Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 7658RESOLUTION NO. 7658 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION OVERTURNING THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR REDUCED LOT WIDTHS WITHIN A WETLAND ZONING DISTRICT THEREBY APPROVING THE VARIANCE AS REQUESTED; PLANNING CASE NO. VR2001-002 WHEREAS, Eichi Inc., represented by Marty & Paul Harstad, applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths within a wetland zoning district; and, WHEREAS, the proposal would have eight of the ten single family lots in the proposed Longview Estates subdivision with reduced lot widths; and, WHEREAS, the City has zoned the property known as Longview Estates, R-1, Single Family Residential, and the subject parcel is legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Muel~er Addition Ramsey County, Minnesota PID 07-30-23-42-0066 WHEREAS, Section 1010.07 Subd. 3a(2) of the Mounds View City Code indicates that the minimum lot width for single-family residential lots within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet as measured at the building setback line; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to allow for reduced lot widths (varying widths from 90 feet to 112,67 feet) for eight lots in order to subdivide the property into ten single-family residential lots; and, WHEREAS, on June 16, 2010, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and received resident, applicant and staff input about this request; and, WHEREAS, on July 7, 2010, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 927- 10, a resolution denying the variance requested by Eichi, Inc. due to a lack of demonstrated hardship; and, WHEREAS, on July 16, 2010, the applicant submitted a written appeal, requesting that the City Council overturn the Planning Commission's denial; and, WHEREAS, on August 9, 2010, the City Council held a public hearing about this appeal; and, Resolution 7658 Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the following documents about this appea{: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Photo 3. 2006 Wetland Map 4. Proposed Subdivision Plan, dated May 20, 2010 5. Applicant's Narrative, dated May 21, 2010 6. Staff Report, dated August 9, 2010 7. Planning Commission Resolution 927-10 WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the code requirements imposes a substantial hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or e~raordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's control; and, WHEREAS, the intent of the wetlands ordinance and the City subdivision requirements is to protect the natural environment, the integrity of the hydrological system and the City's surFace water management system, however such preservation and conservation efforts need to be balanced with the right and allowance to develop one's property; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Councif hereby makes the following findings of fact about this request: 1. The proposed lots as depicted on the subdivision plan meet the subdivision requirements of Chapter 1202 of the City Code. The lots are located within a wetland zoning district, however, which has more restrictive lot width requirements than Chapter 1202. 2. The minimum lot width within a wetland zoning district is 125 feet, and the applicant has submitted to the City a site p{an with 10 residential lots - eight Iots that would range from 90 feet to 112.67 feet wide, a 125 foot wide lot and a 152 foot wide lot. 3. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in that the property now proposed for residential replatting was originally platted in 1963 and that sanitary and water utility stubs were installed during the construction of the adjacent street in anticipation of eventuaf development on this site. 4. The literal interpretation of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that while other property owners within this wetland zoning district would face similar requirements, few if any other property owners would have a preexisting vested interest in their undeveloped property as in this case. Resolution 7658 Page 3 5. The special conditions or circumstances do not resuft from the actions of the applicant in that the land was originally platted in 1963 and the utilities were installed not too long thereafter and many years before the City adopted any wetland protection standards. The utilities were installed with the expectation of future development. While the applicant was fully aware of the development constraints instituted by the City in 1992, the applicant did not cause the special conditions or circumstances. 6. Granting a variance in this case would not confer a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that the applicant is proposing single family homes in a single fami{y home district on lots that exceed the minimum standard subdivision requirements. 7. The variance requested is the minimum variance that would alleviate the hardship and allow the applicant to use the existing 10 water and sewer service stubs for this site. 8. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. 9. lt is the belief of the City Council that the proposed variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mounds View City Council, based upon the above-cited findings of fact, does hereby overturn the decision of the Mounds View P{anning Commission as presented in Resolution 927-10, and does hereby approve the variance as requested for proposed Longview Estates lots 2- 9, as depicted on the preliminary plat date-stamped May 21, 2010, subject to the following: 1. If within one year after granting the variance, the work as permitted by the variance has not been completed, then such variance shall be come null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by the applicant and granted by the City Council. Such extension shall be requested by the applicant in writing, and submitted to the City at least 30 days before the expiration of the original variance. 2. For each proposed house pad, soil borings shall be taken to determine construction suitability. The applicant shall submit the borings analyses to the City along with any soils correction plans for Public Works Director and City Engineer review. A grading permit may be required by the City. Resolution 7658 Page 4 Adopted this 9th day of August, 2010. F ATTEST: (SEAL) ~ G~.~vvl.t~ _ James Ericson, City Administrator