pf_03626 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

because of to consideration, and to grant such variances only it is such actions will be in keeping the spirit and intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means the property question cannot put to a reasonable use if under conditions allowed by the official controls, plight the is due to circumstances unique to the property not created 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 The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls: The Official Controls of the City prescribe that all single family residential parcels be a minimum of 85 feet in width, 110 feet in depth and 11,000 sq. ft. in size. Mr. Beauclaire has a pre- existing lot that is 321 feet deep on the north and 299 feet deep on the south. Mr. Beauclaire proposes to create two similarly sized and shaped parcels, although neither will meet the width and lot size requirements. The adjacent lot to the north on Dale Street is a creative shape averaging over 58 or more of 130 feet of depth and over 7,800 sq. ft. in size. There are two more parcels in the general vicinity that are similar to the proposal by Mr. Beauclaire. Though the property in its current state can be put to a reasonable use under the Official Controls, the property is under utilized as was the case of the above identified addressed properties. The Community Development Staff has determined that the vacant property can be put to a reasonable and practical use under the official controls if the appropriate variances are granted. 5.8 The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner: The Beauclaire situation is unique. In 1964, the County had previously graded this lot and provided (at that time) a driveway access to the lot from Dale Street. Most double frontage parcels in Roseville abut the rear yard adjacent to collector or arterial roadways such as County Road B or C. In the past five years, the City has approved land division for a few double frontage parcels (such as Burke Street), but none that included variances. However, previous substandard "lot splits" were supported by the City that did not include variances to minimum lot standards prescribed by the Code. The Community Development Staff has determined that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. PF3626_RCA_042505 Page 4 of6