Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout88-27 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1988/02/16RESOLUTION NO. 88-27 A RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, PHARMACY CORPORATION OF AMERICA (KEVIN LACASSE) FOR VARIANCES UNDER SECTIONS 17-187(2) AND 14-187(4)(r) OF THE ST_ LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A PARKING LOT WITH A SETBACK OF ZERO (0) FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 25 FEET AND HAVING 25 STALLS INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 60 STALLS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R -B, RESIDENTIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, AT 7600 HIGHWAY 7 BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: 1. On November 23, 1987, Beverly Enterprises, Pharmacy Corporation of America (Kevin LaCasse) filed an application seeking variances to permit a parking lot with a setback of zero (0) feet instead of the required 25 feet and having 25 stalls instead of the required 60 stalls for property located in the R -B, Residential Business District, at 7600 Highway 7, for the following legal description, to wit: Lots 16 through 21 inclusive, except State Highway Block 315, "Rearrangement of St. Louis Park" (Torrens Certificate No. ,683622) 2. On December 1, 1987, the Board of Zoning Appeals reviewed the request and recommended denial of the variances on a vote of 4-0. 3. On December 21, 1987, the City Council held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, discussed the application, continued the public hearing to January 19, 1988, and authorized preparation of a resolution of denial on a vote of 6-0. 4. Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The requested variances do not meet the requirements of Sections 14-219 and 14-220.11 of the Zoning Ordinance necessary to be met for the City Council to grant variances. There are no factors related to the shape, size or other extraordinary conditions of the lot which prevent a reasonable use. b. Granting of the requested variances is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right. The property has had a reasonable use in the past. c. Granting of the requested variances would be contrary to the intent and provisions of the Zoning Ordinance since, if granted, it would permit a zero setback when other properties so zoned require a setback of 25 feet. It would also allow a 58% parking reduction in direct contravention of Section 14-187. 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 variances do not exist. Other legal uses which could utilize the existing parking are allowable on the subject property. e. Granting of the variances may have an adverse impact on adiacent property because, if granted, a more intense use could result without providing comparable parking, thereby resulting in an increase of on -street parking and traffic in the adjacent residential neighborhood. Adopted by the City Council February 16, 1988 ATTEST: Reviewed for administration: Approved as to form and execution: 1