pf_03279 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

. . e 4. Given existing conditions (parcel depth, width, and slope), the proximity of adjacent structures from Lake Owasso, limited structure design options, and a requirement to meet current side yard setbacks, there appears to be no alternative site designs that would allow the proposed construction to comply with the City Code and eliminate the need for variances. 5. The impacts of this redevelopment project, if the variances were issued, will not create any significant community impacts on the health, safety, or general welfare. To the contrary, the proposal removes a dilapidating structure (modified cabin) that is in dire need of improvement and provides added value to the neighborhood. WHEREAS, the Roseville City Council received the Planning Commission's recommendation on Monday, January 22,2001; and WHEREAS, the Roseville City Council made the following findings: 1. Section 10116.22A1 (Non-Conformities) stipulates that non-conformities can continue but are subject to applicable State Statutes and City Ordinance regarding alterations, repair after damage, discontinuance of use, and intensification of use. 2. Section 1016.16 (Structure Design Standards) requires structures to be set back a minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high watermark (OHW). 3. Section 1016.26B1 (Storm Water Management) requires all single-family lots within the Shoreland Management District to have no more that 25% impervious site coverage. 4. Section 1004.02D5 (Dwelling Dimensions and Appearances and Height, Frontage, Yard and Lot Area Requirements in R -1 Districts) requires a front yard setback of 3 0 feet and side yard setbacks of 1 0 feet. 5. The property owner did not create the hardship. The lot division occurred and the structure was constructed and improved many years before the current owner purchased the property. City records indicate the existing structure was constructed in 1934 with sewer, water, foundation and a basement being installed in the early 1960 's. The Rosevi/le City Code was adopted in 1959 and the Shoreland Ordinance adopted in 1974. 6. The economics of constructing an addition and remodeling versus constructing new are quite different. The existing structure does not meet most building codes. Remodeling would be costly and difficult. New construction would provide a modern structure that meets all current building codes and the purpose and intent of the Roseville Comprehensive Plan. 3