CR 98-83 Variance Side Yard SetbackMay 27, 1998
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to approve Resolution 98 -30, approving
setback variances to construct a garage.
At the Zoning and Planning meeting, Ms. Boen moved and Mr. Gross seconded a motion to
approve Resolution RZ98 -9, recommending approval of setback variances to construct a
garage. The motion carried unanimously.
Overview.
The applicant, Chris Buisman, is proposing to construct a garage at 608 Minnetonka Mills
Road. The lot currently has a small 12' x 20' garage on the site. Ms. Buisman is proposing
to construct a new 21'x 24' garage on the site.
An accessory building is required to have setbacks of three feet from the side and rear
property lines and is required to be six feet from the house. The proposed garage is five feet
from the house and one foot from the rear property line.
Primary Issues to Consider.
Nancy S
Planner
• What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan
designated the subject site?
• What are the specifics of the garage?
• Does the property have a hardship?
• What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting?
Supporting Documents.
• Analysis of Issues
• Site Plans
• Resolution 98 -30
21iQ(r'1
nderson, AICP
VARIANCE - SIDEYARD SETBACK
Council Report 98 -83
CR98 -83
Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan
designated the subject site?
The site zoning is R -1 -A. A lot in this district is allowed to have accessory buildings up to a
maximum of 12 percent. The Comprehensive Plan has designated the site as low density
residential.
What are the specifics of the garage?
The garage as proposed will be 21' x 24'. The garage door will face north with access to the
garage from the alley. The garage as proposed meets all the zoning requirements except for
the setbacks.
Does the property have a hardship?
Putting a new garage on the lot is difficult because of the alley along the side of the home
and because of the angle of the lot in the front yard. The home is situated on the lot at one
point only 13.4' from the property line because of the angle of the front yard. The front yard
setback is 25 feet. Because of this angle of the front yard, the home is setback, which limits
the rear yard and the amount of space in the rear yard. The existing garage cannot be
expanded because any addition would be constructed behind the home. The angle of the lot
in the front and the alley along the side of the home present a hardship unique to this
property.
What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting?
Ms. Anderson reviewed the proposed variance with the Commission. Ms. Buisman appeared
before the Commission. The Commission discussed the variances. The property owner to
the west was at the meeting and did not object to the variances.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the variance. By approving the variance, the applicant will be able to construct
the garage as proposed.
2. Deny the variance. By denying the variance, the City Council will consider a
recommendation of denial. If the City Council considers this alternative, findings will
have to be identified that support this alternative.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates that further information is
needed, the item should be continued.
SgLZI .ragwn
.zapun .roicaAi ue .raaur2ug HAD pa.r 42a
� a XTn e u i I ley 30 p 'UO srA
- .radns pail!) pail!) ap aw i ue 10 i( ai da.rd s� u a "
qp Mean .rnssiy�a�q��,Ir�.raaAga.taqI
v y
‘,1.411117,I ) l! A UI•J 1111 ti` �Jlil /� ' : ll!ii!l ih 1
7-06 . ON E101
5 .9 •E
{
°S .uawy0o0J0ua .J0 s }uaUJanoJduJi J9440 /CUD Moys o}
;Jocund }ou saop }l °U09J9141 9bo.m6 puo asnoy 6uI }slx9 Uo 40 Uo
`A}JadoJd paq osap anogo ay} sa opunoq ay} moils s u 30001 ay} puo
4 s } p a }ui XanJns s141
uoisiniQ puZ silodoauuiW ;seM to }did ay} uo UMO s so aou
4 o }sip sa }ouap
'Lan }op pauansso uo uodn pasoq aJo wMo s6uiJoaa
co iv
a)
rri
ONIISIX3
J9>fJOU-1 U0Ji sa }ouap : o
°409J9111. 00'08 XIJa }saM a} y j.o Xpa }so3 6uiXl uoISIAIQ
puoQGS sIlodoauum }saM `Z0 t X1 ` 1.1. puo 0 L s}o Jo }JOd o
} 41
• S3SI113. d 0 011dl - S3
M „52 ,90068 N
33N34 )1NIl
0
i
1 1
`.,
•
a3HS
ONUS?
r
CO
CO
0
(J1
(
0
IT;
•
' i -- - - - Z13N2103 O3HS
.s'1
X ". - --
z I
'__Q - -_ _
-
.L .
•
� r
O
91
0.4 EXISTING
1 1 >ga.
■ 4.-•.-
•.� n... ��; ... t ,,-.. r ...i... . .... -t -- .. 1 .. . _ ...
• Sl • r+t I�ww��� • �. 11 I
Mr
IMPS MM Mw
Adopted this 2nd day of June, 1998.
ATTEST:
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 98 -30
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING
SETBACK VARIANCES AT 608 MINNETONKA MILLS ROAD
WHEREAS, an application for a Variance VN98 -1 has been made by Chris Buisman;
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That an application for setback variances was made by Chris Buisman on April
28, 1998;
2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed notice,
held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application on May 26,
1998: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard;
3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and
4. The legal description of the property is as follows:
That part of Lots 10 and 11, Block 102, West Minneapolis Second Division lying
Easterly of the Westerly 80.00 feet thereof.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Variance VN98 -1 is hereby
approved based on the following Findings of Fact:
1. That the lot has a hardship based on the angle of the front yard.
2. That the lot has a hardship because the alley is in the side yard.
Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor