HomeMy WebLinkAbout6315 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1979/07/161
it
i
RESOLUTION NO. 6315
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN REAR YARD SETBACK
FROM SECTION 14-128 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO
ZONING TO PERMIT A REAR YARD SETBACK OF 12 FEET INSTEAD
OF THE REQUIRED 35 FEET IN AN R-1, SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT,
AT 3755 HUNTINGTON AVENUE SOUTH
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findings
1. Mary Durfee has applied for a variance from Section 14-128 of the
Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a rear yard setback of twelve feet
instead of the required 35 feet for the expansion of a one -car garage into a
two -car garage for a single family house located in the R-1, Single Family
District, at the following location, to -wit:
Lot 10 and the South 5.25 feet of Lot 11, Block 2,
West Minikanda
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed the application for a variance
(Case No. 79 -41 -VAR) and has recommended to the City Council that the application
be granted.
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 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 Ordi-
nance 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.
f
It
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
on the findings set forth above.
ATTEST:
g..k01..471...)
Reviewed for administration:
Adopted by the City Council July 16, 1979
IA
esident Pro -Tem
Approved as form and legality:
City Attorney
2