Resolution 99-04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City of Lake Elmo Washington County, Minnesota Resolution No. PZ 99 -4 A RESOLUTION REGARDING A ZONING ORDINANCE VARIANCE Abbott/Friederichs WHEREAS, the Lake Elmo Planning Commission has reviewed and heard testimony regarding the application of Denise & Edward Abbott and Chris -& William Friederichs,.co- applicants, to vary from the standards of Section 300.07 Subd. 4., Para.B.5.c.ii. (page 300 -24) of the Lake Elmo City Code with respect to the property described as follows: ABBOTT DESCRIPTION: The Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota; EXCEPT the west 33.00 feet thereof; also EXCEPT the north 660.00 feet of the east 660.00 feet thereof; and also EXCEPTING a tract of land for a roadway 66 feet in width (north to south), the south line of which is described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the center line of Old Minnesota State Trunk Highway 212 (now known as Meadowlark Lane) and the east line of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 14; thence north along said east line a distance of 766.9 feet to a point located on the east and west quarter section line of said Section, said point being the east termination point of the said south line of said roadway, running thence west on said east and west quarter section line 461.2 Ayet to the west termination point of said south line of said roadway. Subject to and together with all easements of record, if and, containing 25.08 acres. FRIEDERICHS DESCRIPTION: The north 660.00 feet of the east 660.00 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 14, Township 29, Range 21, Washington County, Minnesota. Subject to and together with all easements of record, if any, containing 10.00 acres. WHEREAS, said variance is described as follows: To permit an aspect ratio of 5.25:1 for Lot 1 where the Zoning Ordinance specifies a maximum of 3:1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lake Elmo Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings concerning said variance: 1. There does exist extraordinary circumstances that do not generally apply to other parcels in this zoning district. The literal interpretation of the applicable Zoning Ordinance section will deprive the landowner of the right to preserve reasonable property rights.