HomeMy WebLinkAbout89-83 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1989/06/19RESOLUTION NO. 89-83
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN FRONT YARD SETBACK
FROM SECTIONS 14-128(5) AND 14-198(4)(A) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 33
FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 40 FEET FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
IN THE R-1, ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AT 3844
HUNTINGTON AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findings
1. The applicant, Roos -Frick, Inc., and the owner, Mary B. Truesdell, have applied for a
variance from Sections 14-128(5) and 14-198(4)(a) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning
to permit a front yard setback of 33 feet instead of the required 40 feet for a single family
home located in the R-1, One Family Residence District at the following location, to -wit:
Lot 38 Auditor's Subdivision No. 301. RS (Abstract)
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals has reviewed the application for a variance (Case No. 89-
28 -VAR) and has recommended to the City Council that the application 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.
7. The following conditions and safeguards are necessary in order to
insure and will in fact insure that there will be no unreasonably adverse
consequences to the granting of the variance:
a. The removal from the property of the detached accessory
building that does not comply with the Zoning Ordinance Code.
8. The contents of Planning Case File 89 -28 -VAR are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The application for a variance for a front yard setback of 33 feet instead of the
required 40 feet is granted based upon the findings set forth above, and said
variance to take effect upon compliance with the condition listed in Number 7
above.
Adopted by the City Council June 19, 1989
ATTEST:
41,4111A"tra-J
6) 14-44'
Reviewed by administration: Approved as to form and execution:
k (. /ix,41
City Manager