My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution 6286
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Resolutions
>
06000 - 06499 (2003-2005)
>
Resolution 6286
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2019 10:13:55 AM
Creation date
1/31/2007 1:57:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
Resolutions
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Read Variance and CUP <br />June 28, 2004 <br />Page 20 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, in their resolution of denial, the Mounds View Planning Commission <br />identified the following findings of fact related to the hardship criteria identified in Section <br />1125.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: <br /> <br />1. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. <br /> <br />2. The maximum garage width allowed for an over-sized garage in an R-1 zoning <br />districts is 35 feet. <br /> <br />3. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage that is 48 feet wide, 13 feet in <br />excess of the permitted width. <br /> <br />4. The property is regularly shaped and is neither exceptional nor extraordinary <br />given the number of properties within the City that are zoned R-1. <br /> <br />5. The literal interpretation of the Code would not deprive the applicant of rights <br />commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that the property is <br />not unique compared to other properties in the same zoning district. <br /> <br />6. Granting a variance in this case would confer a special privilege not enjoyed by <br />other property owners in that there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to <br />warrant approval of the variance. <br /> <br />7. The variance would be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title in that <br />there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to warrant approval of the <br />variance. <br /> <br />8. The hardship criteria as identified in Section 1125.02 have not been satisfied. <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the applicant exercised his right to appeal to the City Council the <br />Planning Commission's variance denial; and, <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the following documents regarding this <br />proposal: <br /> <br />1 . Application <br />2. Zoning Map <br />3. Site Plan <br />4. Layout and Elevations of Proposed Addition and Alternative Plan <br />5. Photographic Documentation <br />6. Staff Report <br />7. Planning Commission Resolutions 758-04 and 757-04 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing regarding this request on June <br />28, 2004; and, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.