Laserfiche WebLink
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • <br /> RESOLUTION NO. 576-99 <br /> CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW <br /> COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br /> STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM CHAPTER 1104 OF THE ZONING <br /> CODE PERTAINING TO SETBACKS, TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE <br /> BETWEEN THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE AND STREET AT 7805 GLORIA CIRCLE; <br /> PLANNING CASE NO. 551-99 <br /> WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the variance request of <br /> Dorothee Dietrich, property owner of 7805 Gloria Circle; and, <br /> WHEREAS, this property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as <br /> follows: <br /> Lot 4, Block 1, Lakeside Court <br /> City of Mounds View, County of Ramsey <br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents associated <br /> with this request: <br /> 1. Planning Application • <br /> 2. Zoning Map <br /> 3. Site Plans <br /> 4. Letter from Applicant <br /> WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, <br /> may grant variances to specific requirements within the Zoning Code under unique, exceptional or <br /> extraordinary circumstances; and, <br /> do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or <br /> shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the <br /> effective date hereof have had no control, in that this property is one of only six lake-front <br /> properties in the city and which property is subject to prohibitive development restrictions; and, <br /> WHEREAS, special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the <br /> applicant in that the presence of Spring Lake is an important aesthetic and environmental feature <br /> which needs to be protected and preserved; and, <br /> WHEREAS, granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant a special <br /> privilege that is denied by this Title to owners or other lands, structures or buildings in the same <br /> district in that the property itself is unique in its lake-front status and associated prohibitive • <br /> development restrictions; and, <br />