My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03279
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03279
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2007 9:52:35 AM
Creation date
12/9/2004 7:01:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3279
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
353 SOUTH OWASSO BLVD
Applicant
Robert Witt
Status
Approved
Date Final City Council Action
2/12/2001
Planning Files - Resolution #
9866
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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 />2.3 Section 1016.26Bl (Storm Water Management) requires all single-family lots within the <br />Shoreland Management District to have no more that 25% impervious site coverage. <br />Impervious area includes roof, sidewalk, patio, and driveway areas. The Witt lot is 8,716 <br />square feet in size which allows for an impervious area of 2, 179 square feet. The existing <br />home, drive, sidewalk, and detached garage has an impervious area of 3,005 square feet or <br />34.5%. The proposed home, storage building, existing and proposed driveway will have an <br />impervious calculation of 3,305 square feet or 38% and requires a variance to allow <br />redevelopment to occur on the parcel. <br /> <br />2.4 Section 1016.16 (Structure Design Standards) requires structures to be set back a <br />minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high watermark (OHW). The proposed home will <br />be setback 49 feet from the Ordinary High Watermark (OHW). This setback is approximately <br />the same as the existing structure (48 feet) and is consistent with the adjacent homes. Because <br />the new home is proposed to be placed less than the required 75-foot setback a variance is <br />required. <br /> <br />2.5 Chart to review required variances: <br /> <br /> Code 70% Requirement Existing Proposed Variance <br /> Requirement Condition Condition Condition <br />Lot Width at Shoreline 100 feet 70 feet 51 feet Same 49 feet <br />Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft. 10,500 sq. ft. 8,716 sq. ft. Same 1,784 sq. ft. <br />Impervious Covera2e 25% NA 34.5% 38% 11.8% <br />Shoreland Setback 75 feet NA 48 feet 49 feet 26 feet <br />Front Yard Setback 30 feet NA 6 feet (garage) 6 feet 29 feet <br /> <br />2.6 The City discussed with Mr. Witt the option of constructing an addition and completing a <br />major remodeling. However given the age of the structure and its dated structural components, <br />Mr. Witt has determined that razing the structure and starting over is the best and most cost <br />effective solution. <br /> <br />3.0 STAFF COMMENT <br /> <br />3.1 Variances may be granted where the strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the <br />ordinance would cause "undue hardship". The granting of a variance shall only occur when it <br />can be demonstrated that such an action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />3.2 "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting a variance means the property in <br />question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official <br />controls, the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created <br />by the land owner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the <br />locality. <br /> <br />3.3 Conditions may be attached to a variance that mitigate the impacts on adjoining properties. <br /> <br />PF3279 - RCA (021201) Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.