HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2002-556CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2002-556
APPROVING A FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE IN THE FRONT YARD FOR
MICHAEL STIEGLER AND SONJA SAVRE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4115
FORESTVIEW LANE NORTH (2002139)
WHEREAS, an application has been filed by Michael Stiegler and Sonja Savre which
requests approval of a variance for a five (5) foot high privacy fence in the front yard for
property legally described as follows:
PARCEL B
That part of Lot 6, Block 2, MISSION VIEW, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as lying northeasterly of a line, and its
northwesterly and southeasterly extensions thereof, described as commencing at the
southeasterly corner of Lot 6, said Block 2; thence westerly on a assumed bearing of
North 88 degrees 48 minutes 30 seconds West, along the southerly line of said Lot 6, a
distance of 27.24 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North
34 degrees 10 minutes 37 seconds West, a distance of 146.28 feet to the northwesterly
line of said Lot 6 and said line there terminating.
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 for a five-foot privacy fence in the front yard for property located at 4115
Forestview Lane North, subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. This variance request to permit a five-foot privacy fence in the front yard is hereby
approved in accordance with the application and plans received by the City on October
17, 2002, except as amended by this resolution.
Resolution 2002-556
(2002139)
Page 2
2. The swimming pool shall be relocated to meet all minimum setback requirements,
including the 25 -foot setback from the Forestview Lane right-of-way.
3. The proposed pool and required decking shall be not be located in any drainage and
utility easements.
4. This resolution is approved with the finding that the applicable variance standards have
been met. Specifically:
a) The unique shape of the lot and the topographical conditions create a particular
hardship to the applicants. The lot is on a cul-de-sac on a corner lot. This creates a
significant amount of street frontage limiting the amount of useable side or rear
yard. There is also a landscape berm that has been created that would be affected if
the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out.
b) The conditions of the parcel are unique and are not applicable, generally, to other
property within the same zoning classification in the RSF-2 (Single Family
Detached 2) due to the placement of the home on the lot and amount of street
frontage which limits the amount of side and rear yard on the property.
c) The request is not based exclusively upon a desire to increase value or income
potential of the property. The proposed fence would allow the current residents to
have the required privacy fence installed fiirther towards the property line. This
would allow them to retain more useable yard enclosing an in -ground pool.
d) The hardship is caused by the Zoning Ordinance and is not self-created. It has not
been created by any persons having an interest in the parcel of land.
e) Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious
to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The proposed fence location
is along a cul-de-sac with minimal traffic and would not cause any restrictions to
site visibility.
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 current
residents to improve the livability of their lot by maintaining the amount of useable
yard. The proposed location is the best placement to fit with the existing
topographical conditions and corner lot.
Resolution 2002-556
(2002139)
Page 3
5. An updated fence permit is required prior to the installation of the privacy fence.
6. 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 December 17, 2002
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 17, 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