My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
2001-046 Council Resolution
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
2001
>
2001-046 Council Resolution
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/16/2021 6:51:14 PM
Creation date
12/3/2015 8:11:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Resolutions
Meeting Date
03/26/2001
Council Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Boschee Variance <br /> page 4 <br /> 01-46 <br /> Council MemberW introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. <br /> CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 0'j-46 <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE COLLECTOR ROAD <br /> SETBACK FOR LOT 8 BLOCK 1 PEREGRINE PASS <br /> WHEREAS, a request has been submitted to the City Council for a Variance from the <br /> City of Lino Lakes Zoning Code, and <br /> WHEREAS, the legal description of the property is: <br /> Lot 8 Block 1, Peregrine Pass <br /> WHEREAS, Section 6, Subd. 2.13.4.2 of the City Zoning Ordinance requires a forty (40) <br /> foot setback from a collector road, and <br /> WHEREAS, 121h Ave. is classified as a collector road, and <br /> WHEREAS, the applicant desires to construct a building 28.5 feet from the right of way <br /> of 12th Ave, and <br /> WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lino Lakes makes following findings of fact: <br /> 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under <br /> conditions allowed by the official controls. The lot shape and the double street <br /> setbacks combined with the wetland and extra buffer easements create unusual <br /> circumstances. <br /> 2. The plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property <br /> not created by the land owner. The lot shape and the double street setbacks combined <br /> with the wetland and extra buffer easements create unusual circumstances. <br /> 3. The hardship is not due to economic considerations alone. It is not reticence to spend <br /> extra money to avoid the need for a variance, but rather the desire to build a home of <br /> a high enough value to fit in with the neighborhood: it is the desire for a higher <br /> expenditure rather than a lower one. The surrounding neighborhoods are R-1 X, and <br /> the Peregrine Pass planned development requires R1-X houses sizes. Higher value <br /> homes are the reason for the R-1 X district compared to the R-1, and the house <br /> proposed is in keeping with that goal. <br /> 4. Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any <br /> special privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or <br /> �. buildings in the same district. The other lots in the development do not have the same <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.