My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03465
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3400
>
pf_03465
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 2:13:52 PM
Creation date
6/30/2005 2:56:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3465
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
3063 VICTORIA ST N
Project Name
KENNETH W BERGER & DEBORAH M LARSON
Applicant
KENNETH W BERGER & DEBORAH M LARSON
Status
Approved
PIN
022923210087
Date Final City Council Action
6/2/2003
Additional Information
GARAGE
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
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 />5.2 The property currently has an attached two stall garage and the proposed detached <br />accessory building would provide an additional 24' x 26' two car detached garage for <br />vehicle and personal storage. <br /> <br />5.3 The Berger parcel slopes gently from a point 45 feet into the parcel towards Victoria <br />Street to a point. The parcel then levels off until is reaches the front of the attache garage <br />at which point the yard begins to slopes down towards the northwest comer. <br /> <br />5.4 This parcel was split a number of years ago, at which time a grading plan was required to <br />deal with the proper drainage of storm water runoff. In particular, the newly created <br />parcel to the north and the northwest comer of the subject parcel were graded to properly <br />direct storm water away from principal structures and adjacent properties. The proposed <br />detached accessory structure would be located in the flat portion of the parcel, the <br />required distance from the south property line (five feet) and not impact or change <br />drainage patterns on the parcel. <br /> <br />5.5 Section 1013.02 states: Where there are practical difficulties or unusual hardships in <br />the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, the city council <br />shall have the power, in a specific case and after notice and public hearings, to vary <br />any such provision in harmony with the general purpose and intent thereof and may <br />impose such additional conditions as it considers necessary so that the public health, <br />safety, and general welfare may be secured and substantial justice done. <br /> <br />5.6 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests for <br />variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict <br />enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the <br />individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is <br />demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the <br />ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance <br />means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due to <br />circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the variance, if <br />granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations <br />alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists <br />under the terms of the ordinance.... The board or governing body as the case may be <br />may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure compliance and to <br />protect" <br /> <br />5.7 Staff analysis of undue hardship factors is as follows: <br /> <br />A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls: The Berger parcel has two location <br />options available that could meet the City Code requirement. I) Mr. Berger could <br />construct the two stall garage as an addition to the existing attached garage, which <br />proposal would create a long (47 foot) garage facing Victoria Street. 2) Mr. <br /> <br />PF3465 - ReA 06/02/03 Page 3 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.