My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7.9. SR 03-06-1995
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1995
>
03-06-1995
>
7.9. SR 03-06-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2007 2:25:30 PM
Creation date
12/20/2007 2:25:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
3/6/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
• CITY OF ELK RIVER <br />RESOLUTION 95- <br />A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO CITY CODE <br />AT 19922 ULYSSES STREET NW, FORA 356 SQUARE FOOT <br />VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM SIZE OF ACCESSORY <br />STRUCTURE AREA. <br />CASE NO. V 94-18 <br />WHEREAS, Paul LeFebvre has petitioned for a variance to exceed the <br />maximum size of accessory structure area at 19922 Ulysses Street NW, on <br />property legally described as: <br />Lot 1, Block 2, Knollwood West 2nd Addition <br />WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Elk River makes the <br />following findings: <br />1. There are special conditions affecting said property such that <br />• the strict application of the City Code would deprive the <br />applicant of reasonable use of this land. <br />2. Literal enforcement of the ordinance would cause unnecessary <br />hardship by not allowing the applicant to construct an addition <br />to his existing detached garage to store his motor home. <br />3. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the <br />health, safety, or welfare of the residents of the City of Elk <br />River. <br />4. A precedent has been established for similar sized detached <br />buildings within the immediate area, therefore, this proposal <br />would not be out of character for the neighborhood. <br />5. This variance is necessary for the preservation of and enjoyment <br />of a substantial property right of the petitioner. <br />6. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the <br />public welfare nor injurious to the other property in the <br />neighborhood. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.