HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-262CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-262
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A
GARAGE ADDITION AT 700 QUEENSLAND LANE. (2004046)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Dan Foy and Julie Brennan for a side yard setback
variance to allow constriction of a garage addition at 700 Queensland Lane, for property legally
described as follows:
Lot 12, Block 1, Fazendin Krogness Addition, 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 Dan Foy
and Julie Brennan for a side yard setback variance to allow constriction of a garage addition,
subject to the following conditions:
1. This resolution approves a variance for a side yard setback variance to allow constriction of a
garage addition at 700 Queensland Lane, in accordance with the plans and application
received by the City on April '10, 2004, except as amended by this resolution.
2. The variance is approved with the finding that the applicable variance standards are met.
Specifically:
a) The home is angled on the lot to allow the front of the home to match the curve of the
street. The home is also set closer to the north property line, with a side yard setback of
25.4 feet to the north and 37.5 feet to the south, which results in less area for the garage
addition. The variance would allow the owner to constrict a garage addition that blends
into their existing home.
Resolution 2004-262
(2004046)
Page 2 of 3
b) The property is unique due to the position of the home on the lot, which is closer to the
north lot line and angled to line up with the curve of the street. Generally, other
properties in the RSF-I zoning district do not have these issue which would prevent the
constriction of a modest -sized garage addition.
c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the value or income
potential of the property. The proposal would allow the applicant to constrict a modest,
functional garage addition that would blend with the design of their home.
d) The conditions relating to the hardship were not created by the applicant, but rather were
created by the original constriction of the home in 1968, prior to the current Zoning
Ordinance.
e) Granting the variance would result in a minor encroachment into the side yard setback.
There would be a 32.8 feet between the closest part of the addition and the garage of the
adjacent home. As noted, the majority of the addition would comply with the setback
requirements, with the exception of the rear corner. The addition would be constricted to
match the design of the existing garage and would not detract from the appearance of the
home or surrounding properties. In addition, there are existing trees that would provide
screening between the garages.
f) The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, or
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 garage addition proposed by the applicant is modest in size (3 12 square feet) and is
the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship and to improve the functionality of
the garage for the homeowners. The alternatives to the variance present difficulties with
the usefulness of the garage and with blending the garage into the architectural design of
the home.
3. The building materials of the addition shall match the exterior materials of the home.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall identify and mark the property irons
for the side property line to the north.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per
Ordinance provisions.
6. 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
Resolution 2004-262
(2004046)
Page 3 of 3
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 July 13, 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 July 13, 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