RES 26-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Application, does not account for possible design alternatives which would not require a variance. 7. City Code § 30-635 describes the findings required for approval of a variance. The Application and proposed project do not meet the required findings in City Code, specifically City Code § 30-635 (c) (2), as provided below: City Code § 30-635 (c) (2): (2) The plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to the property not a consequence of the petition's own action or inaction; and The Applicant noted in their Application that the variance was necessary due to an existing ingress/egress easement that must be maintained to ensure access for the properties to the east. The project proposal can be modified to account for the easements presence and does not require the variance. The plight is due to the petition's own action, and should not be granted. 8. Taking into consideration all the testimony and evidence received, including statements from the applicant, staff reports, and the findings of the Board of Adjustments, the City Council finds that the plight stated in the Application is a consequence of the petition's own action. The Applicant has not established that they meet the requirements for a variance. DECISION NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA, based upon the information received and the above Findings, the City Council of the City of Elk River hereby denies the Variance Application V 25-21, requested a reduction to the number of parking spaces required per residential unit when developing an apartment building and a six-foot encroachment into the wetland buffer strip setback at 17379 Twin Lakes Road NW, Elk River, MN. Passed and adopted this 201h day of January 2026. ATTEST: Jolene Richter, Deputy City Clerk _ ��V/j n J. iet ayor ®IIIII I NATURE