pf08-006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� �'`� 5.7 Section 1013 of the Code states: "Where the�-e are practical difficr�lties or tmusunl hardships irz the wc�v o��currvif�g out t/ae sti-ict lette�� of the provisior�s of this code, tl�e Variar�ce Board shall have tl�e potive�°, ir� a specific case ai�d after i�otice ar�d parblic I�ear-ings, to va�� any s•arch pr-ovisioh rn I�armonv with the genei�al pru pose ar�d ij�ter�t t/�ereof �a��d »�av im�ose such additiot�al co��ditions as it considers necessan� sc� tl�at the prrhlic• hea1N�, safetv, afad gene�•�rl ��elf'ai�e mal� be secz�i-ed crnd si�bstai�tial jtistice dor�e. " 5.8 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6(2) provides authority for the city to '7�ea;- requests for variances firoin tl2e literal provisr'o�s of t{ie ordii�crnce i� rnstcri�ces �•I�ere thei�� sti-ict er�f'orcement would cazrse z�f�d�e f�arc�'.ship becazrse oJ�circam�st�nces zrniqi�e to the i��dividtral propertt� tii�der co�side��ation, nnd to grant sz-rch variances o��lt% whe« it is den�o�strated that si�ch actions ti��ill be in keeping with the spirit ar�d intent of'the ordir2a��ce. `Undz�e hards7�ip ' as used i�� cort�tection with tl�e gra��ti��g of a variance mecrns the property in qa�estion cnranot I�e put to a reasonnble irse if used under conditions allowed by the oJ�icial cor�tr•ols, the j�ligl�t of the landowr�e�- is dz�e to circtrn�sta»ces t�nique to the prope��ty not created by tl�e landowy�er, anc! the vcn�ias�ce, if gi�at�ted, will izot alter t{ie essentia! char•acter o��the localiti•. Ecor�omic considercrtiot7s aloi�e shall not constitr�te an in�dire hardship iireaso�able z�se. for tl�e property exists unde�� the terms of tl�e ordir�ance ... The board or gover-rtir�g bodv as the case inar be mm' irnpose conditiorrs ir� the grcr��ting of variances to instrre cornplin�ce artd to p�rotect. " 5.9 The �operty in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls: While the existing ;�arage already allows two vehicles to be parked inside, such a garage must be seived by a suitable driveway in order to achieve City policies of maintaining and improving Roseville's housing stock. Ancl although the proposed development would not exceed the impervious coverage liinits on a typical residential property, this legal, nonconfonninb lot is consicierably smaller than a typical one; the existing impervious surface area, therefore, is already 1,131 square feet more than the code allows and the proposed improvements would lead to an excess of 1,638 square feet. Because this lot is only 6,935 square feet, the maximuin iinpervious coverage allowed by the City Code witllout a vARt�NCE would be little more than l,725 square feet, which is smaller than the existing structure, ?et alone any other essential improveinents. The Planning Division has determined that the property can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls if the requested vAR�ANCE is approved. 5.10 The pli�ht of the landowner is due to circumstances unic�ue to the property not created by the landowner: Tl�is iegally nonconfonning property was platted in the 1930's and iinproved in 1952, both of which dates precede tl�e current City Code requireineilts, and the existing development leaves the cui-�-ent property owner no opportunity to make even t�iodest improvements (or reductions) in the impervious coverage. Since there are only 37 developed residential parcels suialler than 7,000 square feet in Roseville, the circumstances on this property are clearly unique. The Planning Division has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to unique circumstances not created by the landown�r. PF08-006 RVBA 030508 Page 3 of 4