HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-095CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-095
APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE 25 -PERCENT MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE
REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 400 -SQUARE
FOOT ADDITION FOR JAMES AND DEBRA MCGILL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
17220 19TH AVENUE NORTH (2004009)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by James and Debra McGill requesting approval of a
variance for 28.5 percent impervious surface coverage where the Zoning Ordinance requires a
maximum of 25 percent, and
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as follows:
Lot 1, Block 3, Oakdale West, 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 of James
and Debra McGill for a variance to allow 28.5 percent impervious surface, for property located at
17220 19t11 Avenue North., subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. This variance is granted in accordance with the plans received by the City on February 3,
2004, except as may be amended by this resolution.
2. The variance is granted based upon findings that the applicable variance standards have been
met, as follows:
a) The 25 -percent maximum impervious surface requirement is designed to limit the creation
of stormwater run-off to improve the water quality of Kraetz Lake. However, the subject
property does not drain to Kraetz Lake. Consequently, the regulation does not produce
the intended benefit and limits the ability of the property owners to expand their living
area. In addition, as the subject property drains to a pond, the additional impervious
Resolution 2004-095
(2004009)
Page 2
surface would have minimal impact to the downstream water quality. The regulation
therefore creates a particular hardship to the owner, rather than a mere inconvenience.
b) The conditions relating to the hardship are not generally applicable to other properties in
the Shoreland Management Overlay districts because most properties within an overlay
district drain to the public water that the regulation is designed to protect. In addition,
most of the properties developed prior to the adoption of the shoreland regulations did not
include drainage ponds to improve the water -quality prior to discharge into public waters.
c) The request is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the
property but rather to increase the livability of the home.
d) The hardship is caused by the Zoning Ordinance and was not self-created. The shoreland
regulations were applied after the subdivision was created and do not take into account
the drainage pattern in this area.
e) Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land or improvements in the neighborhood as neither the drainage pattern nor the water
quality of either Kraetz or Gleason Lakes would be materially affected. Granting the
variance would allow the applicant to make improvements to the property which would
contribute to the surrounding property values.
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 applicant has requested the minimum variance to eliminate the hardship. The
proposed addition is not excessive and does not impact to the water quality of Kraetz
Lake.
3. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the property irons adjacent to the proposed
constriction shall be located and exposed and the setback to the proposed addition confirmed.
4. Building permits shall be obtained prior to constriction of the addition.
5. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the applicant has
substantially started constriction of the project, or unless the applicant has received prior
approval from the City to extend the expiration date for up to one additional year, as
regulated under Section 2 103 0. 06 of the Zoning Ordinance.
ADOPTED by the City Council on March 9, 2004.
Resolution 2004-095
(2004009)
Page 3
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 March 9, 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