HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-038CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-038
APPROVING SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND VARIANCE TO ALLOW A GARAGE
DOOR AND A 9 -FOOT DRIVE AISLE SETBACK, WHERE 15 FEET IS REQUIRED, FOR A
LOADING AREA LOCATED AT 15020 -27TH AVENUE NORTH. (2003134)
WHEREAS, Insurance Advisors Inc. has requested approval of a site plan amendment and drive
aisle setback variance for property legally described as:
Lot 10, Block 2, Circle Star Business Center 2"a Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof,
and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said 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
Insurance Advisors Inc. for a site plan amendment and drive aisle setback variance for property
located at 15020-27"' Avenue North, subject to the following conditions:
1. A site plan amendment and variance is approved to allow installation of a garaged door and a
9 -foot drive aisle setback variance for a loading area located at 15020-27"' Avenue North, in
accordance with the plans received by the City on December 11, 2003, except as amended by
this resolution.
2. A variance is approved to allow a 9 -foot drive aisle setback where 15 feet is the minimum
setback specified by the Zoning Ordinance, based on the finding that:
a) The existing conditions of the property result in a particular hardship to the owner, if the
strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. The applicant's property has front
Resolution 2004-038
File No. 2003134
Page 2
yards on the west and south sides of the building. The rear yard is located on the east side
of the building and contains the existing loading dock doors for the property. The
applicant looked into the possibility of adding ramps to the existing loading dock doors on
the east side of the building. However, due to the roughly 4 -foot change in grade from the
floor level of the building to the parking lot, the applicant would have to install ramps that
would extend into the existing parking lot. Therefore, the only other feasible location for
the drive aisle is as proposed with the variance.
b) The circumstance upon which the petition for the variance is requested is unique to the
parcel. Due to the existing layout of the building on the site, there are no other locations
for the loading area to gain access to the building at floor level. The variance request is
based on the need to increase the functionality of the property with the addition of a
loading area.
c) The purpose of the variance is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or
income potential of the parcel of land. The variance request is necessary to allow a loading
area with a gradual incline for forklifts to gain access to the building.
d) The circumstances surrounding the variance request were not created by the current owner,
but rather were an existing condition from when the building was constricted.
e) The proposed improvements would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
other land in the neighborhood. The proposed setback would still provide 9 feet of
separation between the dive aisle and the north (side) property line. The adjacent building
to the north does not have any windows on the south side and therefore would not be
adversely impacted.
f) The proposed improvements would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property, endanger public safety, increase congestion of the public streets, increase
danger of fire or substantially diminish property values in the neighborhood.
g) The requested variance would be the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship.
3. The exterior materials and color of the garage door must match the existing building.
4. This 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 Sections 21030.06 and 21045.09 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Resolution 2004-038
File No. 2003134
Page 3
ADOPTED by the City Council on January 27, 2004.
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 January 27, 2004 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