pm_021002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Thomas Paschke explained that Mike Strub submitted a proposal to construct a detached garage five feet from the property line adjacent to Dellwood Street. The Strub home was constructed in 1979 and lies 17 feet from the Dellwood Street property line. The proposed improvement seeks a 528 square foot detached accessory building for the purpose of seasonal storage. The proposed detached accessory building would be placed in the northwest corner of the parcel, adjacent to the neighboring garage, but set back five feet from the Dellwood Street property line. The Strub parcel is 10,184 square feet in size, affording 3,044 square feet of impervious area. The current principal structure, attached garage and driveway occupy an estimated 2,508 square feet of impervious area, which affords Mr. Strub approximately 536 square feet of impervious area before the maximum limit is reached. Based on the proposal by Mr. Strub, a variance is necessary to Section 602.06 because there will not be adequate depth (20 feet) behind the property line to allow vehicle parking on the driveway. Notwithstanding, staff has determined that a condition must be placed on this proposal to ensure that vehicle parking is limited to inside the accessory structure, due to the close proximity to the public right-of-way and street. The site is "LR" on the Comprehensive Plan and R-1 zoning. The adjoining neighbors to the north did receive a variance for a similarly placed garage. Paschke explained that Mr. Strub's rear yard property is used as a low area for surface water storage. He noted that over 25 nearby properties have similar garage placements; this has occurred over time, has had many constraints including storm water. Staff recommended approval with conditions. Member Pepper asked if the applicant's garage is two stalls (yes). The applicant, Mr. Strub, said the staff report was accurate. Bob and Shirley Cobert (neighbors) recommended approval. Other emails supporting the request were received by staff (Paschke). Member Stone asked if there will be increases in storm water (yes). Thomas Paschke noted there still is porous surface in the yard. To move the garage further into the yard may require a pavement variance. There being no further comments, Chair Duncan closed the hearing. Motion: Member Traynor moved, seconded by Member Bakeman, to recommend approval of a 25 foot variance to Section 1 004.02D4 and Section 602.06 of the Roseville City Code for Mike Strub, to allow construction of a detached accessory building at 1275 Burke Street, based on the findings in Section 5 and conditions of Section 6 of the project report dated October 2, 2002. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Motion carried. b. Planning File 3430: Request by Mack Mead for a 13.5 foot Variance to Section 1 004.02.D4 of the Roseville City Code to allow construction of certain home and attached garage improvements at 388 So. McCarrons Boulevard. Chair Duncan opened the hearing and requested City Planner Thomas Paschke provide a summary of the project report dated October 2 2002. Mr. Paschke indicated Mack Mead submitted a proposal to complete certain home improvements to his existing home at 388, South McCarrons Boulevard. These improvements include the addition of a second stall to the existing tuck-under garage with living area above, creating another bedroom. Any proposed addition to the Western Avenue portion of the structure, such as adding a stall to the garage and living space above, would require a variance. The Meade's current situation would be classified by the Community Development Department as a pre-existing non-conforming use. Based on the information provided and the findings in Section 5 of the project report dated October 2, 2002, staff recommends approval of a 1.5 foot variance for the garage to Section 1004.01 A 11 and a 13.5 foot variance for the living area above the garage to Section 1 004.02D4 of the Roseville City Code for Mack Meade to allow principal structure and site improvements at 388 South McCarrons Boulevard West, subject to the following conditions: The applicant locating the parcel's property pins and verifying the location of the existing principal structure, thus