My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
VN-225
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Commissions-OLD
>
PLANNING
>
Planning
>
Variance Files PLZ 02400
>
VN 201-300
>
VN-225
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/9/2007 6:39:15 AM
Creation date
3/8/2007 3:10:37 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
P.ESDLUTi~~! ~'?0 <br />`s <br />id c6 B4IrF;TO~ PLA~•~"!I"~G COh'h1ISSIGP! <br />.~ <br />RESOLUTION ~";A.KI~lG FIi!"Is1GS OF FP.CT P. h; r; RECD"'.P~E~dDING APPROVAL OF <br />VARIANCE APPLICATIO~d, V~L!-225 <br />!n-HEREAS, an application for a variance, Ufd-225 has been mae+E <br />by the City of ~'eF~! Brighton to construct a well house vrith less <br />than the rec~L~ired setback; and <br />WHEREAS, the procec!ural history of the application is as <br />follows: <br />1. That an application for a variance, Vir-225 was .filed witt <br />the City on December 1, 1982. <br />2. That tie Planning Commission, pursuant to published and <br />mailed notices, held a public hearing on December 21, <br />1982, all persons present at the hearing ~yere given an <br />opportunity to be heard. <br />?~0:-' TNE;;EFOP.E BE IT RESOL\'Ef' by the Planning Commission <br />that the follo~~!ina FindinQS of Fact are made. in respect to \~~!-22~ <br />1. That the property is zoned I-l, Light Industrial; <br />2. That the well construction is a result of a water <br />contamination problem facing t"e City creating a <br />unique circumstance; <br />3. T~;at the City's construction location of the structure <br />is strictly regulated by the ~"innesota health 7epartment <br />ar.d the undue hardship facing the Citv would be to <br />purchase additional property to meet the 60 feet setback <br />renuirement in the zonino code; <br />~. T~:at public facility structures are allowed in <br />residential districts and is therefore not considered <br />by the zonino code of being a typical industrial use; <br />5. That if subject building ±•.~as constructed on residentially <br />zoned property next to a residential district that the <br />6Q foot setback !•~ould not be applicable; <br />5. That the proposed building will have a 50 foot setback <br />and the adjacent structures on the adjoining property <br />are apartment garages; and <br />7. That the 10 foot variance ~yill therefore not adversely <br />affect adjacent properties. <br />Adopted this day of <br />ler'• <br />over S. !!illiams, Chairman <br />BE IT FURTHER RESOL~!E" that the application V„-2?_5 is and <br />hereby recommenled for approval. <br />Joan ". Arc"er, City Plainer <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.