HomeMy WebLinkAbout84-97 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1984/07/02RESOLUTION NO. 84-97
A RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT
ir T CARLSON (MID -CITY PRECISION, INC.) FOR A VARIANCE UNDER
SECTION 14-187(2)(b) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF
REQUIRED OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES FROM THE REQUIRED NUMBER
OF 42 TO 28 STALLS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE I-1, INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT, AT 7430 OXFORD STREET
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK:
Findings
1. On April 18, 1984, Robert T. Carlson (Mid -City Precision, Inc.) filed an application
seeking a variance to permit a reduction in the number of required off-street
parking spaces from the required number of 42 to 28 stalls for property located
in the I-1, Industrial District, at 7430 Oxford Street for the legal description
as follows, to -wit:
Lots 3 and 4 and that part of Lot 2 lying Southwesterly of a line drawn
parallel to the Southwesterly line of Lot 2 and distant 60 feet therefrom,
Block 1, Park Industrial Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract
and Torrens)
2. On April 26, 1984, the Board of Zoning Appeals met and deferred action until
the next meeting on a vote of 5-0.
3. On May 24, 1984, the Board of Zoning Appeals met and recommended denial of
the variance on a vote of 4-0.
4. On June 18, 1984, the City Council held a public hearing, received testimony
from the public, discussed the application, and moved to deny the request on a 5-
0 vote.
5. Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the City
Council makes the following findings:
a. The requested variance does not meet requirements of Section 14-219 and
Section 14-220.1 of the Zoning Ordinance necessary to be met for the City
Council to grant a variance.
b. Granting of the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right.
c. Granting of the requested variance would be contrary to the intent and
provision of the Zoning Ordinance.
d. There is no demonstrable or undue hardship under the terms of the Zoning
Ordinance or Minnesota Statute and therefore conditions necessary for
granting the requested variance do not exist.
e. The strict application of the terms of the City Zoning Ordinance to the
subject property does not prevent the owner and/or applicant in using the
property in a manner legally permissible within the I-1, Industrial District.
Conclusion
The application for the variance is denied based upon the findings set forth above
and on the grounds that conditions required for approval do not exist.
ATTEST:
(A..", /
(t19JWAL11J1e
City Clerk
Reviewed by administration:
it�Man
ager
Adopted by the City Council July `l, 1984
Approved as to form and legality:
L� f
,City Att rney