00-024 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!' ..." ; i .....; RESOLUTION No.00-024 CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVAL OF NCOO-2. WHEREAS, an application for a Type IV Nonconforming Use Variance has been made by Independent School District #621 and the City of New Brighton to construct an addition to Pike Lake Elementary School, and expand/reconfigure the parking lot for Freedom Park; and WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. An application for a Type IV nonconforming use variance was filed with the City of New Brighton on March 1,2000. 2. The Planning Commission, pursuant to published and mailed notices, held a public hearing on March 21, 2000, and all persons present at the hearing were given an opportunity to be heard. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval ofNCOO-2, subject to conditions. 3. On March 28, 2000, the City Council considered the proposed nonconforming use; and Now THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council makes the following Findings of Fact in respect to NCOO-2: 1. The subject site is zoned R-I, Single Family Residential. 2. The proposed additions consist of a new entryway/administrative office (950 s.f.), two new classrooms (I,975 s.f.), and a new mechanical room (975 s.f.). 3. It is recognized that there are uses ofland, structures, and combinations which were lawfully' established and which do not now comply with all applicable portions of the City Code. The i subject site is an example of such a use. While it is recognized that such nonconforming uses may not be summarily terminated, it is the purpose of Section 8-410 to discourage their survival. Further, such permission may be granted only if one or more of the following conditions are met: a. The total number of nonconformities is reduced. b. The impact of any nonconformity upon adjacent premises is reduced to the greatest practical extent. c. The extent of any nonconformity is reduced where practical. 4. The nonconformity that exists on the subject site is that the existing on-site parking stalls do ! not meet the required 30-foot setback. They are set 5-feet back from the front property line. 5. In 1987, ISD #621 obtained a nonconforming use permit to allow the existing five (5) foot front yard setback for the off-street parking area. At that time it was found that the site could not be altered in order to meet the required setback. That finding holds true today, as the parking lot cannot be reconfigured to meet the required setback without eliminating parking stalls. 6. The applicant is proposing to increase this nonconformity by expanding the existing parking area to provide additional parking stalls. The nonconformity is increased as the proposed addition to the parking lot is also set 5-feet back. 7. The City Council may allow the expansion of a nonconformity if the conditions of a variance are present. 8. Per Section 8-460.d. expansion of a Type IV nonconformity shall be called a nonconforming use variance. 9. In considering an application for a variance, the City must make the following findings: a. An undue hardship would be brought upon the applicant, should the variance be denied. 1:I$HAREDlCQUNCIL IR9Solulions\2000\<)dlNCOO-2, wpd