Loading...
CR 01-83 SideYard Setback G\TY OF m HOPKINS June 27,2001 Council Report 01-83 V ARIANCE-SIDEY ARD SETBACK ProDosed Action. Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 01-41. denying a three and one half feet sideyard variance at 345 16th Avenue North. At the Zoning and Planning meeting, Mr. Szuba moved and Mr. Thompson seconded a motion to adopt Resolution RZOI-4, recommending denial of a three and one half feet sideyard variance at 345 16tl1 Avenue North. The motion was approved on a 6-1 vote. Mr. Rowan voted nay. Overview. The applicant is requesting a three and one half feet sideyard setback variance. The home is situated on the corner of Fourth Street and 16tl1 Avenue. The Zoning Ordinance requires the front yard on a corner lot to be the side of the lot with the shortest frontage. In this case, 16tl1 Avenue is the front yard and Fourth Street is the side yard. . The applicant is proposing a 12' x 32' addition on the north side of the home that abuts Fourth Street. Primary Issues to Consider. . What is the zoning of the property? . What does the ordinance require? . What are the specifics of the applicant's request? . What is the recommendation from Public Works? . What special circumstances or hardship does the property have? . What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? SUDDortin2 Documents. . Analysis of Issues . Memo from Steve Stadler . Site Plan . Resolution 01-41 NancY] . Anderson, AICP Planner . Financial Impact: $ N/ A Budgeted: Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): Notes: Y/N Source: . . , ett.cJl-~~ ''NO 1 ~ Page 2 Prima" Issues to Consider. What is the zoning of the property? The subject property is zoned R-I-A, Single and Two Family High Density. What does the ordinance require? The ordinance requires a side. yard setback of five feet when a side yard abuts a public right-of-way. What are the specifics of the applicant's request? The applicant has requested a variance to allow for a one and one half feet sideyard setback. What is the recommendation from Public Works? Steve Stadler, the Public Works Director, has reviewed the applicant's request. Mr. Stadler is opposed to the addition. Attached is the memo from Mr. Stadler. What special circumstances or hardship does the property have? The Zoning Ordinance states the following: a variance is a modification or variation from the provisions of this code granted by the board and applied to a specific parcel of property because of undue hardship due to circumstances peculiar and unique to such parcel. The Zoning Ordinance also states the following: that the Commission must find that the literal enforcement of the provision of the Zoning Ordinance would cause an undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and that the granting of a variance to the extent necessary to compensate for said hardship is in keeping with the intent of this code. The subject site is not unique. If the variance is granted the home will be one and one half feet from the property line. The.zoning ordinance was amended a few years ago.to allow a lesser setback on the side for home that abuts a right-of-way. The setback is five feet if the lot abuts a public right-of-way. The usual sideyard setback for homes ranges from 8 to 14 feet. Staff has also noticed that the applicant has constructed a non-conforming fence on the south side of the lot. The City does not have a record of a fence permit. The fence is six feet in height and six-foot fences are not allowed between homes. Several neighbors have called after notification of the variance request. These neighbors did not want the variance approved. . . c..j(o{-g'3 ~'V~iOl 2 Page] What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Ms. Anderson reviewed the applicant's request with the Commission. Steve Stadler, the public works director, discussed how a sidewalk could be constructed in the right-of- way and the amount of right-of-way needed. Bob Brandel, the applicant, appeared before the Commission. Mr. Brandel reviewed the variance request with the Commission. Mr. Brandel stated that he needed additional space. Harold Christenson appeared before the Commission. Mr. Christenson was concerned with the safety of the intersection if the addition were constructed, if granting a variance without a hardship created precedence, and the effect this addition would have on the property values of the homes in the area. The Commission discussed the hardship issue at length, including whether the applicant had a hardship. Alternatives. 1. Recommend approval of the variance. By recommending approval of the variance, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval. If the Planning Commission considers this alternative, findings of fact will have to be stated that support this recommendation. 2. Deny the variance. By recommending denial of the variance, the City Council will consider a recommendation of denial. 3. Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates that further information is needed, the item should be continued. CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO: 2001-41 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND DENYING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING HOME AT 345-16TH AVENUE NORTH WHEREAS, an application for Variance VNOI-2 has been made by Robert Brandel; and WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application for Variance VNOI-2 was made by Robert Brandel on May 21, 2001; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed notice, held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application on June 26, 2001: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; 3. That the written comments and analysis of the City staff were considered; and 4. Legal description of the parcel is as follows: Lot 21 and the North 9 feet of Lot 20 Block 1 Gibbs First Addition to West Minneapolis NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application for Variance VNOI-2 is hereby denied based on the following Findings of Fact: 1. That the property does not have a hardship for the granting of the variance. 2. That the granting of the variance could limit the City's ability to install utilities and/or sidewalk in the future. Adopted this 3rd day of July 2001. Eugene 1. Maxwell, Mayor ATTEST: . Terry Obermaier, City Clerk