My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0626_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_0626_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 10:25:26 AM
Creation date
10/25/2010 1:37:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
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.
/
345
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
Extract of Draft Planning Commission 1�Tinutes of June 13, 2001: <br />2 <br />3 6(c) Planning File 3311: Conway request for a 14-foot Variance from Section <br />4 1004.01 E of the Roseville City Code for property located at 1803 Victoria <br />5 Street. <br />6 <br />� <br />g <br />9 <br />io <br />11 <br />�2 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />ig <br />19 <br />20 <br />Zi <br />Chair Rhody opened the hearing and requested Thomas Paschke to provide a <br />verbal summary of the project report dated 7une 13,200 1. <br />Thomas Paschke explained that John and Laurie Conway ha�e requested a 14 foot <br />variance from Section 1004.O1E of the City Code to allow construction of a 20 <br />foot by 20 foot (400 square foot) attached garage to a within 24 feet of the front <br />(Victoria Street) property line. He explained the original request for a setback <br />permit (which could not be issued). The setbacks along Victoria vary from 50 to <br />36 feet. The average setback is difficult to determine because of the staggered <br />nature. <br />Member Mulder entered the meeting. <br />Thomas Paschke explained the findings of the staff. <br />22 The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use 1f used under <br />23 conditions allowed by the official controls: The Conway's are proposing a <br />24 number of home updates including conversion of the existing single sta11 <br />2s garage into living space (bedroom). With the conversion comes the need to <br />26 replace the e�sting garage that currently does not meet their needs (single <br />2� sta11 prefer double sta11). Conversion of the e�sting garage into living area <br />2g creates a situation where by the most suitable location for the new garage is <br />29 forward of the e�sting garage due to current access and driveway. Requiring <br />3o strict compliance with the Code may limit the Conway's from improving their <br />31 home in a manner consistent with their needs. <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not <br />created by the landowner: The Conway's home was constructed in 195 1, <br />prior to the inception of the 1959 Zoning Ordinance. The parcel required a <br />greater setback from the front properiy line given its location adjacent a <br />County road (Victoria Street). The setbacks on this block are not consistent <br />(36 to 50 feet) and the road is now the responsibility (turn-back) of the City. <br />A standard front yard setback for principal a structure is 30 feet. The e�sting <br />garage lies eight feet from the side (north) property line, could accommodate a <br />three to five foot addition, but would require the Conway's to redesign their <br />improvement plan. <br />44 The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality: <br />4s The proposed 14-foot variance to allow an encroachment to a distance 24 feet <br />46 from the front properiy line will alter the essential character of the locality by <br />47 bringing the principal much closer to the front properiy line than other home <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.