HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Resolution 2000-568CITY OF PLYMOUTH
RESOLUTION 2000-568
APPROVING A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR SCOTT SCHOOLMEESTERS FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 310 MAGNOLIA LANE NORTH (20166)
WHEREAS, Scott Schoolmeesters has requested approval of a setback variance to allow
an attached garage storage addition to remain at 310 Magnolia Lane North, legally
described as follows:
That part of Lot 8, Block 1, "WILSHIRE GARDENS HENN CO MINN"
commencing at a point in the west line of said Lot 8 distant 42.17 feet south
from the northwest corner thereof, thence easterly to a point in the east thereof
distant 110.47 feet south from the northeast corner, thence south along the
east line thereof 89.53 feet, thence westerly to a point in the west line thereof
distant 200 feet south from the northwest corner thereof, thence north to the
point of beginning.
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 Scott Schoolmeesters for a setack variance, subject to the following findings
and conditions:
1. The variance allows construction of an attached garage storage addition that would be
set back 7.1 feet from the north (side) lot line where 15 feet is specified, in accordance
with the application and plans received by the City on October 25, 2000, except as
amended by this resolution.
2. The applicable variance standards are met, as follows:
Resolution 2000-568
(20166)
Page 2
a) The applicant states that they have a need for the additional storage space for items
such as lawnmowers, bikes, and the like. They park two cars in the existing two -
car garage, leaving little additional storage space. The topography of the site,
together with the placement of the home on the site creates a hardship for
enlarging the garage space. When the home was constructed, it was not centered
on the lot. The north wall of the home is 15 feet from the north lot line and the
south wall of the home is 42 feet from the south lot line. The attached two -car
garage was placed on the north side of the home, with the living area on the south
side. A variance would not be required if the home was centrally located on the
lot.
b) The location of the home off -center on the lot is not typical and if the home had
been centered on the lot, the applicant could have built the garage addition without
a variance. This creates an atypical condition for this property.
c) The request is not based upon a desire to increase value or income potential of the
property. The proposal would allow additional garage storage space for the
convenience and improved livability of the property owners.
d) The existing home was constructed off -center on the lot with the attached garage
on the north side. The applicant did not create this condition, as the home was
constructed in 1976 and the applicant purchased the home in 1987.
e) The granting of the variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood. The addition would
not detract from the appearance of the home or surrounding properties. If the
variance is approved, the applicant would finish the addition with materials that
match the exterior of the home.
f) The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property, nor would it 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 garage addition would be roughly 7.8 -feet wide, which is the same width as
the former shed. The requested variance is the minimum action necessary to
alleviate the hardship.
3. Prior to completion of the garage addition, the applicant shall secure the applicable
building permits from the Building Division.
4. Property irons adjacent to the proposed construction shall be located and exposed
prior to building permit issuance.
Resolution 2000-568
(20166)
Page 3
5. The applicant shall finish the addition with materials that are compatible with the
exterior of the home.
6. This approval shall expire one year after the date of approval, unless the landowner or
applicant has started 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 City Council on November 28, 2000.
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 November 28, 2000, 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