HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-142 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1990/10/01RESOLUTION NO. 90-142
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN FRONT YARD SETBACK
FROM SECTION 14-187(2)(d) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO
ZONING TO PERMIT A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 0 FEET INSTEAD OF
THE REQUIRED 30 FEET FOR A PARKING LOT IN THE R-2, SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT, AT 4003 WOODDALE AVENUE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Findings
1. Wooddale Lutheran Church has applied for a variance from Section 14-
187(2)(d) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a front yard setback of 0 feet
instead of the required 30 feet for a parking lot for a church located in the R-2, Single
Family Residence District, at the following location, to -wit:
Lots 1 to 9 inclusive, Block 2, "Brookview Addition" (Torrens Certificate No.
244458)
2. On July 26, 1990, the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing,
received testimony from the public,discussed the application for a variance (Case No.
90 -49 -VAR) and authorized preparation of a Resolution of Denial on a vote of 3-0-0.
3. On August 23, 1990, the Board of Zoning Appeals, upon finding that the
request did not satisfy the Ordinance necessary for granting a variance, approved a
Resolution of Denial on a vote of 4-0-0.
4. On August 30, 1990, the applicant, Wooddale Lutheran Church, filed an
appeal of this decision to the City Council.
5. On Monday, September 17, 1990, the City Council considered the appeal of
Wooddale Lutheran Church from the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. The granting of the variance will maintain the existing supply of off-street
parking available on the site and result in fewer cars parking on the street.
11. No evidence of traffic hazards or other safety concerns exist with the present
parking lot location.
12. 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. Curb bumpers or wheel stops be placed between the existing parking
lot and the adjacent sidewalk.
13. The contents of Planning Case File 90 -49 -VAR are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to deny this application is hereby rescinded
and the application for a variance to permit a front yard setback of 0 feet instead of the
required 30 feet for a parking lot is granted based upon the findings set forth above, and
compliance with the conditions set forth above with the understanding that this approval is
good for one calendar year from this date and, if the parking lot has not been constructed by
the end of this calendar year, this approval shall become void.
Adopted by the City Council October 1, 1990
ATTEST:
Reviewed by administration:
Gr/• --i2, oi2i
City Manager
90-49-VAR.CC: RESBOZA1
)
May
Approved as to form and execution:
ity Attorney