Recommendation for 9th Ave Side Yard
~ ~._-~~ --,~-,----- ~ ..-. -----.-.-=-,
. .
VI ~ 1
J
"
CITY OF HOPKINS
.side Yard Variance ,...' .... -..---. .1 j
---..----- 9th AVep.u2 South
Ii Sohan Uppa:l
"
I'
i}:;
"'-'.;',-. Purpose - Recommend action yard 'Jar-iane.::' to al.low eonatruct
'."r" on a Slae
- d'
, ion of a ten unit tOl-1l1house development on 9 th Avenue .south; Just
~i' north of Nine Mile Creek.
~}:!.' Backgrollnd - ,see att<"1ched staff report tv Planning an Zoning. The
I~J:;' app1icant stated the variance was nec~ssary because of the extremely
high land correction costs as all units IQUS t be piled. With a side
If? yard variance, an additional uni t. could be a,jded which \,>,ould off-set I
t' this ad d i tional cos t, The applicant s ta ted that he w-al1ted tot'evi&€-
~"") his ori8inaJ. request t.o request no variance fer the north side yard
<<:,~'_:,.:-. and a 3' - 6" for the south lot line.
, ,,--,::'.-'.
, ,.,~.<..::n
.~:t~-.'- ' Recommendation ~ The Commi33ioli moved approval with a 4 to 1 vote of
.~'i:-'-~. -
1f;/. the variance based upon t.h(~ ;)oor soil conditions.
~1 I
Anderson I
i Community Development Analyst I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
"-- C ounei I Rept :# 8') -] .1 .J
-
,
. - ,1
I
I
'1
June 11, 1985 I
I
-j
I
Case No: 85-29 j
Applicant: Sohan Uppal
location: 9th Avenue South
Request: Sideyard variances
STAFF FI~OlNGS & COMMENTS: Andersorl
1. The appl icant is r-equesti ng 5 ideyal'"'d variances to construct a ten unit townhouse
developis1eot at 9th Av'enue South. This request is in conjunction with th~ Con-
ditional Use PermH at this site. The subj~ct site is zoned R-2.
2. Ord inan.ce 427.31 requi res a s ideyard cf 14 feet in an R-2 di strict fol' a three
story building. The proposed buildings will have a southerly setback of 5!6"
and a northerly setback of 12'"
J. l~ere are currently residential homes to the north and south, an empty lot at
the west and a city park to the south.
4. Ordinance 423.23 states that variances shall be approved only by circumstances
unique to the property under consideration would cause undue hardship to the
owner. The applicant has stated that the soil conditions do not allow co~ven~ .
tional techniqu~ of building.
OJhflS S'l;' j ~ 'It NMOhS SDN l/:P/J8
--..~
~.- ~N]"'ilNO" NOO IS]!" N3 a 0
.~~ ~
c_ ' ......:--.----... ~
~:;.;y7 .-------~
~~w ~ .
:,}!v,'1y ~
N .>Jc;? J:--...
O 1; ~____..... _____,
. I .1'- '_",_
d ..... ....'.------...._....
.::J J -----" I I
. X -., -.........-.,
'7-;i~.;AU tit * :*J "3Nrj ..r--. .l':;-..y'~ !...:1 I
~.l'''' 1:'""",,,,.,1 ,N/1 \ _ .<:P2I,Z _ ..L .II I O~ I
r-'-6v~I---- -1 i- '---'r~ . '/ I I
I I I " I;;
; I ~ .... j' "'.
I I ,~ '..0
i I~ ':.1, ..., ~
I ,~ 0 <s: I:r;~ \s) <D "
,~' ... r n I I _J)" . ~,
' . '.' I ..., ~ ~ '..i.'.
N ...,1 ~ ~ ..:l , ..
~ .~ I I . .....
If.;' I I i III J. '7 r: ':~j,
. I ~---._--- -- _ z; "I "",.,._',',
' .~- I"' _t.. "':,~
'J> I I, i-- - -- "lZ. \ ~\\I '1 !;l\1l
L___ 1"',,3____-' I \~XI! I If.. I.,.,
' ~\ ~ ' "'. I .::;i;j\
," . , "'., ""0""
-: ~ r ~ - o<i'o~ i -- ~ ~- '--c ~,-""-.-A'" I -: _~;';',~,&\~'
I , ,~ .,J J _ ',."
N \f. 1 ~ ~ -.. '_'-lii
~ Ii I , l.t r:: ~ ,'1 ~ c' ,,;.; .
.... I I t' t' t;, '-
." , , I : , . I "'''..
i- l II ! ~ ~\ll\' '. a j ~ ~ I :,:.I.r:,.,.t.:,,:,',:.','~,'
~ I l ~\ I ~ C>-'1i~
1 \\\ - . . ",. ..,1'!
t;) I I '=cJ i.... '. ,...,It;
,N \" ~" ~ ):>" '" .:'i~
-J ..1' 'h= ~....._---_._- '--.-. -;",. ~ I " -,':', "',.....,",.".,'.'.',',
~I t _ ~ :'-',?"~"
I - 1 f"ft ~ "' "<13i
.- I r--~----:..-~. __I ,., "" I "':_~
I I ; i;::; t7 ~11 \ \ Z ,,, \to,.$~
I I I ~ I I CI ;;, \'t\ /$i
I I I """",.1, ...... ~ ~ .... ,: ~.;;.;
. , I .',. ~. '. ..".
\ L-____~~______ I \\~ f:rJ I'-.. -~":. i':"
"'- I I '1' 'r,J <.,:
~ - ""7......r.! - -,.;; " I 1"'1\ '-'-l .
UG v., , J _ .. ~ . . .
I' I a ~ iO::; f&; · k.q ~ I I' ~ . C 0 ~ I I ~ 2~ I
1 () I, · . I ~ .._
J 'IrJN ' \ b I; I
r ;, - I \\ \ \ G I '.~ f'q ','
I z I I \\ ~\" -~ I -k ~ ~ . I
CI1 I --L.. ,,\\\\,. t ~ ~ =::
i : J. " .. ....(
I :u ==--=- - - - -.=-=-==- - _.J ~ t ~ t .
r--j ~ [""---t 'qeti-----l ~~I~ I :
\ J m [ ! ~;j
.t. r i ' I ",:
" I .' I r _,.
..:.: 1 ' . 1
"
~ I ~ IS> I ~ -., Sll ,
\) I - :!"': c.. ',It.
r I . . I~' __ ') , ,'.
z . lC N' ". ;, I . '..
~ ~ N (' I .L'7'oW ~(7:dN" t"11f7o-;, -----..~; I t,.' .:
"1'\ \):I~ : _ J
r..'1 r . ,
~ 7 rn I 1 Y" I I . . .
:i - I ., ;:J '.c.
x: /l1 L...---..----_.____---.J
' .' . --- ---'--... (t'.
~ I ~ j- -. - - - ">!i~"1 "-1:g1 I (':"-.:;
:z: l Ire '.. I
c..1 Ij) .......
('t\ . -1 I 1_-1 ..._
'1 h. l:r I ,..,.1
\I') "
.
~ .... ----------..
~aM._Mll._.lIIIn_~ ,
~_,c.__c_'_~, __ --....... -'-""""'Ii
June 13, 1985
CdS,e No: 85-30
APG- .
11cant: Sohan Uppal
LO':ation: 9th Avenue Sout:h
Reluest: Conditional Use Permit to construct townhouses
ST~FF FINDINGS & COMMENTS: Anderson
1. The applicant is propo$ing to build a t~n unit townhouse deVf 'iient on 9th
Avenue South. The proposed development is loc~tedir: tne R-t.. ....one which permits
such a d~velor~nt.
2< The p~oposed townhouses will be en Lots 3 thru 5. In July 1980 the applicant
applied and was granted approval of the plat on lots 2 thru 5. The applicant
r'eplatted these lots on the rec.Olmlendation from the COJllTlission on February 25,
1930. The Commission recommended that Lots 2 thru 4 be replatted to allow
triplexes and lot 5 for construction of a du~lex structure (totalling 8 units).
Existing triplexes are located on Lots 1 & 2 of the plat.
3. The.three lots have the required lot area of 12.000 sq. ft. ~s required by
427.31 for an R-2 district. Another requireFent also is 3500 sq. ft. of lot
area per 1 family. The proposed deve 1 cpment has req...!1 red 3500 sq. ft. per
family. The lots do not have the required lot width. In January 1979 the
applicant was penrnitted to plat lots 1 thru 5 at 92 f~et based on a historical
agreement between the City and the previous m~ner for land usage in that area.
Since then the lots have been. replatted. The lots which the townhouses are
proposed have an 80.56 width and two lots 96 foot width.
4. The proposed development wil1 have a front yard setback of 38 feet. a rear yard
setbac~ of 69 feet. and sideyard setbacks of 12 feet and 5'6". A variance has
beer. applied for the side yard ~etbacks. The height of the townhouses is 33
feet.
5. The subject prope~'ty boal'de~'s Nine Mile Creek and the flood plain consumes a
good part of the property. An approved pla~ from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed
District wil1 be required as well as final review by the City Engineer for flood
plain encroachment and drainage.
6, Ordinance 427.31 requires a maximum building coverage af 35% in an R-2 district.
The P~'l)posed developfT)2ot has a building cove~age of 21%.
7 The open space ratio in an R.2 district is 1:1.5. The subject site would have
an open space rat~o of 1:1.39.
8 The landscape fllan shows plantings of maple dnd ash along Yth Avenue and also in
t he tOea,' 0 f the to\.,fi hou ses. The proposed landscape rlan conforms with the new
t lJndscapt: ordindnce which wOIJld r'eql!ire 14 trees. 'he proposed p1an shows 18
trees.
9 Access to the townhouses will be from 9th Avenue South.
_~:_.~JlJI!IimiIIIJ~.-..r_ _,n.... _J____ ..&... ur-