2001 Planning Commission Packets

Home Browse Search

Resolution 678-01 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received resident input regarding this request on October 17, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to properiy owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting #he improvement of properiy due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's control; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which all must be satisfied, in order to grant a varia.nce to the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings of fact related to the hardship criferza ideniif"ied in Section 1125.02 of the Maunds View Zonuzg Code: The proposed Iots are located within a wetland zoning district. 2. While the proposed Iots comply with the subdivision requirements of Chapter I202, the lots DO NOT comply with the requirements of Chapter 1010 which regulate subdivisions within a wetland zoning district. 3 � The ininimum lot width for within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet. The parcel is substantially covered by delineated wetlands which is neither exceptional nor extraordinary given the number of wetlands within the City. The literal interpretation of the Code would N�T deprive Mr. Harstac� of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that the parcel could support a subdivision of up to eight parcels which complies with aIl subdivision requirements. b. Granting a variance in this case WOLTLD confer a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that there does not appear to be a sufficient ha.rdship to warrant approval of the variance. 7. The variance requested is N�T the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship in that a ten-lot subdivision would appear to be the minimum variance to satisfy the perceived hardship based upon the number of utility stubs already installed. 8. The variance WOULD be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title in that the sole purpose of the requirements is preserve natural wetlands, promote wildIife habitat and to protect the integrity of the City's surface water management system. 9. The hardsiup criteria as identified in Section 1125.02 have NOT been satisfied. __-__-. _. -: 7