My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03554
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3500
>
pf_03554
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 2:34:18 PM
Creation date
3/22/2006 9:22:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3554
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
2458 SHELDON ST
Applicant
Steve Hanon
Status
Approved
PIN
102923240029
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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 /> <br /> <br />Hanon is <br />anow the attached garage addition as proposed. <br /> <br />5.6 In Section 1013 the Code states ..... Where there are practical difficulties or unusual <br />hardships in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the provisions of this code, <br />the Variance Board shaH have the power, in a specific case and after notice and <br />public hearings, to vary any such provision in harmony with the general purpose <br />and intent thereof and may impose such additional conditions as it considers <br />necessary so that the public health, safety, and general welfare may be secured and <br />substantial justice done. <br /> <br />5.7 State Statute 462.357, subd. 6 (2) provides authority for the city to "hear requests <br />for variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their <br />strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to <br />the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when <br />it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of <br />the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a <br />variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used <br />under conditions aHowed by the official controls, the plight of the landowner is due <br />to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner, and the <br />variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic <br />considerations alone shaH not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the <br />property exists under the terms of the ordinance.... The board or governing body as <br />the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to insure <br />compliance and to protect" <br /> <br />5.8 The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions <br />allowed by the official controls: The Hanons home is set back approximately 45 feet <br />from the front yard property line, which distance is determined to be the parcels <br />predominant front yard setback. Constructing an addition on to the front of the principal <br />structure will encroach into this required setback. The City's regulatory authority begins <br />at the 40 foot setback distance and a Setback Permit could be issued for an encroachment <br />of 8 feet. The existing garage lies at the front of the home and can only be expanded to <br />the north and west. Although a number of options could be implemented, such as <br />eliminating existing patio area to reduce impervious coverage or placing a detached <br />accessory building in the rear yard (eliminating the garden shed) neither option is <br />practical, reasonable, nor supported by the Community Development Department. The <br />Community Development Staff has determined that the property can be made more <br />livable and put to a reasonable and practical use nnder the official controls, if <br />variances are granted. <br /> <br />PF3554 - RVBA 040704 - Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.