HomeMy WebLinkAbout92-133 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1992/09/08RESOLUTION NO. 92-133
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN REAR YARD SETBACK FROM
SECTION 14-128(5) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING
TO PERMIT A REAR YARD SETBACK OF 30 FEET FOR A 3 SEASON
PORCH INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 35 FEET IN THE R-1, SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT AT 2033 VIRGINIA AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Findings
1. David W. Nelson and Jane T. Laurance have applied for a variance from
Section 14-128(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a rear yard setback of
30 feet for a 3 season porch instead of the required 35 feet for a single family home located
in the R-1, Single Family Residence District at the following location, to -wit:
Lot 5, Block' 2, "Fifth Country Club of Westwood Hills" (Torrens Certificate
No. 762148)
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing, received testimony from
the public,discussed the application for a variance (Case No. 92 -40 -VAR) and, upon finding
that.the request for a 30 foot rear yard setback did not satisfy the Ordinance necessary for
granting a variance, approved a Resolution of Denial on a vote of 4-0. The Board of Zoning
Appeals did approve a Resolution of Approval for a 34 foot rear yard setback.
3. On July 27, 1992, the applicants, David W. Nelson and Jane T. Laurance,
filed an appeal of this decision to the City Council.
4. On Monday, August 17, 1992, the City Council considered the appeal of
David W. Nelson and Jane T. Laurance from the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals
and authorized staff to prepare a Resolution of Approval.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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. The lot is located in a
subdivision which narrows on the southern end of the block. The narrowing of the
124 33
subdivision creates irregular shaped lots restricting the applicant's property more than
other properties in the immediate area. The irregular shape of the parcel results in a rear
lot line which is at an angle to the subject house, placing the house close to the rear lot line
on one side. In addition, the configuration and floor plan of the house greatly limit the
alternatives for adding a porch to the extent that there is no reasonable alternative location
for the porch. A porch which complied with the setback requirement would be so narrow
that its function would be impaired.
8. 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.
9. The contents of Planning Case File 92 -40 -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 to permit a rear yard setback of 30 feet for a 3 season porch
instead of the required 35 feet is granted based upon the findings set forth above, with the
understanding that this approval is good for one calendar year from this date.
Adopted by the City Council September 8, 1992
Pryor
ATTEST:
leohL4404,dirm)
Reviewed by administration: Approved as to form and execution:
At/c',,D'X
City Manager
92-40-VAR.CC BOZA
City Attorney
1