Laserfiche WebLink
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> • RESOLUTION NO. 477-96 <br /> • <br /> CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW <br /> COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br /> STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING LOT WIDTH VARIANCE REQUEST BY THE MOUNDS <br /> VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR 8265 SPRING LAKE ROAD; <br /> PLANNING CASE NO. 455-96 <br /> WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the request of the <br /> Mounds View Economic Development Authority(EDA) to allow a 20 foot reduction in the required <br /> lot width of 100 feet 8265 Spring Lake Road; and, <br /> WHEREAS, this property is a corner lot in the R-1 district; and, <br /> WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Mounds View EDA to redevelop this property by <br /> demolishing the existing single family home and making the lot available for the construction of a new <br /> single family home; and, <br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the criteria used to evaluate variance <br /> requests; and, <br /> • WHEREAS, the applicant presented a hardship statement to the Planning Commission stating <br /> that the lot was platted in 1939 with a lot frontage of 80 feet, no vacant or undeveloped land is <br /> available which could be used to remedy this situation, a single-family home currently exists on the <br /> property and the use of the property for a single family home is typical of lots in the R-1 district; and, <br /> WHEREAS, exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exist due to the size of the lot which <br /> was platted in 1939 and these circumstances were not caused by the applicant; and, <br /> WHEREAS, the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Municipal Code would deprive <br /> the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of <br /> the Municipal Code in that no building permit could be issued to the property and it could not be used <br /> for the construction of a single family home, and, <br /> WHEREAS, granting the variance would not confer special privileges on the applicant that are <br /> not enjoyed by other property owners in the same district in that the typical use of properties in the R- <br /> 1 district is for single family residences; and, <br /> WHEREAS, the variance requested is the minimum necessary to alleviate the hardship, based <br /> on the existing width of the lot; and, <br /> WHEREAS, the variance would not be detrimental to the purposes of the Zoning Code or to <br /> other properties in the R-1 district in that it would allow development of the property for a single <br /> family residence which is the express purpose of this zoning district; and, <br /> 40 <br />