HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2003-361CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2003-361
APPROVING VARIANCES FOR REDEVELOPMENT OF AN UNDERSIZED LOT AND
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
SINGLE-FAMILY HOME AT 2426 HEMLOCK LANE NORTH (2003072)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Jim Dehnbostel which requests approval of variances
to allow redevelopment of an undersized lot and impervious surface coverage to permit
construction of a new home for property legally described as follows:
That part of Lot 19, Elmhurst, lying southwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the
northwesterly line of Lot 19 distant 131.50 feet northeasterly from the most westerly corner
of said Lot 19 to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 19 distant 126.00 feet
northeasterly of the most southerly corner of said Lot 19. And;
That part of Lot 19, Elmhurst, lying northeasterly of a line drawn from a point on the
northwesterly line of Lot 19 distant 131.50 feet northeasterly from the most westerly corner
of said Lot 19 to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 19 distant 126.00 feet
northeasterly of the most southerly corner of said Lot 19, and southwesterly of a line drawn
from a point on the northwesterly line of Lot 19 distant 194.50 feet northeasterly from the
most westerly corner of said lot to a point on the southeasterly line of said Lot 19 distant
189.00 feet northeasterly of the most southerly corner of said Lot 19.
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 Jim
Dehnbostel for variances to allow redevelopment of an undersized lot and impervious surface
coverage to allow construction of a new single-family home at 2426 Hemlock Lane North, subject
to the following conditions:
Resolution 2003-361
(2003 072)
Page 2 of 4
1. This resolution approves variances to allow redevelopment of an undersized lot and for
impervious surface coverage, in accordance with the plans and application received by the
City on June 24, 2003 and revisions submitted on July 25, 2003, except as amended by this
resolution.
2. The variances for an undersized lot and impervious surface coverage are 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 combine his two existing non -conforming lots
and construct a new, modest -sized home to replace his existing older home. Due to the
narrowness of the lot, the property could not be redeveloped in a reasonable manner
without granting of the variances.
B. The circumstances related to this request are not generally applicable to other properties in
the RSF-3 district. The Elmhurst neighborhood is unique due to its several non-
conforming lots that were originally platted in the early 1900's, prior to modern zoning
and subdivision regulations. Although the City rezoned this neighborhood from RSF-2 to
RSF-3 as a means to help preserve the neighborhood, the rezoning was implemented with
the recognition that some of the lots in the neighborhood would continue to be
nonconforming. The original platting established a lot configuration that does not serve
the needs of present day land use, unless variances are granted.
C. That the purpose of the variation is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase the
value or income potential of the parcel of land.
D. The request is not based upon a desire to increase value or income potential. The
proposal would allow the applicant to build a new home on his property to replace his
older home, which would benefit the community by replacing a non -conforming older
home. The proposal strikes a balance between allowing the improvement of the property
and meeting current requirements.
E. 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 would be
improving the original platting by consolidating two non -conforming lots.
F. 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 size and style of the proposed home
would be compatible with the neighborhood.
Resolution 2003-361
(2003 072)
Page 3 of 4
G. 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 constructed on the property. In addition, the
consolidation of two non -conforming lots would produce a lot that exceeds the minimum
lot area in the RSF-3 zoning district.
H. 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 lot
width variance is beyond the control of the applicant as the lot was platted prior to the
applicant's ownership of the property. The applicant has revised his originally submitted
building plans to reduce the amount of impervious surface coverage on the lot and the
amount of side yard setback encroachment in order to minimize the amount of variance
needed.
3. The building height requirements are as stated in the RSF-3 (Residential Single Family
Detached 3) zoning district. No variances are approved or implied.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit an accurate survey for the
revised house plans. The survey shall identify the amount of impervious surface coverage on
the lot. The survey shall also be corrected to show the structure to the north on the adjacent
property is a garage.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide proof that the lot
consolidation for the subject property was recorded at Hennepin County.
6. The applicant shall construct a raingarden on-site to reduce the impact of the additional
impervious surface from the driveway. The raingarden shall be installed after construction of
the home is completed.
7. Any subsequent phases or expansions are subject to required reviews and approvals per
Ordinance provisions.
8. 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 August 26, 2003.
Resolution 2003-361
(2003 072)
Page 4 of 4
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 August 26, 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