Laserfiche WebLink
r ~ <br /> <br />C~ <br />i~ ; <br />~~ RESOLUTIOW NO <br />'' STATE OF MINNESOTA <br />,~ COUNTY OF RAMSEY <br />CITY OF NEW BRIG!-,TON <br />t <br />i RESOLUTION t~iAKI^JG FINCINGS OF FACT AND APPROVItdG APPLICATIOtJ FOR VARIANCE, <br />VPJ-225 <br />!+,'~;EkEAS, an application for a variance entitled UN-225 has been made by <br />the City of ~'ew Brighton to construct a well house with less than the required <br />side yard setback; and <br />WHEREAS, t"e procedural history of the application is as follows: <br />1. That an application for variance, VN-225 was filed avith the City of Newt <br />Brighton on ?ecember 1, 1982. <br />2. T'-:at the Planning Commission, pursuant to published .and mailed notices, <br />geld a public hearing on December 21, 1982, all persons present at the <br />hearing were given an opportunity to be heard. <br />3. That such application was reviewed by the City Council on December 28, <br />182. ~ <br />4. Tye written comments and analysis of the city staff, the Planning <br />Commission minutes and recommendations were considered.- <br />(~101~r TyEREFORE 8E IT RESOLVED, that the New Brighton City Council makes they <br />following Findings of Fact in respect to '~t~-225: <br />1. That the property is zoned I-1, Light Industrial; <br />2. That the well construction is a result of a water contamination problem <br />facing the City creating a unia,ue circumstance; <br />3. That the City's construction location. of the structure is strictly re- <br />gulated by t"e P~,innesota ~-iealt" Department and the undue hards,~ip facing <br />the City would be to purc~ase additional pranerty to meet the 50 feet <br />setback requirement in the zoning code; <br />4. That public facility structures are allo~~led in residential districts and <br />is therefore not considered by the zoning code of being a typical <br />industrial use; <br />B. That if subject building was constructer on residentiall! zoned property <br />next to a residential district that the 60 foot setback would not be <br />applicable; <br />c. Trat the proposed building will have a 50 foot setback and the adjacent' <br />structures on the adjoinir.o property are apartment garages; and <br />7. That the 10 foot variance brill therefore not adversely affect adjacent <br />properties. <br />adopted t..is <br />da~~ of <br />.1982, <br />~reaory B. !;arcus, `~'ayor ; <br />ATTEST: <br />. Janes !:. Fornel 1 , Ci t~~ 'tanager <br />John R. Grau, Acting City Clerk <br />tSFALi <br />B:. IT F!;RTFER ?ESOLVEL, that the application t!Pi-225 is hereby approved. <br />h' <br />