No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.p. JAC Company Adopt Findings for Denial of Fence VarianceCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION City Council Meeting Date: May 2, 2000 AGENDA ITEM: JAC Company (Gent -Ryan) Variance Petition: AGENDA SECTION: Resolution overturning the Zoning Board Consent of Appeals & Adjustments. PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner AGENIWW%W� #6 P ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution overturning a decision by the APPROVED BY: Zoning Board of Appeals & Adjustments. Applicant & Property Owner: Location: Current Zoning (Gent -Ryan): Extreme Motor Sports: Board of Appeals & Adjustments: SUMMARY John Ryan 14785 S. Robert Trail C -2, Community Commercial (14745, 14755 S. Robert Trail) C-4, General Commercial (14785 S. Robert Trail) Variance granted with conditions (3 -1) Mr. Ryan has requested a variance to construct a fence along the perimeter of the former Extreme Motor Sports property along South Robert Trail, effectively expanding the Genz -Ryan site. The issue is that the fence would be six feet high to match the existing fence on the adjacent property on the north side. Mr. Ryan indicated at the March 14 meeting that barbed wire was not being requested. Fence heights are restricted to 42" in front yards. The current fence on the Genz Ryan property is considered to be non - conforming as are most of the other fences in the South Robert Trail area. PLANNING COMMISSION / BOARD OF APPEALS & ADJUSTMENTS PUBLIC HEARING The Planning Commission/Board of Appeals & Adjustments granted the variance with conditions based upon the length of time that the business had been established in Rosemount and that there currently were no plans to relocate elsewhere in the city. Staff was concerned that the variance granted was not based upon the findings required for variances (Section 14.2G), or applicable state statutes, and therefore may be viewed as an arbitrary decision which creates a precedent. Therefore, the Council adopted a resolution to conduct a public hearing to appeal the Board of Appeals & Adjustments decision. CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION The Council has directed staff to prepare findings for denial of the variance appeal based upon the draft findings presented at the April 18, 2000 Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt aresolution overturning a decision by the Zoning Board of Appeals & Adjustments. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: a • ` CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OVERTURNING A DECISION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS & ADJUSTMENTS WHEREAS, on March 28, 2000, the Planning Commission/Board of Appeals and Adjustments of the City of Rosemount (the `Board") considered a variance application (the "Application ") submitted by JAC Company; and WHEREAS, there were procedural issues arising from a tie vote on a motion arising from the Application; and WHEREAS, there is a need to clarify whether such approval and the conditions imposed upon such approval are lawful, enforceable, and binding on the City and JAC Company; and WHEREAS, the City Code permits review of certain Board decisions if there is an allegation of error in fact, procedure, or finding; and WHEREAS, the City's Zoning Administrator may appeal Board decisions under the City Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a resolution to review the Board decision regarding the Application; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on April 18, 2000 to consider the Board's decision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Rosemount hereby denies the variance requested by JAC Company based upon findings of fact: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The fence variance may result in additional detrimental impact to the aesthetics of the neighborhood. 2. The property is already developed with a building that is capable of supporting uses consistent with ordinance standards and policies in the comprehensive plan. 3. The applicant has not shown that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions that are unique to the property at 14785 South Robert Trail that distinguishes it from other properties in the area. 4. Other fences in the area with six foot heights in the front yards are non - conforming with ordinance standards. r Resolution 2000 - 5. Anticipated use of the property would have to be considered part of a wholesale business and supply center, otherwise, if it is a contractor yard with outdoor storage, it may be considered a non - conforming use which actually would be expanded with the addition of the fenced enclosure. ADOPTED this 2N day of May, 2000, by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. Cathy Busho, Mayor ATTEST: Linda J. Jentink, City Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Voted in favor: Voted against: Member absent: