pf_03118 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Lot sizes in the neighborhood range from 8,960 square feet to 43,750 square feet and lot widths ranging from 66 feet to 175 feet. . The proposed use is consistent with thel Comprehensive Plan, Section III Residential Areas within the following ,subsections: I - Comprehensive Goals I And Policies, II - Community Wide (General) A, B (1), (2) & (5), C (1), (3) & (11), and III - Residential Areas A, B (~), (3(a, b, and c)) & C (1 (a and c)). The proposal meets the development dJnsity requirements for this area and, if granted, would not adversely affect theipublic health, safety, or general welfare, provided standards/conditions are attacped to insure that the redevelopment of the site is completed in accordance with tht plans proposed by the applicant. Section 1013.02 requires the applicant ~o demonstrate a physical hardship and to demonstrate that no practical alternativb exist that would reduce the need for a variance. Mr. Eggessa has not demonstrated a physical hardship or lack of practical alternative. The proposal could be easily modified to increase the lot size and width of Parcel "A" to elimin1te the need for any variance. Over the past two years the PlanniJg Commission and/or City Council have considered similar requests. Though each request is unique and has a different set I of circumstances, in the case of 102~_ & 1027 Shryer Avenue, 2120 Cleveland Avenue, 2207 County Road B, and 9~r Burke Avenue, the requests were denied. The Planning Commission and City C<j>uncil have reiterated the City policy of not approving variances for issues where pbysical hardship can not be demonstrated, or in situations where practical alternativeJ are readily available which would reduce or eliminate the need for a variance. Therf has also been concerns where proposals for flag lots are introduced into neighborlioods with more conventional lot sizes and setbacks. I NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by Je City Council (the "Council") of the City of Roseville, Minnesota (the "City"), Ramsey County,! Minnesota, that a variance to reduce the minimum lot width and the minimum lot square footage for the purpose of a minor subdivision and proposed constructing of a single family residential hbme for property located at 1992 Cleveland Avenue be denied. : The motion for the adoption of the foregOinJ resolution was duly seconded by Council Member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: and the following voted against the same: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. WHEREUPON said resolution was declared uly passed and adopted. - I I L. Resolution _ - Page 2 of 2