Planning Commission Resolution 477-96

Home Browse Search

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