HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2003-162CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2003-162
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA COVERAGE IN THE
SHORELAND MANAGEMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF
THREE -SEASON ROOM ADDITION FOR SKYLINE DESIGN INC. FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 14865 18TH AVENUE NORTH (2003012)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Skyline Design Inc., which requests approval of a
variance for 47 percent impervious surface area coverage where the Zoning Ordinance permits 25
percent coverage. This variance would allow construction of a 12.5 -foot by 18 -foot three season
room addition for property legally described as follows:
Lot 34, Block 2, Cimarron East, 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 Skyline
Design Inc. for a variance to allow 47 percent impervious surface area coverage in the Shoreland
Management Overlay District to permit construction of a three -season room addition for property
located at 14865 18th Avenue North, subject to the following conditions:
1. This resolution approves variance to allow 47 percent impervious surface area coverage
where 25 percent coverage is permitted, in accordance with the plans and application received
by the City on February 5, 2003, except as amended by this resolution.
2. The variance for the shoreland impervious surface coverage is approved with the finding that
the applicable variance standards are met. Specifically:
a. The creation of this lot predates the City's shoreland regulations. At the time the property
was platted, the development was not required to comply with the impervious surface
Resolution 2003-162
(2003 012)
Page 2
requirements. Consequently, the developers of the project established lot lines without
regard to impervious surface coverage on the unit lots.
b. The conditions relating to the hardship are not generally applicable to other properties in
the RSF-4 zoning district. The platting of this lot predates the shoreland district
requirements. Additionally, the homeowners association in this subdivision owns common
open space between the residences and the lake, which serves as a buffer between the
homes and the lake.
c. The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential of
the property; but rather, the variance is necessary to make improvements to the home to
make it more livable for the current occupants.
d. The hardship is caused by the Zoning Ordinance and the physical surroundings of the
property and was not self-created. The creation of the lot predates the shoreland district
requirements. Additionally, the shoreland ordinance does not recognize the common open
space areas of this development, which reduces the overall impervious surface coverage
for the development and also allows for infiltration of runoff.
e. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land or improvements in the neighborhood. The applicant is proposing to match the room
addition with the existing exterior of the home. Furthermore, the addition would comply
with all other Zoning Ordinance requirements.
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 requested variance appears to be the minimum action required to eliminate the
hardship. While the applicant could possibly construct a smaller addition, the proposed
addition and patio do not appear to be excessive as compared to improvements made to
other homes in this development.
3. The addition shall be finished to match the exterior of the existing home.
4. A building permit for the addition shall be obtained prior to construction.
5. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per
Ordinance provisions.
Resolution 2003-162
(2003 012)
Page 3
6. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the property owner or
applicant has substantially started construction 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 21030.06 of the Zoning Ordinance.
ADOPTED by the City Council on April 8, 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 April 8, 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