Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6814 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1981/04/201 f RESOLUTION NO. 6814 A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN FRONT YARD SETBACK, REAR YARD SETBACK, SIDE YARD SETBACKS, AND LOT AREA FROM SECTION 14-128(5) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 25 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 35 FEET; REAR YARD SETBACK OF 7 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 35 FEET; SOUTHERLY SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 8 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 9 FEET; NORTHERLY SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 7 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 9 FEET; AND A LOT AREA OF 7,453 SQUARE FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 9,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, AT 2839 SALEM AVENUE SOUTH BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: Findings 1. Blatz Realty, Inc. has applied for a variance from Section 14-128(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a front yard setback of 25 feet instead of the required 35 feet; rear yard setback of 7 feet instead of the required 35 feet; southerly side yard setback of 8 feet instead of the required 9 feet; northerly side yard setback of 7 feet instead of the required 9 feet; and a lot area of 7,453 square feet instead of the required 9,000 square feet for constructing a single family house located in the R-1, Single Family Residence District at the following location, to -wit: All of Lot 14, including 1/2 of vacated alley, and that part of the North 35 feet of Lot 15, Block 1, "Latham's Minnetonka Boulevard Tract" lying West of the East 64.0 feet thereof, according to the duly recorded plat thereof on file with Hennepin County, Minnesota 2. The Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed the application for a variance (Case No. 81 -29 -VAR) and has recommended to the City Council that the applica- tion 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, 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 dgsignated is granted based upon the findings set forth above. Adopted by the City Council April 20, 1981 ATTEST: 64, d_611-ka ity Clerk Reviewed for administration: 4111 0"142'4J -AAA- y Manager ed..ko Mayor Approved as to form and legality: C4C/// City A orne 2