Laserfiche WebLink
2.4 The proposed site improvements will not exceed the allowable 30% maximum threshold <br />for impervious area required by the Roseville Zoning Ordinance. <br />3.0 REVIEW of INITIAL REQUEST <br />3.1 Section 1004.02D5 requires principal structures to have a minimum front yard setback of <br />30 feet. Mr. Wieden proposes to place his garage 18 to 19 feet into the required front <br />yard setback, thus requiring a variar ,a. The �ortion of the lot where the setback variance <br />is requested lies on the south side of the lot, faumg Eldridge Avenue. <br />3.2 Attachment 1 indicates three proposed "Plan" locations where a garage could be <br />constructed. Plan 1 would require the removal of a very large maple tree and a side yard <br />Setback Permit. Plan 2 would allow the structure construction, but would not eliminate <br />the steep slope. Plan 2 also requires a turn-around that eliminates two large coniferous <br />trees. Plan 3 requires the removal of a small deciduous tree and a variance. <br />3.3 In review of the three plans, staff has determined Plan 3 provides the most practical <br />approach to solving access issues, while affording the least amount of loss to the existing <br />vegetation on the parcel. Plan 2, with removal of the existing mature tree, may be the <br />most workable solution if the owner/applicant agrees to the loss of the tree. <br />3.4 Mr. Wieden seeks the variance to allow him to rectify a serious access issue along Dale <br />Street during the wintertime and allowing him to keep his mature trees. <br />3.5 Mr. Wieden will make the appropriate modifications to the existing driveway on the <br />south side of the lot to accommodate the new garage. Mr. Wieden will renovate the <br />existing garage adjacent Dale Street and will be required to remove the existing access <br />and driveway. <br />3.6 Applicable Code Requirements: <br />4.0 STAFF COMMENT <br />4.1 Variances may be granted where the st.�ct enforcement of the literal provisions of the <br />ordinance would cause "undue hardship". The granting of a variance shall only occur <br />when it can be demonstrated that such an action will be in keeping with the spirit and <br />intent of the ordinance. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting a <br />variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls, the nlieht of the land owner is due to <br />circumstances uniQUe to the nronertv not created bv the land owner, and the variance, if <br />PF32 I 1— RCA (061200) Page 2 of 4 <br />