Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7 The proposal to locate the detached garage four feet north of the existing driveway has been <br />approved by the DNR. More specifically, the DNR has concluded that hardship(s) exist on the <br />parcel, limiting Mr. Mickelson's options, and hence, the DNR supports the four variances <br />being requested. <br /> <br />8 A variance requires the applicant to prove physical hardship and to demonstrate that no <br />practical alternatives exist that would reduce the need for a variance. <br /> <br />9 The unique parcel configuration is classified as a pre-existing, non-conformity within the <br />Shoreland Ordinance and the location of the property adjacent to Lexington Avenue(a County <br />Road) and Josephine Park, adversely impacts development and/or redevelopment <br />opportunities for the Mickelson's <br /> <br />10 The hardship is not the applicant's creation. <br /> <br />11 The property cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions permitted by the <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />12 If granted, the variance will not impact the health, safety, or general welfare of the <br />community. <br /> <br />NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of <br />Roseville, Minnesota (the "City"), Ramsey County, Minnesota, that a variance from Section <br />1016.22Al (Non-Conformities), Section 1016.26.Bl (Storm Water Management), Section 1616.16 <br />(Structure Design Standards), and Section l004.02D5 (Dwelling Dimensions and Appearances and <br />Height, Frontage, Yard and Lot Area Requirements in R-l Districts), to construct a 22 foot by 30 foot <br />(660 sq. ft.) detached accessory building for the property located at 2985 Lexington Avenue (PID # <br />032923140002) be approved, subject to: <br /> <br />1. Verification of property lines or provision of a survey prior to issuance of building <br />permit. <br /> <br />2. The accessory structure shall not exceed a size of 22 feet by 30 feet or 660 square feet. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member <br />Maschka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Maschka, Wiski, <br />Gopedeke, Mastel, Kysylyczyn <br />and the following voted against the same: None <br /> <br />WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. <br /> <br />3 <br />