Planning Commission Resolution 678-01

Home Browse Search

R.esolution 678-01 Page 2 . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received resident input regarding this request on October 17, 200 I; and, \VHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's control; and, \VHEREAS, according to Section 1 ]25.02, 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 variance to the Zoning Code_ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings offact related to the hardship criteria identified in Section 1125_02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: 1- 2_ . " " - 4_ . The proposed lots are located within a wetland zoning district. While the proposed lots comply with the subdivision requirements of Chapter 1202, the lots DO NOT comply with the requirements of Chapter 1010 which regulate subdivisions within a wetland zoning district. The minimum lot width for within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet. Thc parcel is substantially covercd by delineated wetlands which is neither exceptional nor cxtraordinary given the number of wetlands within the City. 5_ The literal interpretation of the Codc would NOT deprive Mr, Harstad of rights commonly enjoyed by othcr properties in the same district in that the parcel could support a subdivision of up to eight parcels which complics with all subdivision requirements_ 6_ Granting a variance in this case WOULD confcr a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to warrant approval of the variancc_ 7. The variance requested is NOT the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship in that a tcn-Iot 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 wildlife habitat and to protect the integrity of the City's surface water management system. 9_ The hardship critcria as identified in Section] 125_02 have NOT been satisfied_