pf_03507 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4.0 REVIEW of REQUEST: 4.1 Vicorp Restaurant Inc. has submitted a proposal to construct a uni-sex restroom addition in accordance with Minnesota State Accessibility Code. The existing structure currently lies 10 feet from the east property line at the required setback and the proposed improvement seeks to construct the 75 square foot uni-sex restroom adjacent the existing restrooms along the east portion of the building, which said addition would lie four feet ten inches from the side yard (east) property line. 4.2 The Vicorp parcel is 56,700 square feet in size. The Vicorp lot is designated as "B", Business in the Comprehensive Plan and has a zoning designation of B-IB, Limited Retail District. 5.0 STAFF COMMENTS/FINDINGS: 5.1 The existing building has numerous building and utility constraints which limit the Vicorp's options for constructing an additional restroom that meets the Minnesota State Accessibility Code allowing physically impaired patrons' easier access to and from restrooms. The existing restrooms lie on the east side of the structure at or near the required 10 foot setback. The proposed five feet, two inch variance request would allow for the construction of a Code compliant uni-sex restroom. 5.2 The Bakers Square restaurant is set back ten feet from the east property line making the construction of a 75 sq. ft. uni-sex restroom achievable only with a setback variance of five feet two inches. The existing restrooms lie on the east side of the structure at the prevailing 10 foot side yard setback. A proposed addition in the same location would not be able to comply with the required 10 foot setback. 5.3 The Section 1005.01A2 of the Roseville City Code states: A side yard setback shall be a minimum of ten feet (10'). Based on the proposal by Rick Foerster, Vicorp Inc., a setback vanance IS necessary. 5.4 Section 1013.02 states: Where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city council shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof and may impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. 5.5 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance PF3507 - ReA 081803- Page 2 of 4