Laserfiche WebLink
<br />RESOLUTION NO <br />STATE OF MINNESOTA <br />COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br />CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON <br />RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND GRANTING APPLICATION <br />FOR VARIANCE APPLICATION VN-207 <br />WHEREAS, An application for a Variance, VN-207, has been <br />made by Donald P. McGinn, 2303 14A Street, to permit the <br />eonstruction of a duplex with less than the required front , <br />yard, side yard, side street yard setbacks. <br />WHEREAS, The procedural history of the application is <br />as follows: <br />1. That an application for a variance, VN-207, was filed <br />with the City of New Brighton on July 11, 1979. <br />2. That such application was reviewed by the New Brighton <br />Planning Commission Board of Review on July l7, 1979._' <br />3. That the City Council, pursuant to published and mailed <br />notices, held a public hearing on August 14, 1979, all <br />persons present at the hearing were given an opportunity <br />to be heard. <br />4. The written comments and analysis of the City Staff, the <br />Planning Commission minutes and recommendations were <br />considered. <br />NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the New Brighton City <br />Council makes' the following Findings of Fact in respect to <br />VN-207. <br />1. That the lot is zoned R-2, Two Family Residential and <br />the lot has the necessary area and width. <br />2. The applicant warrants <br />a. that Lot 11 and Lot 5 of Stony Lake Addition are <br />the only two R-2 lots in the City of New Brighton <br />which are located between a street and a R-1 lot. <br />b. the side yard setback of 30 feet in place of the <br />customary 5 feet is discriminatory against this <br />duplex because the rule was devised as protection <br />for conditions which are n'ot present with the <br />proposed design. <br />c. the front yard setback of 30 feet is excessive <br />because the proposed design doss not block or <br />disrupt reasonable sight lines, and because the <br />proposed 20 feet allows 33 feet to park four cars <br />inside the property line by virtue of the shape of <br />the building. <br />d. the side street yard of 20 feet is discriminatory <br />against the duplex because the building on the , <br />R-1 lot (Lot 4) to the north is only required to <br />give 15 feet. <br />3. The applicant also warrants <br />a. that a front yard setback of 20 feet, a side yard <br />setback of 5 feet, and a street yard setback of <br />15 feet would allow very good sight lines because <br />of the angular placement of the structure. <br />b. that a similar application was reviewed by the <br />City of New Brighton Planning Commission and <br />found acceptable. <br />c. that a public hearing on the proposal solicited <br />only one, third party, comment and it was favorable <br />to the approval of this variance. <br /> <br />