My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_0924_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_0924_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 3:07:23 PM
Creation date
10/25/2010 1:38:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
169
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
3.0 STAFF COMMENT <br />3.1 Using the definition of a lot line "front", the parcel has a front facing west towards Huron <br />Street; side yards facing south towards the adjacent single family home and north <br />towards Woodhill Drive; and a rear yard towards the east. Specifically the Code reads: <br />rt Lot Line, Front: That boundary of a lot which abuts a street, and in the case of a corner <br />lot, it shall be the shortest dimension on a public street." <br />3.2 The proposed fence would be set back appro�mately nine feet from the property line <br />adjacent to Huron Street. The fence would run north/south for a distance of <br />appro�mately 32 feet, then east 2 1 feet to the rear (southwest comer) of the home (see <br />attachment). The proposed fence would not obstruct any vehicular view of Huron Street <br />or Woodhill Drive. <br />3.3 The uniqueness of this properiy has to do with the house orientation on the properiy. The <br />City Code determines a front properiy line, in a comer lot situation, as that which is the <br />narrowest of the two properiy lines fronting a public right-of-way. In the case of the <br />Freeman parcel the true Ii-ont yard is that property line adjacent to Huron Street. <br />However, the Freeman home and garage are oriented toward Woodhill Drive, and the <br />properiy has been given a Woodhill Drive address <br />4.0 STAFF VARIANCE FINDINGS <br />4.1 Section 1013.02 requires the applicant to demonstrate a physical hardship and to <br />demonstrate that no practical alternatives e�st that would reduce the need for a variance, <br />4.2 Variance may be granted where the strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the <br />ordinance would cause "undue hardship". The granting of a variance sha11 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. <br />4.3 "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting a variance means the properiy <br />in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the <br />official controls, the plight of the land owner is due to circumstances unique to the <br />properiy not created by the land owner, and the variance, if granted, will not alter the <br />essential character of the locality. Specifically to this request: <br />A. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br />conditions allowed by the official controls: The City has been attempting to deal <br />with the limited options comer lots are presented when proposing development <br />and redevelopment. However, staff has yet to create language for consideration <br />by the Planning Commission or City Council. The Community Development <br />staff has determined that the properiy is limited in development options (specific <br />to fencing) given the home and garage orientation and the properiy address. <br />PF3341 — RCA (092401).doc Page 2 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.