HomeMy WebLinkAbout6853 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1981/06/01RESOLUTION NO. 6853
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN LOT WIDTH AND LOT AREA
FROM SECTION 14-128(5) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO
ZONING TO PERMIT RECOMBINATION OF THREE LOTS INTO TWO IN
THE R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, AT 2940-2944
INDEPENDENCE AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findings
1. John E. Bury has applied for a variance from Section 14-128(5) of
the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a recombination of three
lots into two with one lot having a width of 50 feet instead of the required
75 feet and an area of 6,750 square feet instead of the required 9,000 square
feet and the other lot having a width of 70 feet instead of the required 75
feet for property in the R-1, Single Family Residence District, located at
2940-2944 Independence Avenue at the following location, to -wit:
Lots 9, 10, and 11, Block 4, J.F. Lyons 4th Addition
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed the application for a
variance (Case No. 81 -39 -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, endagner 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.
ATTEST:
Reviewed for administration:
Adopted by the City Council June 1, 1981
�t2 ( � 2
Mayor G
-2
Approved as to form and legality:
City Attorney