Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 12-079A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2653 STINSON BOULEVARD Meeting Sheet IIIIII VIII VIII VIII VIII VIII IIII IIII 103714 Box: 31 Folder: RES 2012 Document: CC RES 12-079A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2653 STINSON BOULEVARD CITY OF ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 12-079 RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE FRONT YARD FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2653 STINSON BOULEVARD WHEREAS, the City of St. Anthony Village received a request from the Applicants Patricia LaBossiere and Nina Guertin for a variance to allow an a storage shed in the front yard for the property located at 2653 Stinson Boulevard on August 15, 2012, legally described as follows: LOT 28,BLOCK 8, MURRAY HEIGHTS ADDITION TO MINNEAPOLIS WHEREAS, the Applicants have requested a variance to allow a shed in the front yard on the property; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the request based on the related documents shown in the Applicants' application at their regular meeting on September 18, 2012; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Anthony Village approves the Applicants' variance request based on the following findings: 1. The requested variance is 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 proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner. The shed will be used to store equipment such as a lawn mower, snow blower, and outdoor lawn furniture, which is currently stored in the existing garage. b. The rear yard is the only place the Code allows for the shed; however, it is not the property owners' fault that there is not sufficient room in the rear yard to accommodate the shed. The existing home was constructed at a time when present rules regarding setbacks were not in existence. The home does not meet the required rear yard setback and does not provide sufficient space to locate the proposed shed. c. Granting the variance will not alter the essential character of the locality. If the home were oriented with the front towards 27th Avenue rather than Stinson Boulevard, the Applicants could propose the shed in the same location and would not need a variance. The Applicants are proposing to construct the shed in a manner that is consistent with the principal structure and existing garage. The proposed use remains a single family home in a single family neighborhood. Staff finds that the essential character of the locality will not be changed. 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 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 Code relating to promoting orderly development and redevelopment. Allowing the shed at the proposed location on the property is consistent with promoting orderly redevelopment. g. Granting the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City's Code relating to providing adequate light, air and access to property. h. Allowing the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City's 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 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 Code to prevent overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating land, buildings, yards and densities. A detached shed is a permitted accessory use and is common among other homes in the City. The proposed shed would not put the property over the maximum amount of impervious surface. The variance will not result in overcrowding or concentration of buildings. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that the City Council's approval of the requested variance is contingent on the following: 1. The Applicant shall submit the appropriate plans and permits for review and approval before beginning construction of the proposed shed. 2. The proposed shed shall at no point be closer than 6 feet from the front property line. 3. The exterior of the shed shall be done in a manner that is consistent with home and garage with regard to color and building materials. APPROVED in the regular session of the City Council on September 25, 2012. ."-J rome O. Faust, Mayor Attested: Barb Suciu, City Cl Reviewed for administration: -Wavk Mark Casey,City anager