My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
071107_VB_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Variance Board
>
Minutes
>
2007
>
071107_VB_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2007 12:02:54 PM
Creation date
10/9/2007 12:02:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Variance Board
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/11/2007
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.
/
6
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
Variance Board Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, July 11, 2007 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />MOTION <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Martinson to adopt Variance <br />Board Resolution No. 62 entitled, “A Resolution APPROVING A VARIANCE to <br />Section 1004 (Residential Districts) and Section 1012 (General Requirements) of <br />the Roseville City Code for Thomas Gross, 2613 Fry Street (PF07-031);” based <br />on the comments and findings outlined in Section 5, and detailed conditions of <br />Section 6 of the project report dated July 11, 2007; <br />with Condition “c” amended <br />to require removal of the existing garden shed six (6) months after issuance of a <br />Certificate of Occupancy. <br />Ayes: 3 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br />c. PLANNING FILE 07-035 <br />Request by Curt Dubbeldee, 2373 Victoria Street, for a VARIANCE to Roseville <br />City Code, §1004 (Residential Districts) to allow an addition to the attached <br />garage that would encroach into the required side yard setback and add to the <br />existing impervious coverage that is more than the City Code allows. <br />Chair Boerigter opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 07-035. <br />Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the request for variances to City Code, <br />Sections 1004 (Residential Districts) and 1012 (General Requirements) to allow <br />construction of a residential addition; with the proposed addition encroaching two feet <br />(2’) in to the required side yard setback and increase the impervious surface area on <br />their lot by approximately 1900 square feet for an overall total of 4,155 square feet. <br />Mr. Lloyd noted that the existing improvements on the property included a house with <br />a one-car, attached garage setback approximately eight-five feet (85’) from the front <br />property line and a long horseshoe-shaped driveway. Mr. Lloyd advised that the <br />encroachment could have been reviewed and approved administratively were it not for <br />the amount of impervious surface area on the property. <br />Mr. Lloyd reviewed lot and impervious surface areas; and noted that the applicants <br />have indicated that the existing concrete apron/carport is wide enough to serve the <br />proposed garage addition without the need for an expanded driveway. <br />Staff recommended APPROVAL of the request for a two-foot (2’) side yard setback <br />VARIANCE set forth in City Code, Section 1012.01B (Supplemental Lot <br />Requirements) and a 600 square foot VARIANCE from the impervious surface area <br />limit, established in City Code, Section 1004.01A6 (Maximum Total Surface Area), to <br />allow construction of the proposed residential addition on the property at 2373 Victoria <br />Street; based on comments and findings outlined in Sections 5 and 6, and detailed <br />conditions of Section 6 of the project report dated July 11, 2007. <br />Discussion included existence of a shed on the property, and subsequent removal to <br />further reduce impervious surface coverage on the property. <br />Applicant, Heather Dubbeldee, 2373 Victoria Street N <br />Ms. Dubbeldee expressed the applicant’s willingness to work with the City Engineer <br />on stormwater management, including creation of a rain garden or directing rain <br />gutters as appropriate. Ms. Dubbeldee advised that the garden shed had not been <br />included in the impervious surface calculations, as it did not have a solid foundation. <br />However, Ms. Dubbeldee noted the applicant was willing to remove the existing shed. <br />Public Comment <br />Stan Morass, 841 Grandview Avenue <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.