pf_03255 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

. along said right-of-way a distance of223 feet to point; thence in a westerly direction 65.16 feet to place of beginning, and also the North 20 feet of that part of Government Lot 2, Section 3, Township 29, Range 23 extendingfrom the West right-of-way of Lexington Avenue, to the East shore of Lake Josephine, (PIN: #032923140002); and 3404266 WHEREAS, the Mickelson lot is a pre-existing oddly shaped lot with a width of 59 feet, a depth of213 feet and 20 feet of frontage along Lake Josephine, and a lot size of 12,567 square feet. A buildable pre-existing non-conforming lot of record must have a minimum lot width of 70 feet (70% of the standard 100 foot wide shoreland lot); and WHEREAS, Section 1Ol6.26Bl (Storm Water Management) requires all single-family lots within the Shoreland Management District to have no more that 25% impervious site coverage. Impervious area includes roof, sidewalk, patio, and driveway areas; and WHEREAS, the Mickelson lot is 12,567 square feet in size allowing an impervious area of 3,142 square feet or 25% of the lot. However, upon completion of the accessory structure the lot will have an impervious calculation of3,772 square feet or 30%; and WHEREAS, Section 1016.16 (Structure Design Standards) requires structures to be set back a minimum of75 feet from the ordinary high watermark (OHW); and WHEREAS, the proposed detached accessory structure will have a small triangular section along the northwest comer that lies approximately eight feet into the required 75 foot setback; and WHEREAS, Section 1004.02D5 (Dwelling Dimensions and Appearances and Height, Frontage, Yard and Lot Area Requirements in R-l Districts) requires a front yard (east) setback of30 feet for the Mickelson property adjacent to Lexington Avenue; and WHEREAS, because ofthe concerns expressed by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) the proposed accessory structure has been placed on the front (east) property line; and WHEREAS, the Roseville Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the request on Wednesday, September 13, 2000, and recommended approval (6-0) ofthe requested variances, subject to the following: Whereas, the Planning Commission finds that a strict application of the City Code would work an unusual hardship on the applicant; and Whereas, specifically, the unique physical features or the parcel and its limited buildable area prevents the applicant from providing adequate garage space without a variance; and Whereas, the hardship was not created by the applicant; and Whereas, the granting of the variance will not significantly impact the health, safety or general welfare of the community; and t