Res 2019- 30 Variance 916 Adeline CourtCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2019-30
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 916 ADELINE COURT
(PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-08)
WHEREAS, Breanna Zarmbinski & Paul Shrewsbury (as "Applicant") applied for a
variance for the property located at 916 Adeline Court (the "Subject Property"), and legally
described on attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided LR -Low Density Residential in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and is located in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant is seeking a variance to encroach 8.8 -ft. into the 30 -ft. front
yard setback standard in the R-1 One Family district, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-
08; and
WHEREAS, Title 12-1L-5 of the City Code (Variances) allows for the Council to grant
variances or certain modifications from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code,
and impose conditions and safeguards with variances if so needed or granted: and
WHEREAS, on April 23, 2019, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public
hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item
with staff and the Applicant, the Planning Commission recommended favorably (by 3-2 vote) to
approve the application for a Variance, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-08, with certain
findings of fact to support such denial.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the
recommendation from the Planning Commission is hereby affirmed, and the Variance application
proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-08 is hereby approved, with the following findings of fact
and conditions:
A. Under Title 12 -1L -5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from
the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are
"practical difficulties" in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code.
"Practical difficulties" consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use
the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the
plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute
"practical difficulties."
B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite "practical
difficulties" in order to justify the granting of the Variance for reduced setbacks,
by:
i.) the proposed matching and small-scale addition to the existing home is a
reasonable use of the property;
ii.) the curvature of the front property line of the subject property creates a unique
situation for the owners to add on to the home on the front area of the house;
iii.)approving the Variance does not change the essential character of the
neighborhood, as this residential area will not be affected by the approval of the
Variance; and
iv.) the reason for the Variance request is to allow a suitable and reasonable addition
to the front -yard space of the property, and for this reason the request is not
solely based on economic considerations.
C. The City has considered the factors required by Title 12 -1L -5E1 of the City Code,
including but not limited to the effect of the Variance upon the health, safety, and
welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of
the Variance on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value
of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has
determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the
neighborhood or the community in general.
D. Approval of this Variance is for 916 Adeline Court only, and does not apply or give
precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance
applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a
variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by City staff and
legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code.
E. The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning
Case No. 2019-08, dated and presented April 23, 2019 (and on file with the City of
Mendota Heights), is hereby fully incorporated into Resolution No. 2019-30.
F. The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject
to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly
Res 2019-30 Page 2
proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this
transaction are as follows:
i.) The proposed encroachment for the addition shall not extend further than 8.8 -
feet into the required 30 -foot front -yard setback, as illustrated on the survey and
site plan included in the application submittal (per Planning Case File No. 2019-
08).
ii.) The new addition, including the roofline, will match the overall architecture and
design of the existing residential dwelling.
iii.) Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to and during
grading and construction work activities.
iv.) All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable
federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the
City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
v.) Within one year of approval by the City Council, the Applicant shall obtain a
building permit for construction of the proposed porch/foyer addition.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Variance
application for the property located at 916 Adeline Court, as proposed under Planning Case No.
2019-08, is hereby approved.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of May, 2019.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
ATTEST:
j4-
�L,2
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Res 2019-30 Page 3
Exhibit A
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 916 Adeline Court
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118
PID No. 27-71275-02-250
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot Twenty-five (25), Block Two (2), South Ridge, Dakota County, Minnesota
Res 2019-30 Page 4
Receipt:# 603770 3304064
VR '4600 I 11 I11 IIIII 1II 11I 111 1IIII 111
Recorded on: 5/9/2019 12:36 PM
By: DRA, Deputy
Office of the County Recorder
Dakota County, Minnesota
Amy A. Koethe, County Recorder
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2019-30
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 916 ADELINE COURT
(PLANNING CASE NO. 2019-08)
WHEREAS, Breanna Zarmbinski & Paul Shrewsbury (as "Applicant") applied for a
variance for the property located at 916 Adeline Court (the "Subject Property"), and legally
described on attached Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the Subject Property is guided LR -Low Density Residential in the 2030
Comprehensive Plan and is located in the R-1 One Family Residential District; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant is seeking a variance to encroach 8.8 -ft. into the 30 -ft. front
yard setback standard in the R-1 One Family district, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-
08; and
WHEREAS, Title 12-1L-5 of the City Code (Variances) allows for the Council to grant
variances or certain modifications from the strict application of the provisions of the City Code,
and impose conditions and safeguards with variances if so needed or granted: and
WHEREAS, on April 23, 2019, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public
hearing on this matter, and whereupon closing the hearing and follow-up discussion on this item
with staff and the Applicant, the Planning Commission recommended favorably (by 3-2 vote) to
approve the application for a Variance, as proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-08, with certain
findings of fact to support such denial.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the
recommendation from the Planning Commission is hereby affirmed, and the Variance application
proposed under Planning Case No. 2019-08 is hereby approved, with the following findings of fact
and conditions:
A. Under Title 12-1 L -5A of the City Code, the Council may only grant variances from
the strict application of the provisions of the Code in cases where there are
"practical difficulties" in carrying out the strict letter of the regulations of the Code.
"Practical difficulties" consists of a three-part test: (i) the Applicant proposes to use
the property in a reasonable manner not otherwise permitted by the Code; (ii) the
plight of the Applicant is due to circumstances unique to the property not created
by the Applicant; and (iii) the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential
character of the neighborhood. Economic considerations alone do not constitute
"practical difficulties."
B. The Applicant has met the burden of demonstrating the requisite "practical
difficulties" in order to justify the granting of the Variance for reduced setbacks,
by:
i.) the proposed matching and small-scale addition to the existing home is a
reasonable use of the property;
ii.) the curvature of the front property line of the subject property creates a unique
situation for the owners to add on to the home on the front area of the house;
iii.)approving the Variance does not change the essential character of the
neighborhood, as this residential area will not be affected by the approval of the
Variance; and
iv.) the reason for the Variance request is to allow a suitable and reasonable addition
to the front -yard space of the property, and for this reason the request is not
solely based on economic considerations.
C. The City has considered the factors required by Title 12 -1L -5E1 of the City Code,
including but not limited to the effect of the Variance upon the health, safety, and
welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect of
the Variance on the danger of fire and the risk to public safety, and upon the value
of properties in the surrounding area, and upon the Comprehensive Plan, and has
determined this Variance will not affect or pose any negative impacts upon the
neighborhood or the community in general.
D. Approval of this Variance is for 916 Adeline Court only, and does not apply or give
precedential value to any other properties throughout the City. All variance
applicants must apply for and provide a project narrative to the City to justify a
variance. All variance requests must be reviewed independently by City staff and
legal counsel under the requirements of the City Code.
E. The factual findings and analysis found in the Planning Staff Report for Planning
Case No. 2019-08, dated and presented April 23, 2019 (and on file with the City of
Mendota Heights), is hereby fully incorporated into Resolution No. 2019-30.
F. The City has the authority to place reasonable conditions upon the property subject
to his Variance request. Conditions must be directly related to and roughly
Res 2019-30 Page 2
proportional to the impact created by the variance. Conditions related to this
transaction are as follows:
i.) The proposed encroachment for the addition shall not extend further than 8.8 -
feet into the required 30 -foot front -yard setback, as illustrated on the survey and
site plan included in the application submittal (per Planning Case File No. 2019-
08).
ii.) The new addition, including the roofline, will match the overall architecture and
design of the existing residential dwelling.
iii.)Full erosion and sedimentation measures will be put in place prior to and during
grading and construction work activities.
iv.) All grading and construction activity will be in compliance with applicable
federal, state, and local regulations and codes, as well as in compliance with the
City's Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
v.) Within one year of approval by the City Council, the Applicant shall obtain a
building permit for construction of the proposed porch/foyer addition.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that the Variance
application for the property located at 916 Adeline Court, as proposed under Planning Case No.
2019-08, is hereby approved.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of May, 2019.
ATTEST:
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
Drafted by: City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Neil Garlock, Mayor
.03
4
t v
Res 2019-30 Page 3
Exhibit A
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 916 Adeline Court
Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118
PID No. 27-71275-02-250
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot Twenty-five (25), Block Two (2), South Ridge, Dakota County, Minnesota
Res 2019-30 Page 4
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) S.S.
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS )
I, Lorri Smith, being the duly appointed City Clerk of the City of Mendota Heights, do
hereby certify that the attached Resolution is an exact copy of the resolution on file in
my office adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council.
Signed and sealed by my hand on this 9th day of May, 2019.