Laserfiche WebLink
City of Lino Lakes <br /> May 11, 2021 <br /> Page 3 <br /> Relief Requested <br /> Applicant is seeking the following City approvals: <br /> 1. Variance from Animal Unit Restriction. Applicant is seeking a variance from the <br /> Stable Ordinance's animal unit restrictions and the cap of 25 animal units. Applicant is <br /> requesting fifty(50) animal units to be kept on the Property. <br /> 2. Amended Conditional Use Permit. Applicant seeks issuance of an amended <br /> conditional use permit reflecting that fifty(50) animal units may be retained on the <br /> Property. Applicant requests that the amended permit excise prior condition number 12, <br /> requiring that"PID#05-31-22-22-003 and PID #05-31-22-22-0005 shall be combined <br /> with Anoka County."3 <br /> Variance Criteria and Conditions <br /> Under the City Code, variances must meet the following criteria: <br /> 1. The variance shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the <br /> ordinance. <br /> The variance being sought is in conformance with the general purposes and intent of the <br /> ordinance. The City Code, at § 1007.080(1), states the purposes for the rural zoning district. <br /> These purposes include: <br /> a. To preserve productive land for agricultural use and maintain `open space' within and <br /> near to urban areas. <br /> c. To provide a method by which the urban farm can be guided so as to control urban <br /> sprawl and still conserve land in an economic status until such time as the need is present <br /> for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> The Property will continue to be maintained as an open space. The Property will continue to <br /> stand as a bulwark against urban sprawl. Moreover, it is noteworthy that for veterinary hospitals <br /> (a conditional use in this zoning district)up to forty(40) animals may be boarded on a property <br /> irrespective of its size. See City Code § 1007.080(7)(e). Horses boarded on the Property include <br /> 3 Resolution No. 20-129 "observed that [t]here are three (3)parcels of land . . . under common <br /> ownership and operate as a single enterprise." Indeed, these parcels have long been <br /> committed to the same operation and purpose. There is no need to require consolidation of <br /> these parcels. Instead, a CUP condition could be crafted that required that all three parcels be <br /> held in common by the same person or entity. Requiring consolidation of these parcels <br /> unnecessarily reduces the marketability of the parcels where there is a less restrictive <br /> condition that could be incorporated into a revised CUP. <br />