 <br />1. The proposed arrangement would still preserve the 10-foot separation between dwelling units, the 26 <br />10-foot yard on one side of each lot would likely be more useful to the future homeowners than a 27 <br />five-foot yard on both sides, and a homeowners’ association can prohibit any structures being built 28 <br />or expanded into the side yard. Taking this into consideration, enforcing a minimum setback from 29 <br />both of a lot’s side lines in this location represents a practical difficulty which the variance process is 30 <br />intended to relieve 31 <br />2. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is generally consistent with 32 <br />the Comprehensive Plan because it represents the sort of residential development promoted by the 33 <br />Comprehensive Plan’s goals and policies while not compromising the policies intended to protect 34 <br />the internal and nearby residential properties. 35 <br />RCA Attachment F <br />Page 5 of 8
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.