My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003_0818_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2003
>
2003_0818_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/21/2011 9:54:39 AM
Creation date
10/21/2011 9:14:17 AM
Metadata
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.
/
378
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
5.0 STAFF OMMEN`I`S /FINDINGS: <br />5.1 The Paal home /parcel has limited options for adding accessory building space on the <br />parcel. Specifically, Staff has concluded the following option exist: <br />The existing attached garage could be widened and the depth increased, creating a <br />double deep attached garage. <br />The existing attached garage could be removed; a smaller living area addition <br />added to the home; and a detached garage constructed in the rear yard with an <br />extended driveway. <br />The existing attached garage could remain; no living area addition; and a detached <br />garage constructed in the rear yard with an extended driveway. <br />5.2 The City Planner has concluded that none of the options are reasonable or practical, and <br />each present associated setback and lot coverage impact requiring variances. <br />5.3 Other approved structure variances include: Meade, 388 South McCarrons Boulevard, <br />16.5 feet - 13.5 foot variance; Graham, 671 Shryer Avenue, 28 feet -- 12 foot variance; <br />Wilson, 3107 west Owasso Boulevard, 17 feet - 13 foot variance; Vazquez, 812 well <br />Avenue, 22.5 feet - 7.5 foot variance; and Bean, 1 760 Dunlap Street, 24 feet - 1 foot <br />variance. <br />5.4 Section 1013.02 states: Where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships <br />in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city <br />council shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, <br />to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof <br />and may impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the <br />public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial ,justice <br />done. <br />5.5 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their <br />strict, enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to <br />the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when <br />it is demonstrated that such actions will be in beeping with the spirit and intent of <br />the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a <br />variance mean the property m question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used <br />under conditions allowed by the ofcial controls, the plight of the landowner is due <br />to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the <br />variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic <br />considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the <br />property exists under the terms of the ordinance .... The board or governing body as <br />the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to inure <br />PF3503 - RCA 081 803 - Page 3 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.