HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-049 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 2002/05/06•
VARIANCE
RESOLUTION NO. 02-049
A RESOLUTION DENYING THE APPLICATION OF NIAZ REAL ESTATE
CORPORATION FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 36-
194(C)(25)(C) TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIREMENT OF ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE
ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE "C-2" GENERAL COMMERCIAL
DISTRICT, AT 4050 BROOKSIDE AVENUE.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St Louis Park, Minnesota
FINDINGS
1. On February 28, 2002, Niaz Real Estate Corporation filed an application seeking a
vanance to eliminate the requirement of access to open space and to allow vehicles to
back into the public street on the property located in the C-2 General Commercial
Distnct, at 4050 Brookside Avenue for the following legal description, to wit:
The South 40 feet of Lot 1, Brookside Subdivision No.2, Hennepin County, Minnesota
2. On April 2, 2002, the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public heanng, received testimony
from the public, discussed the application and approved a resolution
1111 3 On April 8, 2002, staff received a letter appealing the Board of Zoning Appeals' decision
to the City Council.
4. On May 6, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing, received testimony from the
public, discussed the application and approved a resolution.
5 Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, City Council makes
the following findings on the variance to the requirement for access to open space:
a The requested variance does not meet the requirements of Section 36-33(d) of the
Zoning Ordinance necessary to be met for the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant
variances. There is no existing condition, where by reason of narrowness,
shallowness, or shape of the lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographical
or water conditions or other extraordinary and exception conditions of the lot, the
stnct application of the terms of this open space requirement would result in
peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the
owner of the lot in developing or using the lot in a manner customary and legally
permissible within the use district in which such lot is located, since other uses
would not require the open space variance.
b Conditions applying to the structure or land are peculiar to the property or
immediately adjoining property, and do not apply, generally, to other land or
structures in the use district in which the land is located. However, it is the
proposed residential use and not such conditions that create the need for the open
space vanance.
Resolution No 02-049 -2-
c. Granting of the open space vanance is not necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant.
d Granting of the open space variance will be contrary to the intent of the Zoning
Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
e. Granting of the open space variance will merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant and is not necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or
difficulty. Therefore, conditions necessary for granting the requested open space
variance do not exist.
6. The contents of vanance Case File 02 -17 -VAR are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
The applicant's request for a vanance to eliminate the requirement of access to open space is
hereby denied, based on the findings set forth above
Reviewed for Administration:
i,
City Manager
Attest.
Cit' Clerk
Ado
by the City Council May 6, 2002
May