08/23/90 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Commissioner moved the adoption of the following findings of fact: PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT VARIANCE: REAR YARD SETBACK 35-32-25-22-0010 14059 SUNFISH LAKE BLVD. N.W. August 10, 1990 That Paul Burzynsld, representative of CAPCO, hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", has properly applied for a Board of Adjustment variance from Section 170.016I regarding rear yard setback requirements in the I-I Industrial District for the property generally known as 14059 Sunfish Lake Blvd. N.W. and legally described as follows: The West 169.41 feet of Tract C Registered Land Survey No. 30, files of Registrar of Titles, County of Anoka. Excepting from Tract C, Parcel 7A of Anoka County Highway Right-of-Way Plat No. 1 according to the recorded plat thereof. That the Applicant appeared before the Board of Adjustment for a public hearing pursuant to Section 170.013G of the Ramsey City Code on August 23, 1990 and that said public hearing was properly advertised and that the minutes of said public hearing are hereby incorporated as a part of these findings by reference. That the subject property is zoned I-1 Industrial and is approximately one acre in size. 4. That the subject property is surrounded by I-1 Industrial zoning. That Section 170.016I of the Ramsey City Code requires a rear yard setback in the I-1 Industrial zone of 35 feet. o That the existing facility developed on the site in 1984 was constructed with a 20 foot rear yard setback. That the Applicant is proposing to expand the manufacturing facility on the subject property in accordance with the dimensions of the existing facility and rear yard setback. That Section 170.015H of the Ramsey City Code states that non-conforming structures are permitted to continue to exist and any expansion of a non-conforming structure must conform to City Code or obtain a variance in accordance with City Code. That there is a unique circumstance applying to the subject property that does not generally apply to other properties in the district; namely, that in 1984 the existing facility was allowed to be developed on the site with a 20 foot rear yard setback. 10. That such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the I-1 Industrial District, namely the cability to expand the existing facility on the site in accordance with I-1 Industrial District regulations with the exception of rear yard setback which is a pm-existing condition. 11. That the unique circumstance on the subject property does not result from the actions of the Applicant. 12. That if granted, the variance will not grant the Applicant any special privilege that is denied to other owners of lands, structures or buildings in the same district.