Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2003-110CITY OF PLYMOUTH RESOLUTION 2003-110 APPROVING A FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE FOR DEAN TEMPLE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A THIRD STALL GARAGE ADDITION AT 18540 23RD AVENUE NORTH (2003005) WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Dean Temple which requests approval of a variance to allow a garage addition with a 9 -foot setback where 25 feet is specified, for property legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 3, Imperial Hills Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the request at a duly called public meeting. 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 Dean Temple for a variance to allow a garage addition with a 9 -foot front yard setback where 25 -feet is required for property located at 18540 23rd Avenue North, based upon the following findings: 1. This variance request to permit a 9 -foot front yard setback for an 11 -foot by 33 -foot garage addition is hereby approved in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on January 10, 2003, except as amended by this resolution. 2. The garage addition shall not exceed 11 feet by 33 feet, as shown on the revised site plan dated February 10, 2003. 3. The applicant would need to provide documentation from a Geotechnical Engineer that the addition could be safely constructed in this area and that the city could safely repair or replace the wall in the future. 4. If the retaining wall is damaged, the applicant will be responsible for all costs required for reconstruction. 5. The garage addition shall be finished to match the existing home and garage. Resolution 2003-110 (2003005) Page 2 6. This resolution is approved with the finding that the applicable variance standards have been met. Specifically: 1) A hardship exists due to the placement of the house on the lot, which is not centered and is located closer to the west property line. The property also has a non -conforming front yard setback for the existing garage and shed. The grades of the property also limit the use of the property. The placement of the garage and the grades of the property prevent the applicant from constructing a detached garage in an alternative location. 2) The conditions of the parcel are unique due to the non -conforming front yard setback, the grades of the property, and location of the City -owned retaining wall. Due to the placement of the garage, the proposed location for the expansion is the only viable location. The applicant would not be able to add a detached garage at the rear of the property due to the grades of the property and lack of a suitable location for an alternative driveway. 3) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential of the property. The proposed addition would allow the applicant to increase the garage and storage space available for use of the household. 4) That the alleged difficulty or hardship is caused by this Chapter and has not been created by any persons having an interest in the parcel of land and is not a self-created hardship. The property had a non -conforming front yard setback when the applicant purchased the home in 2001 and therefore was not a self-created created hardship. Without the variance, the applicant would not be able to make any expansions to the existing garage. 5) That the granting of the variation will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located. The proposed front yard setback is unusual in the neighborhood as the majority of homes in the area have front yard setbacks of at least 50 feet. However, the impact of the setback is reduced as the house faces 23rd Avenue and has a higher grade than the surrounding properties. The yard along Walnut Grove Lane visually appears as a side yard rather than a front yard because of the house orientation. In order for the variance to not be detrimental, the applicant would need to demonstrate that the proposal is the minimum action necessary and provide an Engineering report to prove that the addition could be constructed safely, structurally sound, and without harm to the City -owned retaining wall. 6) The applicant would provide proof that the stability of the City -owned retaining wall in the public right-of-way would not be compromised before a building permit would be issued for the proposed addition. With appropriate documentation, the variation would meet the standard that it will 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. Resolution 2003-110 (2003005) Page 3 7) The requested variance is the minimum action required to eliminate the hardship. The applicant has reduced the size of the garage in width to from 15 feet wide to 11 -feet wide. The proposed 33 -foot depth is necessary to allow the roof lines to blend with the existing garage and house. ADOPTED by the City Council this 11th day of March, 2003. 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 11, 2003 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