My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf08-042
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
2008
>
pf08-042
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/29/2014 12:11:24 PM
Creation date
6/21/2013 2:48:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
08-042
Planning Files - Type
Variance
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
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
� .-. <br />ordinance. `Undue hardship' as used in connection with the granting of a variance <br />means the properry in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to <br />circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variunce, if <br />granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations <br />alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists <br />under the terms of the ordinance ... The board or governing body as the case may be may <br />impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect ". <br />5.9 The propertv in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions <br />allowed by the official controls: The small size of the parcel and the size and location of <br />the existing house definitely limits further expansion of the structure, but a 3-or-4-season <br />porch could be constructed in the location of the back yard patio without requiring a <br />vARiANCE. This leads Planning Division staff to be ambivalent about its support of the <br />applicant's demonstration of hardship. <br />On one hand, the applicant expressed in a phone conversation the need for an additional <br />room that would be suitable for relaxing, interacting with neighbors, or doing computer- <br />related office work from home; if the need is simply for an additional room (as opposed <br />to the need for more space in an existing room - an expansion of the kitchen, for <br />example) staff believes that the utilization of the unused patio could create an adequate <br />space in compliance with zoning requirements. <br />On the other hand, the applicant's written narratives (included with this staff report as a <br />series of email communications in Attachment D) stress the importance a sunroom <br />specifically, so staff has evaluated the request from the perspective that a sunroom is <br />necessary, in which case the location of the existing patio at the northeast corner of the <br />home is certainly unsuitable. If it were feasible to simply enclose the existing deck and <br />integrate it with the adjacent pool structure, Planning Division staff would not be able to <br />support the "hardship" claim and would recommend denial of the vAx�AlvcE request. <br />When the nonconforming size and improvements of the property are combined with the <br />structural constraints of the existing pool addition and the stated need for a sunroom, <br />however, the case far "hardship" becomes more clear. Thus, the Planning Division has <br />determined that the property can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls if a <br />VARIANCE is approved. <br />5.10 The nli�ht of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the propertv not created by <br />the landowner: Substandard lots are not "unique" in Roseville, but they do present real <br />challenges in light of the requirements of the City Code. The subject property was platted <br />and improved long before the applicant purchased it, so the Planning Division has <br />therefore determined that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances not created <br />by the landowner. <br />5.11 The variance, if �ranted, will not alter the essential character of the localit� The great <br />majority of residential properties along Dellwood Avenue actually face the cross streets, <br />making the Dellwood Avenue right-of-way line their side property lines. Nevertheless, <br />many of the homes extend far into the required 30-foot setback from their respective <br />Dellwood Avenue property lines; if the upper-level sunroom is made to look more like a <br />split-level addition, the Planning Division believes that the allowance of vAR�ANCES will <br />not alter the essential character of the locality, nor adversely affect the public health, <br />safety, or general welfare of the city or adjacent properties. <br />PF08-042 RVBA 110508 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.