My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/29/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2002
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/29/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 9:28:54 AM
Creation date
6/4/2003 11:42:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
08/29/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
134
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
72 <br /> <br />Subdivision g states that accessory buildings within 5 feet of the home must be <br />attached to the home, This appears to be an aesthetic issue because the Building <br />Code does not establish a minimum separation between homes and detached garages, <br />However, the Building Code does state that garages that are within 3 feet, cave to <br />cave, of the home must be constructed with gypsum board on the wall adjacent to the <br />home. Staff is interested in simplifying the zoning regulations for accessory <br />buildings and suggests that this aesthetic requirement be repealed. <br /> <br />Subdivision 9 is an exact repeat of Subdivision 8, apparently a typographical error. <br />Even if the Commission makes a decision to retain Subdivision 8, Subdivision 9 <br />would still have to be repealed. <br /> <br />Subdivision 11 imposes the setback standards required for dwellings to detached <br />accessory buildings that are proposed to be located witMn 10 feet of the dwelling. It <br />also states that the side yard setback on the interior lot Lines is. subject to the setback <br />of structures on adjacent parcels, if those setbacks are greater th.an the standard. This <br />regulation has not been actively enforced in the past. The setbacks for detached <br />accessory .buildings are called out in the underlying zoning district and additional <br />setbacks referenced in other sectlons often causes confusion and errors in <br />administration. In addition, the recently adopted ordinance amending the residential <br />zoning regulations eliminated the requirement for accessory buildings to meet the <br />setback of adjacent structure setbacks when we are dealing with comer lots. It <br />doesn't serve any purpose;to retain this requirement on regular, non-comer side-yard <br />lines. <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />City Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: a) determine the .preferred lot size <br />threshold that should be exempt from that requirement which restricts detached accessory <br />buildings from being closer to the front property tine than the home; b) forward the ordinance to <br />City Council for adoption. <br /> <br />Commission Action: <br /> <br />Motion to recommend that City Co'uncil adopt an ordinance to amend setback requirements for <br />detached accessory buildings. <br /> <br />Copies Distributed To: <br />Principal Planner <br />Associate Planner <br />Community Development Intern <br />Building Official <br />Building Inspector <br />Fire/Building Code Inspector <br /> <br />PC: 08/29/02 <br /> <br /> ! <br /> I <br />-I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.