Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5.6 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 Meyer parcel is unable to <br />reasonably expand impervious surface coverage to address maneuvering and access <br />constraints without a variance due to the parcel's coverage restrictions. Requiring <br />modifications from the proposal take away from the usefulness of the driveway and <br />would not eliminate current garage access conflicts. The Community Development <br />Staff has determined that the property can be made more livable, useful, and <br />put to a reasonable use under the official controls if the requested variance <br />granted. <br /> <br />B. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not <br />created by the landowner: The Meyer property (site/structure) is unique. It was <br />constructed before the Village/City established a zoning code and before the City <br />established lot coverage maximums. Family needs and the inability to safely maneuver <br />vehicles in the driveway have created certain conflicts Roseville's present code. The <br />Community Development Staff has determined that the plight of the landowner <br />is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. <br /> <br />C. The variance, ifgranted, will not alter the essential character of the locality: <br />The improvement proposed for the Meyer parcel will not be out of character or context <br />of a home from 1950's and more importantly in keeping with today's designs and family <br />accommodations. The Community Development Staff has determined that this <br />variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality, nor <br />adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare, of the city or <br />adjacent properties. <br /> <br />6.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: <br /> <br />6.1 Based on the information provided and the [mdings in Section 5 of this project report, the <br />Community Development Staff recommends approval of an 887 square foot (7%) <br />VARIANCE to Section 1004.01A6 ofthe Roseville City Code for John Meyer to allow the <br />replacement and expansion of an existing driveway at 2735 Fernwood Street, subject to the <br />following conditions: <br /> <br />A. The proposed improvements must not exceed 4,483 square feet of impervious <br />coverage or 37% of the parcel size. <br /> <br />B. The property owner must locate the lot's property pins (or provide a survey) and based <br />on that, developing a scaled site plan with dimensions for structmes and driveway, thus <br /> <br />PF3486 RPCA 060403 - Page 4 of 5 <br />