HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2004-527CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2004-527
APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A THIRD STALL
GARAGE ADDITION FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 17005 -24TH AVENUE NORTH
(2004141)
WHEREAS, Douglas and Marilyn Grant are requesting approval of a variance to allow a garage
addition to encroach nine feet into the required 15 -foot side yard setback on property legally
described as follows:
Lot 4, Block 2, of FAZENDIN PARK, Hennepin county, Minnesota.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said request at a duly called public meeting
and recommends approval of the variance;
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 Douglas
and Marilyn Grant for a variance to allow a garage addition to encroach nine feet into the
required 15 -foot side yard setback, subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. The variance to allow a third stall garage addition is approved in accordance with plans
received by the City on November 1, 2004, except as amended by this resolution, based on
the conclusion that the applicant has met the applicable standards, as follows:
a) The proposed garage addition would provide on-site storage for a classic car and would
help to fiilfill the applicants general storage needs. Furthermore, the proposed location
would preserve the most trees and would result in a compatible building design that
would preserve the integrity of the existing home and neighborhood.
b) The conditions related to this application are somewhat unusual. The applicants
considered other garage locations, but are requesting that the garage be expanded to the
east in order to preserve the character of the lot and home. Constricting a detached
garage in the rear yard would require the removal of several mature oak, maple, and
basswood trees. Expansion in front of the existing garage would negatively impact the
Resolution 2004-527
(2004141)
Page 2
character of the home, because the main entrance for the home would be located roughly
40 feet behind the garage. That arrangement would result in the loss of visibility and
functionality of the front door. That location may also result in the loss of three mature
trees and other landscaping, due to their proximity during the constriction process.
c) The request is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the
property. The proposal would allow the applicant to constrict a functional garage
addition that would be compatible with the design of the home, and would preserve the
character of the existing home and neighborhood.
d) The subject lot does not conform to the current lot width requirement of 110 feet, as
specified by the RSF-1 zoning district. The subject property has a lot width of 100 feet.
If the lot was platted at the minimum RSF-1 standard, the requested variance potentially
would not be required.
e) The proposed addition would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land in the neighborhood. The proposed garage addition would be located next to
another garage (as opposed to living space) on the neighboring property to the east.
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 would be of minimal size needed to store the classic car (11 feet
wide by 24 feet deep). The requested addition is the minimum action required to
eliminate the hardship.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicants shall submit a revised plan showing a
reduction in the width of the garage addition from 12 feet to 11 feet, which in turn increases
the requested side yard setback from 5 feet to 6 feet.
3. The variance shall allow a two -foot eave overhang on the side of the garage.
3. A building permit is required prior to constriction of the proposed improvements. Prior to
issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit detailed building plans for the
proposed improvements.
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 this day December 28, 2004.
Resolution 2004-527
(2004141)
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 December 28, 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