Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout86-186 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1986/11/03ip RESOLUTION NO. 138-9R8 A RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF WILLIAM F. JOHN FOR A VARIANCE UNDER SECTION 14-128(5) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING ATTACHED GARAGE RESULTING IN A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4.7 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED SIX FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, AT 2614 XENWOOD AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY The City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: 1. On August 8, 1986, William F. John filed an application seeking a variance to permit the construction of an addition to an existing attached garage resulting in a side yard setback of 4.7 feet instead of the required six feet for property located in the R-1, Single Family Residence District, at 2614 Xenwood Avenue for the following legal description as follows, to wit: Lot 3, except that part thereof lying West of a line drawn parallel to and 150 feet East of the West line, "Auditor's Subdivision Number 350 Hennepin County Minnesota" (Torrens Certificate No. 467758) 2. On August 28, 1986, the Board of Zoning Appeals reviewed the request and deferred action to September 25, 1986. 3. On September 25, 1986, the Board of Zoning Appeals recommended denial of the variance on a vote of 6-0. 4. On October 20, 1986, the City Council held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, discussed the application, and authorized preparation of a resolution of denial on a vote of 5-0-1. 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 the 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 provisions 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. Granting of the variance may have an adverse impact on the adjacent property. Adopted by the City Council November 3, 1986 k.) 2‘4,-,/-4-J M& or ATTEST: Reviewed for administration: Approved as to form and legality: