HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2002-388CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2002-388
APPROVING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF DETACHED GARAGE
SPACE FOR JAMES AND TRACY KOCHENDORFER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321
WEDGEWOOD LANE NORTH (2002085)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by James and Tracy Kochendorfer which requests
approval of a variance to exceed 1,000 square feet of detached garage space for a garage addition
for property legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 1, White Oaks Hill, 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 variance request to
exceed 1,000 square feet of detached garage space for a garage addition for property located at
321 Wedgewood Lane North, subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. This variance request to permit a total detached garage space of 1,146 square feet is hereby
approved in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on July 3, 2002,
except as amended by this resolution.
2. The garage addition shall be finished to match the existing garage and home.
3. This resolution is approved with the finding that the applicable variance standards have been
met. Specifically:
Resolution 2002-388
(2002085)
Page 2
a) The parcel is hilly and heavily wooded. This restricts the area in which an additional
storage shed could be placed. The area around the existing detached garage is not heavily
wooded or hilly and contains adequate area for expansion. Therefore, the proposed
garage addition to the existing detached garage is the most logical location for expansion
from an architectural standpoint.
b) The conditions of the parcel are unique due to the angle of the existing home and detached
garage on the lot. If the detached garage had been placed parallel to the home, such a
large addition would not be needed to tie-in the home and garage both architecturally and
aesthetically, and a variance would not be required for the proposed development.
c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income potential of
the property. The proposed addition would allow the applicants to increase the storage
space for boats and lawn equipment, allowing them to maintain an attractive property with
inside storage as opposed to outside in the yard. The request is also to provide a
workshop for the applicants to undertake projects not currently possible with the existing
space.
d) The hardship is caused by the Zoning Ordinance and is not self-created. The home was
built in 1941 and the current owners purchased the home in 1990. The garage is
connected by a 30 -foot breezeway that helps to tie -into the home. The homeowners wish
to continue this line by adding onto the existing garage at an angle compatible with the
present house, breezeway and garage.
e) Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
land or improvements in the neighborhood. The proposed addition is set back roughly
120 feet from the property line and will have landscaping around it.
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 is the minimum action required to allow the applicants to expand
the existing detached garage. The proposed size and location is the best placement to fit
with the angle of the existing home both architecturally and aesthetically.
4. A building permit for the addition shall be obtained prior to constriction.
5. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the applicant has
substantially started constriction of the project, or unless the 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 August 27, 2002
Resolution 2002-388
(2002085)
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 August 27, 2002 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