2001_0212_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I. Section 101 16.22A1 (Non-Conformities) stipulates that non-conformities can continue but are subject to applicable State Statutes and City Ordinance regarding alterations, repair after damage, discontinuance of use, and intensification of use. 2. Section 101 6.16 (S�^ucture Design Standards) requires s�^uctures to be set back a minimum of 75 feet fi^om the ordinary high watermark (OHW). 3. Section 1 DI 6.26B1 (Storm Water Management) requires all single family lots within the Shoreland Management Dis�^ict to have no more that 25% impervious site coverage. 4. Section 1004.0205 (Dwelling Dimensions and Appearances and Height, Fi^ontage, Yard and Lot Area Requirements in R-1 Dis�^icts) requires a fi^ont yard setback of 30 feet and side yard setbacks of 10 feet. S. The property owner did not create the hardship. The lot division occurred and the s�^ucture was cons�^ucted and improved many years before the current owner purchased the property. City records indicate the existing s�^ucture was cons�^ucted in 1934 with sewer, water, foundation and a basement being installed in the early 1960 's. The Roseville City Code was adopted in 1959 and the Shoreland Ordinance adopted in 1974. 6. The economics of cons�^ucting an addition and remodeling versus cons�^ucting new are quite d fferent. The existing s�^ucture does not meet most building codes. Remodeling would be costly and difficult. New cons�^uction wouldprovide a modern s�^ucture that meets all current building codes and the purpose and intent of the Roseville Comprehensive Plan. 7. Requiring a setback of 75 feet fi^om the OHW would be overly res�^ictive and out of character with the adjacent homes. The parcel has a sharp (vertical) �^ansition fi^om the road inward creating a unique physical feature that provides difficulties for redevelopment and direct access. Access is currently (will remain) via a private easement with the west property owner. The narrow width of the parcel limits the type, style, and design options for a new home. Adjacent homes are located 38 feet (east) and 60 feet (west) fr�om the OHW suggesting the proposed new home be placed 49 feet (the average of adjacent lots) fi^om the OHW and in a similar line to the lakeshore. 8. Given existing conditions (parcel depth, width, and slope), the proximity of adjacent s�^uctures fi^om Lake Owasso, limited s�^ucture design options, and a requirement to meet current side yard setbacks, there appears to be no alternative site designs that would allow the proposed cons�^uction to comply with the City Code and eliminate the need for variances. 9. The impacts of this redevelopment project, if the variances were issued, will not create any significant community impacts on the health, safety, or general welfare. To the con�^ary, the proposal removes a dilapidating s�^ucture (modified cabin) that is in dire need of improvement and provides added value to the neighborhood.