HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 12-067 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR THE PROPERTY LLOCATED AT 3301 31ST AVENUE Meeting Sheet
IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII
103726
Box: 31
Folder: RES 2012
Document: CC RES 12-067 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO
EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS
SURFACE FOR THE PROPERTY LLOCATED AT 330131ST AVENUE
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 12-067
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
ALLOWABLE AMOUNT OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 330131ST AVENUE
WHEREAS,the City of St. Anthony Village received a request from the
Applicants Curt and Jane Wollan for a variance to exceed the allowable amount of
impervious surface for the property located at 3301 31 st Avenue on May 4, 2012, legally
described as follows:
SOUTH '/20F THAT PART OF LOT 38 LYING SOUTH OF THE NORTH 30 FEET OF SAID
LOT, BLOCK 1,"BONNIE-VIEW HEIGHTS, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINN"
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested a variance to exceed the allowable
amount of impervious surface in order to construct a walkway and patio in the front yard;
and
WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the request
based on the related documents shown in the Applicant's application and revised
improvement plan at their regular meeting on June 19, 2012; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
St. Anthony Village approves the Applicant's variance request based on the following
findings:
1. The requested variances are consistent with all the standards for granting a
variance as described in Section 152.245 of the St. Anthony Village Zoning
Code. More specifically, the City Council finds that the requested variance is
justified for the following reasons:
a. The property owner is proposing to use their property in a reasonable
manner not permitted by the zoning code. Most homes in the
neighborhood have an entrance that is connected from the driveway to the
front door.
b. There are circumstances unique to the property not created by the property
owner. The home, garage and driveway were built in the 1940s according
to the property owner. This would have been prior to lot coverage surface
rules. As a result, the garage is located at the back of the property,
resulting in an unusually long driveway. This driveway accounts for a
significant portion of the existing impervious surface. These conditions
were not created by any persons presently having an interest in the parcel
of land.
c. Granting the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality.
If anything, it will make the home more in keeping with the surrounding
neighborhood by having a front step and connecting walkway.
d. Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical
difficulties.
e. Granting the variance is consistent with the city's comprehensive land use
plan and is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City's
Zoning Code relating to protecting the use districts. The use of the
property will remain the same as it is today.
f. Allowing the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the City's Zoning Code relating to promoting orderly development and
redevelopment. Staff believes that providing a front door step and
walkway is consistent with promoting orderly redevelopment.
g. Granting the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the City's Zoning Code relating to providing adequate light, air and
access to property. The project will not impact adjacent properties in their
ability to receive adequate light and air, or to access their property.
h. Allowing the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the City's Zoning Code relating to preventing congestion in public
streets. The project will have no impact on congestion.
i. Allowing the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the City's Zoning Code to provide for compatibility of different land
uses. The project will have no impact on land use compatibility.
j. Allowing the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the City's Zoning Code to prevent overcrowding of land and undue
concentration of structures by regulating land, buildings, yards and
densities. The Applicant has minimized the amount of additional
impervious surface to the extent possible. The City Engineer has reviewed
the proposed plan and has determined that the additional amount of
impervious surface will not be detrimental.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council's
approval of the requested variances are contingent on the following:
1. The Applicant shall submit the appropriate plans and permits for review and
approval before beginning construction of the proposed walkway and patio.
2. The Applicant shall use the revised proposed improvement plan shown in
Exhibit C for their building permit application.
3. The proposal shall result in an addition of no more than 180 square feet of
impervious surface.
APPROVED in the regular session of the City Council on June 26, 2012.
Je ome O. Faust, Mayor
Attested:
Barb Suciu, City rk
Review for Administration: (
6071,111
Mark Casey, City NZager