My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_871202
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1987
>
pm_871202
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:51 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
12/2/1987
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />December 2, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked when variances would be required in this <br />particularly because the existing house would not conform <br />the lot split. Dahlgren replied that variances would be <br />if an expansion was proposed for the existing home. <br /> <br />area, <br />after <br />needed <br /> <br />Berry asked as to whether there was an illegal structure on the <br />lot to the west. A member of the audience replied that it was a <br />storage shed that was approved by the City. <br /> <br />Members of the audience proceeded to point out that there is a <br />five foot NSP easement that also impacts the development of the <br />site. <br /> <br />DeBenedet calculated the building envelope based on the NSP ease- <br />ment, which was small but still workable. <br /> <br />Phil Oknich, 656 Shryer, asked how the sewers flowed in the area. <br />Janisch reviewed this item and ascertained that the sewage hookup <br />is south toward Shryer. <br /> <br />Unnamed resident stated his concern about the power line in the <br />area. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked as to whether the house would need a new garage. <br />Dahlgren replied that a one car garage was required, and the <br />house would have to be a minimum of 960 square feet. <br /> <br />Johnson stated her concern that based on the NSP <br />additional calculations would have to be made <br />whether this is, indeed, a buildable lot. <br /> <br />easement, that <br />to ascertain <br /> <br />DeBenedet reported that he had calculated the building envelope <br />with the garage requirement, and it would still work with respect <br />to the potential development of the house. <br /> <br />Mrs. Christensen stated it is her opinion it would be more appro- <br />priate not to drag this out, but deny it based on neighborhood <br />opposition. <br /> <br />Johnson stated that it was important for the Planning commission <br />to fully understand the building envelope limitations. <br />Discussion of the code ensued, with Dahlgren pointing out that <br />the new codes came into effect in 1959. <br /> <br />Unnamed resident stated that it was his opinion that one person <br />should not be able to come in and totally disrupt the <br />neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mrs. Christensen stated this is an older neighborhood in the area, <br />the residents like it the way it is, and it should be kept that <br />way. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.