Agenda - Council - 12/11/2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

'1 I I I I I I '1 I I I I I I I I I FINDINGS OF FACT 0095 MR. ~RRY RENDRIKSEN 1) That the applicant has applied for a Board of Adjustment variance to con- struct two accessory buildings which have a total area larger than allowed by City Ordinance. 2) 7hat the applicant appeared before the Board of Adjustment for a public bearing on Dec(m~er 11, 1984, and that said public hearing was properly adver- tised and that the minutes of said public hearing are hereby incorporated as a part of these findings by reference. 3) That the applicant's property is generally known as 15631 Ramsey Blvd. NW and is located in the R-1 district. 4) That the applicant's property is approximately seven acres in size. 5) That the applicant's request is to construct two accessory structures. One structure is to be approximately 286 square feet and will serve as a loafing shed for the applicant's horses. ~he other accessory structure will be approxi- mately 24' x 48' (1,152 square feet) and will serve as a machine shed for the applicant's personal property. ~he total square footage of the proposed acces- sory buildings is approximately 1,438 square feet. ~he applicant has an exist- ing accessory structure of 2,400 square feet and a detached single car 9arage of 200 square feet, for a total of 2,600 square feet. 6) That the City Ordinance restricts the total square footage of all accessory buildings to a maxim~ of 1,200 square feet on parcels of land larger than 2 1/2 acres. 7) That the applicant has stated that the variance is requested in order to provide protection from the el~nents for his horses and machinery. 8) That there are not exceptional, unique or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the property in question as to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning dis- trict. 9) That such variance may be necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the same district and in the same vicinity. ~e possibility of increased financial return shall not in itself be de~med sufficient to warrant a variance. 10) That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property and will not materially impair the intent or purpose of this ordinance or the public interest. 11) That the condition or situation of the specific piece of property, or the intended use of said property for which the variance is sought, is not of so general or recurrent a nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of a general regulation for such conditions or situation.