HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-387CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-387
APPROVING VARIANCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF AN UNDERSIZED LOT TO
ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AT 2725 KIRKWOOD
LANE NORTH (2004083)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Sherri Werner, representing Re/Max Results, which
requests approval of variances to allow redevelopment of an undersized lot for property legally
described as follows:
Lot 6, Block 3, Elmhurst Lakeview, 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 Sherry
Warner, representing Re/Max Results, for variances to allow redevelopment of an undersized lot
to allow constriction of a new single-family home at 2725 Kirkwood Lane North, subject to the
following conditions:
1. This resolution approves variances to allow development of an undersized lot, in accordance
with the plans and application received by the City on June 28, 2004, except as amended by
this resolution.
2. The variances for undersized lot is approved with the finding that the applicable variance
standards are met. Specifically:
a) The subject lot is an existing lot of record created prior to modern zoning and
subdivision regulations. The applicant is proposing to make the best use of the
property by constricting a new, modest -sized home. Without granting of the
variance, the lot could not be redeveloped.
Resolution 2004-387
(2004083)
Page 2 of 3
b) The circumstances related to this request are not generally applicable to other
properties in the RSF-2 district. The Elmhurst Lakeview neighborhood is unique due
to its non -conforming lots that were originally platted in the early 1900's, prior to
modern zoning and subdivision regulations. The original platting established a lot
configuration that would not allow constriction of a home on the property, unless
variances are granted.
c) The request is not based upon a desire to increase value or income potential. The
applicant purchased an existing platted lot of record that previously contained a house.
The proposal would allow the applicant to build a new home on a lot that is vacant
due to a demolition of a condemned house.
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. The applicant
purchased the vacant lot in 1999, almost a century after creation of the lot.
e) The proposal would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
neighborhood. Many lots in this neighborhood are similarly -sized and would require
variances to build a new home. In addition, the applicant has proposed a home with a
size that would comply with Zoning Ordinance requirements for setbacks and
impervious surface coverage.
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. This proposal would be an improvement to the lot
and neighborhood because a new single-family home could be constricted on the lot.
g) The request is reasonable and strikes a balance between allowing redevelopment to
occur while minimizing the extent of the variations needed to alleviate the hardship.
The proposal meets all setback and impervious surface requirements. The variances
requested are beyond the control of the applicant as the lot was platted prior to the
applicant's involvement with the property.
3. The building setback and height requirements are as stated in the RSF-2 (Residential Single
Family Detached 2) zoning district. No variances are approved or implied.
4. The constriction of the home shall comply with the standards in Section 21105 and 21115 of
the Zoning Ordinance for general building and performance standards and building
regulations.
5. The maximum impervious surface allowed on the lot is 25 percent.
6. A building permit is required prior to constriction on the property.
Resolution 2004-387
(2004083)
Page 3 of 3
7. Drain tile is required between the proposed home and the north property line due to the grade
of the property.
8. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per
Ordinance provisions.
9. 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 September 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 September 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