Laserfiche WebLink
17. That the Applicant has stated that historically, he has been able to determine that the Subject <br /> Property was regraded after the flood of 1965 and prior to 1974 so that the highest elevation <br /> is approximately 100 feet from the river and the topography then declines toward the center <br /> of the lot and then rises again towards Bowers Drive. <br /> <br />18. That the Applicant has stated that the proposed house pad location is best for the following <br /> reasons: <br /> <br />a) places structure at maximum elevation; <br />b) provides excellent spacing for future well and 1 st and 2nd alternative drainfields; <br />c) maintains established character of neighborhood; <br />d) prevents the need to remove 3 mature and healthy oak trees; <br />e) prevents placing the initial drainfield in an area flooded with backwaters in 1965 and <br /> 1997; <br />f) prevent the need for fill and contour adjustments for a house pad, which would be an <br /> unnecessary hardship. <br /> <br />19. That if granted, the variance will not allow any use which is neither a permitted or a <br /> conditional use in the land use district in which the Subject Property is located. <br /> <br />20. That similar variances have been granted in the Critical River Overlay District. <br /> <br />21. That there are exceptional circumstances unique to the Subject Property which were not <br /> created by the Applicant: a) the Subject Property was a saleable, buildable lot when the <br /> Applicant purchased it in 1978; and b) the amendment to the critical river rules in 1985 <br /> regarding duo-ownership rendered the Subject Property non-buildable; while four other <br /> similarly sized lots not in duo-ownership have been developed since that time; c) grading on <br /> the property prior to the Applicant taking ownership resulted in the house pad location under <br /> today's standards being in an area that has proven susceptible to flooding in prior years. <br /> <br />22. That the strict enforcement of Section 9.21.07 of the Ramsey City Code will result in <br /> unnecessary hardship to the Applicant. <br /> <br />23. That if granted, the variance is not contrary to the purpose and intent of Section 9.21.07 of <br /> the Ramsey City Code. <br /> <br />24. That if granted, the variance will not alter the essential character of the area. <br /> <br />25. That if granted, the variance will not adversely impact the degree of public health, safety and <br /> general welfare provided for in the Ramsey City Code <br /> <br />26. That if granted, the variance will not unreasonably increase the congestion in the public <br /> street. <br /> <br /> <br />