My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2002_0729_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2002
>
2002_0729_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2011 4:10:26 PM
Creation date
10/7/2011 4:00:13 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
183
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
6.0 STAFF COMMENTS/FINDINGS: <br /> 6.1 The proposed improvements to the Huppertz home, with an investment of nearly <br /> $175,000, exceeds the goals identified in the Rambler Redesign Program and Housing <br /> Policies to encourage young families to remain and grow in the community. The specific <br /> goal of the Rambler Redesign program is to demonstrate techniques to help homeowners <br /> put professional design, value, and utility back into the City's 1950's and 1960's housing <br /> stock and to assist families who would like to remain in Roseville create an adaptable <br /> home for their family. <br /> 6.2 Section 1013.02 states: where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships in the <br /> way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city council shall <br /> have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, to vary any such <br /> provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof and may impose such <br /> additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the public health, safety, and <br /> general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. <br /> 6.3 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests for <br /> variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict <br /> enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the <br /> individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is <br /> demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br /> ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means <br /> the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions <br /> allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances <br /> unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not <br /> alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not <br /> constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of <br /> the ordinance....The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions <br /> in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect" <br /> 6.4 Staff analysis of undue hardship factors is as follows: <br /> A. The property in question cannot he put to a reasonable use if used under <br /> conditions allowed by the official controls: The Huppertz current situation <br /> would not allow any improvements to the home or site without a variance. <br /> Further, the Huppertz proposal seeks to make their home more livable and <br /> functional by attaching the garage and adding certain elements such as a family <br /> room, mud room, and additional bathroom. The Community Development Staff <br /> has determined that the property cannot be put to a reasonable use under the <br /> official controls. <br /> PF3408 -RCA 072902 -Page 3 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.