HomeMy WebLinkAbout92-134 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1992/09/08f
RESOLUTION NO.
92-134
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM
SECTION 14-148(7) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING
TO PERMIT A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 0 FEET FOR A PARKING LOT
INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 15 FEET IN THE R -B,
RESIDENTIAL/BUSINESS DISTRICT AT 4501 MINNETONKA
BOULEVARD
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findines
1. Reginald A. Gassen has applied for a variance from Section 14-148(7) of the
Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a side yard setback of 0 feet for a parking lot
instead of the required 15 feet for a business located in the R -B, Residential/Business
District at the following location, to -wit:
Lot 1, Block 2, "Fern Hill" (Abstract)
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing, received testimony from
the public,discussed the application for a variance (Case No. 92 -39 -VAR) and, 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.
3. On July 31, 1992, the applicant, Reginald Gassen, filed an appeal of this
decision to the City Council.
4. On Monday, August 17, 1992, the City Council considered the appeal of
Reginald A. Gassen 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.
Granting of the variance will increase the applicant's ability to provide additional off-street
parking without endangering public safety.
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. The subject property is located in an area with a large number of apartment
buildings and limited on -street parking. Without the variance, the applicant would likely
lose some off-street parking increasing the congestion on the public streets.
9Z-/344
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.
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 92.39 -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 side yard setback of 0 feet for a parking lot
instead of the required 15 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
ATTEST:
Reviewed by administration:
k#e Aeliet
City Manager
92-39-VAR.CC BOZA
W ,g,t.
Approved as to form and execution:
Attg,ta A. Paii54101144,0
City Attorney