HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 19-011 ADOPTING THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR DENIAL OF A LOT SPLIT WITH VARIANCE REQUEST FOR LOT SIZE ON A CORNER LOT BY WALTER SENTRYRZ AT 3713 33RD AVENUE NECITY OF SAINT ANTHONY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 19 -011
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND REASONS FOR DENIAL OF A LOT
SPLIT WITH VARIANCE REQUEST FOR LOT SIZE ON A CORNER LOT
BY WALTER SENTYRZ AT 3713 33" AVENUE NE
FACTS
Walter Sentyrz is the owner of a parcel of land located at 3713 33rd Avenue NE, St. Antony Village,
Minnesota; and,
2. The subject property is legally described as follows; and,
THE EAST 138 FEET OF THE SOUTH 1/3 OF THE EAST 24 RODS OF THE SOUTH 80 RODS OF
THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 29 NORTH, RANGE 23, WEST OF THE 4T"
PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, EXCEPT THE NORTH 225 FEET THEREOF, HENNEPIN COUNTY,
MINNESOTA
3. Walter Sentyrz has applied to the City of St. Anthony Village for a lot split and variance to create two
lots with one being below the minimum lot size, as described in the application.
4. The proposal would vary from the minimum lot size requirements for the R -1 Single - Family District in
that one of the two lots would be 10,101 square feet instead of the 11,000 square foot minimum lot size
for a corner lot.
5. Following a public hearing on the application, the St. Anthony Village Planning Commission
recommended denial of the lot split and variance on December 17, 2018.
6. The City Council of the City of St. Anthony Village reviewed the requested lot split and variance at its
Meeting of January 8, 2019. The request is for a lot split and an 899 square foot variance to the
minimum lot size for a corner lot in the R -1 Single - Family District.
APPLICABLE LAW
7. Minnesota Statute Section 462.357, subd. 6 provides:
a. Variances shall only be permitted (a) when they are in harmony with the general purposes
and intent of the ordinance and (b) when the variances are consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
b. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are
practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as
used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that (a) the property owner
proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance;
(b) the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by
the landowner; and (c) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the
locality.
8. City Ordinance allows variances as follows.
City Code Section 152.245 Variances
(C)Evidence. No variance will be granted unless the evidence presented discloses all of the
following facts.
(1) The subject matter of the application is within the scope of this section.
(2) Strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because:
(a) The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
the zoning code;
(b) The plight of the property owner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the property owner; and
(c) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality.
(3) Economic considerations alone are not the basis of the practical difficulties.
(4) The variance, if granted, would be consistent with the city's comprehensive land use plan.
(5) The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the
zoning code.
9. Relevant City Code. Title XV Land Usage, Section 152.039 (B) the minimum lot size for a corner lot
shall be 11,000 square feet in the R -1 Single - Family District.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
10. The requested variance is not in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance because the
intent of the zoning code is to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the city and its people
through the establishment of minimum regulations governing land development and use. The zoning
code is established to: protect the use districts; promote orderly development and redevelopment;
provide adequate light, air, and access to property; prevent congestion in the public streets; prevent
overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating land, buildings, yards, and
densities; and provide for compatibility of different land uses.
11. The requested variance is not consistent with the comprehensive plan and the plan does not suggest a
lot size reduction in the R -1 Single - Family District.
12. The property owner does not propose to use the property in a reasonable manner as they propose to
create a lot that is smaller than that allowed by the zoning code.
13. There are not unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner as the landowner is
requesting the lot split which would create a non - conformity. The existing lot is conforming.
14. The variance does not maintain the essential character of the locality as the reduced lot size would
conflict with the zoning standards set for the neighborhood and all other R -I neighborhoods in the
locality.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
VILLAGE, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
The application to approve a lot split and issue a variance to allow Walter Sentyrz to split a conforming lot into
two with one lot being below the minimum lot size is hereby denied.
Adopted t
ATTEST:
Reviewed for administration: 0'� 6 Z
Mark Casey, Ci anager