Laserfiche WebLink
Pinewood <br />March 7, 20Q1 <br />Page 4 <br />-.� <br />That ihe va��iance requested rs the mininaum varia��ce which would allevicrte the hardship. <br />Economic conditions alone sdrall not be considered a hardshrp. <br />The variance to allow a zero-foot parking lot setback along the west property line is ihe <br />minimum variance to alleviate the hardship, especially considering the parking lot <br />encroaches over the property line and into City right of way by seven feet. <br />f. The 1�ariance would not be mate�ially a'etrimental to the purpose of this Trtle or to other <br />property in the sa»ze zone. <br />Given the circumstances, staz�' does noi feel the variance request would be materially <br />detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Extending <br />the parlcing lot to the south does not increase the exteni of the non-conformity <br />g. The proposed variance will not impair crn adequate supply of lrght and air to adjcrcent <br />pYOperty oY substantially zncrease ihe congestion of Phe public streets or zncrease the <br />dangeY of fire or endange� the public safety or substantially di�ninish or ir�rparr p��ope�ty <br />values tivithin the neighbo��hood. <br />The praposed variance would not im�air a supply of'light or air to adjacent properties or <br />substantiaily increase congestion on streets. rn fact, it would seem to be the case that the <br />expanded parking area would ease congestion and lessen the demand for on-street parking � <br />at the schooi, a problem whicll has generaied complaints from adjacent residents. <br />Based upon review of the above criteria, it would seem that a hardship does indeed exist and that <br />a variance could be granted to maintain the non-conforming parking iot setback along Quincy <br />Street. <br />Conditional U�e Pea°mii Iliscaassfoh: <br />�chools and religious institutions located within a residential district require a conditional use <br />perznit. Because most of these types of facilities in Mounds View predate the current Zoning <br />Code, most do not have a CUP. It has been the City's policy to require a CUP in the event of any <br />expansions so as to bring the facifity into compliance with the Code. While CLTP approval is <br />typically assured, it does provide the opportunity to review such issues as parking, traffic, lighting <br />and other faciors which may impact the residential neighborhood. <br />From ��ction i 106. Q4, Subd.1 of the Zoning Code relating to conditionai uses within the R-1 <br />district, the following requirements shall be met in order to approve a CUP: <br />