Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2007-166CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION 2007-166 APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 6 -FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK WHERE 15 FEET IS REQUIRED TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A THREE -CAR GARAGE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 910 GARLAND LANE NORTH (2007017) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Lake Country Builders to allow a 6 -foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required to allow constriction of a three -car garage for property legally described as follows: Lot 9, Block 3, City View Acres 2" a Unit, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called public meeting and recommends approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLYMOUTH, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby does approve the request by Lake Country Builders for a variance to allow a 6 -foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required to allow constriction of a three -car garage for property located at 910 Garland Lane North, subject to the following conditions: 1. This resolution approves a variance for a 6 -foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required to allow constriction of a three -car garage, in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on February 22, 2007, and revised plans received on March 5, 2007, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The variance to allow a detached garage in a front yard and the variance for impervious surface coverage are approved with the finding that the applicable variance standards are met. Specifically: a) The only viable option to build a new garage on the property is on the front side of the home. The applicant's current two -car garage is in the rear yard area. The existing driveway access to the garage is on a steep slope around the side of the home. This situation poses a unique hardship to the owners during winter months when the driveway is slippery. Constricting the new garage would allow the property owners Resolution 2007-166 (2007017) Page 2 of 3 convert the existing garage into living space and remove their existing driveway, which would reduce impervious surface on the lot. b) The applicant's home was constricted closer to the north side lot line. If the home were centered on the lot there would be enough space to meet the setback requirement. Staff finds that the placement of the home on the lot limits the opportunities for additional garage space and creates a hardship. c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential of the property. The proposal would allow the addition of a three -stall garage and home addition for the convenience and improved livability of the property owners, and would not detract from the appearance of the home or surrounding properties. The applicant would constrict the garage with materials and design compatible with the exterior of the home. d) The hardship is caused by the Zoning Ordinance and has not been self-created. The existing home was constricted off -center on the lot with the attached garage in the rear yard. This condition was not created by the applicants, as the home was constricted in 1952 and the applicants purchased the home in 2003. e) Granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The closest stricture to the proposed garage is the neighboring garage to the north. The two garages would be 32 feet apart. The proposed garage would not be viewable from the neighboring home to the north. The applicant has also proposed a window on the north side of the garage facing the neighboring property to the north to improve the side view of the garage. f) The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, nor would it substantially increase the congestion of the public streets, or increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety, or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. g) The variance request is reasonable based upon the unique conditions of the parcel. Therefore, the requested variances represent the minimum action necessary to alleviate the hardship. The property is in an older part of the City and this application strikes a balance between a positive improvement of an older property and meeting the letter of the Zoning requirements. 3. A building permit is required prior to any construction. 4. Prior to building permit final inspection, the applicant shall remove all bituminous surfaces indicated for removal on the survey. 5. Adjacent paved streets shall be kept free of mud, sand, and silt as a result of constriction. Resolution 2007-166 (2007017) Page 3 of 3 6. The addition shall comply with all standards specified for the RSF-I (Residential Single Family Detached 1) zoning district. No other variances are granted or implied. 7. The building materials of the garage shall match the exterior materials of the home. 8. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per Ordinance provisions. 9. This variance approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or applicant has substantially started constriction of the project, or unless the landowner or applicant has received prior approval from the City to extend the expiration date for up to one additional year, as regulated under Section 21030.06 of the Zoning Ordinance. Adopted by the City Council on April 10, 2007. STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS. The undersigned, being the duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Plymouth, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at a meeting of the Plymouth City Council on April 10, 2007, with the original thereof on file in my office, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. WITNESS my hand officially as such City Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this day of City Clerk