1977-02-22 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Council Proceedings City of New Brighton Feb. 22, 1977 2. However, substantive variations in setback have not been allowed without the potential of a substantive denial of reasonable use of the property. 3. The present request is for substantive variance in setback, while there is no potential of a substantive denial of reasonable use of the property. 4. The request would therefore constitute special privilege under the laws and practices of the City. 5.1 While you could argue that the present configuration of the property constitutes unique circumstances which cause the code to work undue hardship, the request does not satisfy the requirement of Minnesota Statutes which require that hardship variance satisfy the spirit of the law. A 6. The presence of a canopy purchased previous to application for permit are not circumstances of the property, but rather constitutes circumstances of the applicant. 7. Economic hardship implied by the possible moving of the pumps to obtain closer conformance with the ordinance requirements does not constitute variance warrants as established by State Statute. 8. The canopy has been deemed a structure in past practice of the City, which is consistent with the zoning ordinance as written. Council Business Mayor Bromander, with the consent of the Council, directed that the administrative report and HRA resolution regarding abatement of assessments be received and placed in the minutes. Motion by Hardt, seconded by Fisher to direct Mayor and Manager to execute Agreement in Regard to .abatement of Assessments of HRA properties. RESOLUTION 5 ayes- 0 nayes- carried NO.1853 Motion by Hardt, seconded by Senden to waive reading of the resolution and to adopt resolution entitled RESOLUTION ABATING UNPAID PORTION OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVIES OF CERTAIN PROPERTIES. 5 ayes- 0 nayes- carried