HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-236CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-236
APPROVING VARIANCES FOR KTB HOMES, INC. FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF A NON-
CONFORMING LOT AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE, FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 10550 SOUTH SHORE DRIVE (2004052)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by KTB Homes, Inc. which requests approval of
variances for redevelopment of a non -conforming lot and impervious surface coverage to allow
constriction of a new single-family home for property legally described as follows:
Lot 3, Block 2, Medicine Lake Park First Division, 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 KTB
Homes, Inc. for variances for redevelopment of a non -conforming lot and impervious surface
coverage to allow constriction of a new single-family home at 10550 South Shore Drive, subject
to the following conditions:
1. This resolution approves variances to allow 1) redevelopment of an existing lot of record that
is non -conforming due to lot width, and 2) impervious surface coverage of roughly 32
percent, in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on May 14, 2004,
except as may be amended by this resolution.
2. The variances are approved with the findings that the applicable variance standards are met, as
follows:
a) The subject lot is an existing lot of record that was created prior to modern zoning and
subdivision regulations. The applicant is proposing to improve the property by removing
two small cabins in ill repair and subsequently constricting a new single-family home on
Resolution 2004-236
(2004052)
Page 2 of 3
the lot. The long and narrow shape of the lot, together with the desire to maintain the
neighborhood character by placing the home adjacent to the neighboring homes, results in
a site plan that exceeds the allowable lot coverage. Without the variances, the lot could
not be redeveloped in a reasonable manner in keeping with the established neighborhood
character.
b) The circumstances related to this request are not generally applicable to other properties in
the RSF-2 district. The Medicine Lake Park lit Addition where this lot is located is
unique due to its several non -conforming lots that were originally platted in the early
1900's, prior to modern zoning and subdivision regulations. That original platting
established a lot configuration that does not serve the needs of present day land use, unless
variances are granted.
c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential.
The proposal would allow the applicant to build a new single-family home on this
residentially zoned lot, replacing two old cabins in poor condition.
d) The conditions relating to the hardship were not created by the applicant, but rather were
created by the original platting of the lot in the early 1900's.
e) The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
neighborhood. Many lots in this neighborhood have a similar lot width and exceed 25
percent impervious surface coverage. Additionally, the size, location and style of the
proposed home would be compatible with the neighborhood.
f) The proposal would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties,
increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, or diminish property values within
the neighborhood. The proposed home would meet or exceed all setback requirements for
homes located in the RSF-2 zoning district.
g) The request is reasonable and strikes a balance between allowing redevelopment to occur
while preserving neighborhood character and minimizing the extent of the variations
needed to alleviate the hardship.
3. Any changes or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per Ordinance
provisions.
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 Section 2 103 0. 06 of the Zoning Ordinance.
ADOPTED by the City Council on June 22, 2004.
Resolution 2004-236
(2004052)
Page 3 of 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 June 22, 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