My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Council - 07/24/1984
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Council
>
1984
>
Agenda - Council - 07/24/1984
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/15/2025 11:18:05 AM
Creation date
3/27/2006 9:11:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Council
Document Date
07/24/1984
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
315
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
PROPOSED <br />FINDINGS OF FACT 00 <br />FOR DANIEL KUECHLE <br /> <br />1) That the applicant properly applied for a Board of Adjustment variance to <br />construct a detached accessory building larger than permitted by City Code in <br />front of the front setback of his principal structure. <br /> <br />2) That the setback of the proposed accessory building fron the front property <br />line will comply with City Code. <br /> <br />3) That the applicant appeared before the Board of Adjustment for a public hearing <br />pursuant to the City Zoning Ordinance on Juiy 24, 1984. That said public hearing <br />was properly advertised and the minutes of said public hearing are hereby <br />incorporated as a part of these findings by reference. <br /> <br />4) That the combined square footage of the attached and detached accessory <br />structures will not exceed the total allowable square footage for accessory buildings. <br /> <br />5) That the property is generally known as 15345 Sunfish Lake Blvd. N.W. and <br />is legally described as the North 250 feet of the South 544.5 feet of the Southwest <br />Quarter of the Northwest 0uarter of Section 23, Township 32, Range 25, Anoka <br />County. <br /> <br />6) That such a variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of <br />a substantial property right similar to that possessed by other properties in the <br />same district and in the same vicinity. <br /> <br />7) That the authorization of such a variance will not be of substantial detriment <br />to the adjacent properties and will not materially impair the intent and put'pose <br />of this ordinance or the public interest. <br /> <br />8) That the condition or situation of the specific piece of property is not so general <br />or reoccurant in nature as to make reasonably practicable the formulation of <br />a general regulation for such conditions or situations. <br /> <br />9) That the variance observes the spirit and intent of the ordinance and is not <br />contrary to the public interest. <br /> <br />10) That properly constructed, the structure will comply with the requirements <br />of the State Building Code. <br /> <br />ll) That the applicant has agreed to enter into a development agreement in <br />consideration of said variance. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.