Resolution - #98-07-144 - 07/07/1998

Home

Board Member Bawden introduced the following resolution and moved for its adoption: RESOLUTION #98-07-144 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT #0462 RELATING TO A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM STREET FRONTAGE OR LOT WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WHEREAS, Jerry and Janice Melberg, hereinafter referred to as "Applicants", have properly applied for a Board of Adjustment variance from the minimum lot width requirement established in Section 9.20.11 of the Ramsey City Code in order to construct a dwelling on the following legally described property: The west 475.2 feet of the east 650 feet of the south 275 feet of the north 575 feet of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 32, Range 25 (as measured along the North and East Lines thereof); except the road; subject to easement of record. (" Subject Property") NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF RAMSEY, ANOKA COUNTY, STATE OF MINNESOTA, as follows: That the Applicants appeared before the Board of Adjustment for a public hearing pursuant to Section 9.03.05 of the Ramsey City Code on July 7, 1998, and that said public hearing was properly advertised and that the minutes of said public hearing are hereby incorporated a part of these findings by reference. is zoned R-1 Rural Residential and is approximately 3 acres in 2. That the Subject Property size. 3. That the Subject Property is surrounded by R-1 Rural Residential zoning. o That Section 9.11.01 of the Ramsey City Code states that no lot shall contain any building used as a dwelling unless it has the minimum lot width; Section 9.20.11 states that the minimum lot width in the Rural Residential District is 200 feet; Section 9.02 defines lot width as the width measured at the property line abutting the street and in no case shall street frontages in the Rural area be less than 200 feet. 5. That the Applicants are proposing that a single family dwelling be constructed on the Subject Property. o That the Subject Property is landlocked and has no frontage on a public road and the literal interpretation of City Code Section 9.11.01 would prohibit the development of a single family dwelling on the Subject Property and therein deprive the Applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district, resulting in an undue hardship.