pm_010711 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

residence is set back 150 feet from Hamline Avenue. The height of the garage would match the design of the house with a clerestory for added light, requiring the height variance. The staff recommended approval; there are no options for the placement of the garage. Doug Root, 2648 Hamline, answered questions regarding the wooded site. The garage will compliment the design of the house. Member Cunningham found the plan an enhancement, not visible from Hamline Avenue. There was no public comment; Chair Rhody closed the hearing. Motion: Member Duncan moved, second by Member Wilke, to recommend approval of the request by Douglas Root for: o A variance to Section 1004.01 A 7 of the Roseville City Code to allow construction of a detached accessory structure in the front yard; and o A three foot variance to Section 1004.01A10 of the Roseville City Code to allow a detached accessory structure to be constructed to a maximum height of 18 feet (as measured at the midpoint of the roof truss) allowing a natural light clearstory to be incorporated into the structures design, for property located at 2468 Hamline Avenue, based on the findings in Section 3 of the project report dated July 11, 2001. Ayes: 7 Nays: 0 Motion carried. 6(d) Planning File 3328: A request by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, Inc. for a Variance from Section 1007.01A1a of the Roseville City Code for property located at 2361 West Highway 36 Chair Rhody opened the hearing and requested Thomas Paschke to provide a verbal summary of the project report dated July 11, 2001. Thomas Paschke explained that Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. has requested a variance from Section 1007.01 A 1 a (Required Setbacks) from the Roseville City Code for the existing structure at 2361 West Highway 36 to allow the placement of a 21' x 20' mechanical room addition on the corner-south face of a structure that currently encroaches into the required setback adjacent St. Croix Street and West Highway 36. He noted that the existing building sets within the required setback, and there is a need for additional HVAC for office uses. One option was HVAC placement along the south face of the building. Another option is to place the addition along the southwest corner. Staff recommended approval of setback variances along the south and west walls for this specific addition. Chair Rhody asked if there was adequate parking (yes) and whether materials will be consistent (yes). Chair Rhody asked if there was storage space (yes). Otto Bonestroo, BRA & Associates, explained that the building was on this site before the Highway 36 expansion and probably met the Code at that time. There was no public comment; Chair Rhody closed the hearing. Motion: Member Mulder moved, seconded by Member Duncan, to recommend approval of the following variances: A. A 25 foot variance from Section 1007.01 A 1 a of the Roseville City Code for the existing and proposed structure adjacent St. Croix Street (from the west property line); B. A 10 foot variance from Section 1007.01 A 1 a of the Roseville City Code for the existing and proposed structure adjacent to West Highway 36 (from the south property line), based on the comments and findings in Section 3, 4, and 5, and subject to the conditions indicated in Section 6 of the project report dated July 11, 2001. Ayes: 7