HomeMy WebLinkAbout6271 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1979/06/04June 4, 1979
8a
RESOLUTION NO. 6271
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN FRONT YARD SETBACK
FROM SECTION 14-133 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING
TO ZONING TO PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE FOOT
EXPANSION IN THE R-2, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT, AT
1640 OREGON AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findings
1. Rivia and Harold L. Goldberg have applied for a variance from
Section 14-133 of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a front
yard of 27 feet instead of the required 30 feet for a single family house
located in the R-4, Single Family District, at the following location -to -wit:
Lot 5 of the N. 53 ft. of S. 159 ft. of
E. 1/2, LaPetite Ferme Addition
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed the application for a
variance (Case No. 79 -26 -VAR) and its action has been reported to the City
Council.
3. The Council has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon
the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated
traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety,
the effect on values of property in the surrounding area and the effect of
the proposed variance upon the Comprehensive Plan.
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding
property, it is possible to use the subject property in such a way that the
proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, unreasonably diminish
or impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary
to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
5. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question
are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not
apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which such
land is located.
6. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. It will not
merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate
demonstrable hardship or difficulty.
Conclusion
The application for a variance for the purpose designated is granted, based
upon the findings set forth above.
Adoptedy the City Council June 4, 1979
Mayo
ATTEST:
ity C erk4(4,44-0•4---
Reviewed for adm, istration: Approved as to form and legality:
anager
Cit Attorne
2