2002_0617_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� 2 3 4 S 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 z7 z8 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 S1 Extract of Draft 1�Tinutes, Plannin� Commission 1�Teeting. June 5.2002: c. PlanninE File 3397: Request by Knut Dahman for a variance to Section 1004.O1A4 (Requirements for Increased Maximum Size) and a conditional use permit to allow the construction of a second detached building 32 feet by 30 feet (960 sq. ft. in size) adjacent to the existing home (rear) at 1055 Shryer Avenue. Chairman Duncan opened the hearing and requested City Planner Thomas Paschke provide a summary of the project report dated June 5, 2002. Knut Dahmarm has requested consideration of a conditional use permit to allow a total of 1,419 square feet of accessory building square footage and a variance to Section 1004.0 1A4 (Requirements for Increased Maximum Size) of the Roseville City Code to construct a 32 foot by 30 foot - 960 square foot detached accessory building (864 square feet is the maximum without a CUP) in the rear yard of property located at 1055 Shryer Avenue. Mr. Dahmann desires to tear down an e�sting dilapidated 18 foot by 18 foot (324 sq. ft) detached accessory structure and construct a new 32 foot by 30 foot (960 sq. ft) detached accessory building in the same general location. NIr. Dahmann also wants to keep another detached accessory building in his rear yard that is 25.5 feet by 18 feet (459 sq. ft.). Mr. Dahmann's single-family residential lot is 128 feet wide by 298 feet deep and includes 38,244 square feet of area (three times the size of a normal Roseville residential lot). This portion of Shryer Avenue has a number of large, non-typical residential lots similar to the lots along the south side of Parker Avenue directly adjacent (north). Thomas Paschke explained the requirements for approval of a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance and the findings that are necessary. The staff recommended a smaller accessory structure and a variance of 171 sq.ft. and no garden shed of 120 sq.ft.. Member Mulder asked if there was a hardship, other than Code requirements. Thomas Paschke explained reasonableness and appropriateness within a large lot (38,253 sq.ft.), which is three times the size of a normal lot. Mary Ann Sabino, applicant, stated the garage is a three-car garage. Member Bakeman asked how much of the lot is buildable. Thomas Paschke stated at least one-third of the site is buildable. Could the lot be split? (No). Member Duncan stated there are four new houses in the area — to the east —, which ha�e three car garages. There being no further discussion, Chair Duncan closed the hearing. Member Mulder stated he was concerned with the size of the structure and the odd situation. The second building is significant; there will be three on the site.