pf_03536 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

5.5 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. 5.6 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 means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance.... The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to protect" 5.7 Staff analysis of undue hardship factors is as follows: A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use ifused under conditions allowed by the official controls: The Rose parcel is afforded an option (east side) that meets the required setback of the Roseville City Code, but this location is impractical and unreasonable due to it being on the opposite side of the living/entertaining rooms of the home. Ms. Rose could also construct a second story and remodel the existing main floor at considerably more expense; however, the addition is also impractical and unreasonable. The Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be made more livable and can be put to a reasonable use under the official controls, if an 11 foot VARIANCE to Section 1004.02D4 is granted. B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: Corner lots are the most difficult to develop and become very problematic when attempting to retrofit additions to homes or add accessory structures. Specifically, the EXISTING CITY CODE requires these lots have a 30 foot front yard, corner street side yard, and rear yard setback and either a 5 foot or 10 foot interior side yard setback. When applied to existing lots, it becomes evident that little area is available for expansion needs/desires. The Rose home was constructed prior to the adoption of Section 1004.02D4. Further complicating matters is attempting to determine the front lot line/yard. The City Code, Section 1002.02 Definitions, states: "Lot Line, Front: The boundary of a PF3536 - ReA 022304 - Page 3 of 5