Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3.4 "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 by <br />the land owner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. <br />Specifically to this request: <br /> <br />A. 7I'h~ properly OllB /fjMeSl10ollB C~llBllBol1lhe pMl1l1o ~ re~sollB~lhUe Mse if MsedJ U81ruief' conditions <br />~Klow~di /by I1he offidmll com1rolls: Mr. Marchek's currently has a driveway located 12 feet <br />from the comer street side property line. Requiring the driveway to be relocated to the <br />west an additional 18 feet to be consistent with the Code would create an awkward <br />ingress/egress from West Owasso Boulevard. further, requiring compliance (30 ap:;on <br />setback) would require unnecessary improvements to the existing driveway to mat~h into <br />the apron. <br /> <br />B. The plighl1 ofl1he ItlJlJIJdi oWlJIJe/J' itj diMe 110 ci/J'(:MlJI1IItjl1tJIlJlJ(:etj MlJIJiqMe 110 I1he properly not createdi <br />/by I1he Il(mdi oWlJIJer: The City's Pavement Management .!Program and the reconstruction of <br />West Owasso Boulevard has required Mr. Marchek to apply for a variance if he wants the <br />existing driveway apron location to remain. Mr. Marchek's driveway improvemer.:s were <br />constructed prior to the City having a minimum distance from the public right-of-way <br /> <br />c. <br /> <br />The vcwitlJm:e, ifg/J'tlJlJIJtedi, wilff lJIJol1 tlJlll1ell' I1he etjtjelJlJl1i~1l clkcwtlJde/J' of the !locality: The <br />proposed 18 foot variance to the required apron setback from a street right-of-way (comer <br />lot property line) will not alter the essential character or the locality, nor adversely affect <br />the public health, safety, or general welfare, ofthe city or adjacent properties. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />4.0 STAlFJF nmCOMMJENDATJION <br /> <br />4.1 Based on the findings outlined in Section 3 staff recommends approval ofthe request for a I8-foot <br />variance from Section 703.04B4 ofthe City Code, to reduce the required apron setback from a <br />property line on a comer lot from 30 feet to 12 feet for property located at 2995 West OWG:sso <br />Boulevard. <br /> <br />5.0 JP>:IL.ANNJING COMMJISSJION ACl'JION <br /> <br />5.1 At their meeting of June 12,2001, the Planning Commission held the public hearing regarding the <br />Marchek variance request. No citizens addressed the Commission regarding the Marchek request. <br />The Commission having no specific questions of staff or the property owner, recommended (6-0) <br />approval of the request by Mr. Marchek, based on the findings in section 3 of the project report <br />dated June 12,2001 <br /> <br />6.0 SUGGJESTJED CJI1'Y COUNCJIJL AC1rJION <br /> <br />Adll[J)jp)t ~ Ire~l[J)lluntfil[J)llJl to allP'lP'Irove (approve w/modifications or deny) the request by Steven <br />Marchek, for an 18 foot variance to Section 703.04B4 of the Roseville City Code to decrease the <br />required driveway access point from a comer lot property line from 30 feet to ][2 feet for property <br />located at 2995 West Owasso Boulevard, based on the findings in Section 3 of the project report . <br />dated June 26, 2001. Prepared by: Thomas .!Paschke (490-2236) <br />Attachments: Property location map; site photo; site plan. 60-day Time Limit: Not Applicable - City Initiated <br />Request. <br /> <br />PF3306 RCA (062601) Page 2 of2 <br /> <br />........- <br />