pf_03266 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

3.6 The parcel is odd shaped, has topographical limitations to the northeast and east, is restricted due to a city sewer line and 20 foot wide easement along the east side of the lot, and has no reasonable alternative. The former four-season porch and its current concrete slab foundation are pre-existing, non-conforming structures. 3.7 At the Planning Commission meeting, Ms. Sladky provided a survey that clearly defined the property lines and the placement of the structure on the site (attached in the packet). The staff had been concerned with how the house is situated on the parcel and the potential of the home lying over the western property line and possibly into the sewer easement. Assistant City Engineer Deb Bloom was able to determine that the house was either on or very close to the east side easement and recommended to the Sladkys that, through a separate request, they apply for a small easement vacation (1 to 2 feet) to reduce future problems with title to the property. 4.0 POLICY REFERENCE 4.1 The Comprehensive Plan and the Roseville Housing Improvement Plan encourage reconstruction and upgrading of residential structures (and neighborhoods) throughout the community. 5.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO ESTABLISH FINDINGS 5.1 Staff reviewed the merits of the lot and setback variances to allow the Sladkys to proceed with their four season porch replacement. Staff has concluded that there are unique circumstances (trees, some slope, the odd configuration ofthe pre-existing lot, existing utility easement to the east, and need to remove the structurally damaged porch), which are present on, or affecting the parcel. Staff recommends approval of the request. 5.2 Staff suggests the Council use an outline of the following possible findings to determine whether the Council finds an "undue hardship" significant enough to approve a variance. a. The hardship situation was not (was) created by the applicant (Sladkys) or existed prior to the applicant... b. The unique physical features or situations within the proposal that could justify a variance include ... C. The economic issues that may (in part) justify a variance include... d. The alternative designs that allow use of the site but do not require a variance include.. . e. The impacts ofthe project, if the variance was issued, would (would not) create significant community impacts on the health, safety, or general welfare including.. . PF3266 - RCA (102300) Page 3 of 4