Loading...
CR 98-110 Variance - Front Yard SetbackJuly 2, 1998 Proposed Action. Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 98 -44, approving a variance to park in the front yard setback. At the Zoning and Planning meeting, Mr. Blair moved and Mr. Gross seconded a motion to approve Resolution RZ98 -14, recommending approval of a variance to park in the front yard setback. The motion was approved unanimously. Overview. The applicants, Jim Benshoof, George Watson, and Jeff Schoenbauer, are proposing to construct a 5 500 square -foot office building on the property owned by the City along County Road 3. The building would be a single story. The applicants are purchasing the lot from the City. The property on County Road 3 from Eighth Avenue to west of where Ninth Avenue would intersect if it were extended. The zoning ordinance requires a 20 -foot setback for a front yard abutting a county road. The building is set back 20 feet, but there is parking within the 20 -foot setback. The zoning ordinance does not allow parking within the front yard setback. The site is a very difficult site on which to construct a building. In addition to the narrow lot, there are several utility easements located on the site. Primary Issues to Consider. • What is the zoning of the property, and how has the Comprehensive Plan designated the subject site? • What are the specifics of the variance? • 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 -44 G s IA cut Nanc S. Anderson, AICP Planner j 0 VARIANCE — FRONT YARD SETBACK Council Report 98 -110 CR98 -110 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 B -3, General Business. The Comprehensive Plan has designated the site as Commercial. The proposed development complies with both designations. What are the specifics of the variance? The front yard setback for the site is 20 feet. Parking is allowed in setbacks except for the front yard setback. The site plan indicates that there will be parking in nine feet of the front yard setback on the east side, reducing to six feet on the west side. Does the property have a hardship? The subject site is a very difficult site on which to construct a building. The site is narrow and has several easements. The applicant has looked at many different options, and the current site plan minimizes the variance requirement by having the parking only in the front yard setback. What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting? Ms. Anderson reviewed the reasons for the variance. Jim Benshoof and George Watson appeared before the Commission. Mr. Watson reviewed the various easements on the site. No one in the audience spoke on this item. Alternatives. 1. Approve the variance. By approving the variance, the applicant will be able to construct the office building as proposed. 2. Deny the variance. By denying the variance, the applicant will not be able to construct the building as proposed. 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. WHEREAS, an application for a Variance VN98 -3 has been made by Jim Benshoof, George Watson, and Jeff Schoenbauer; WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered; and 4. The legal description of the property is as follows: Lot 2, Block 1, 10417 Associates Addition NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the application for Variance VN98 -3 is hereby approved based on the following Findings of Fact: ATTEST: CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO: 98 -44 RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPROVING TO ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK 1. That an application for a variance to park in the front yard setback was made by Jim Benshoof, George Watson, and Jeff Schoenbauer on June 10, 1998; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed notice, held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application on June 30, 1998: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; 1. That the lot has a hardship based on the narrow dimension. 2. That the lot has a hardship because of the utility easements. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Variance VN98 -3 is hereby approved based on the following conditions:. 1. That the conditional use permit to construct the proposed building is approved. Adopted this 7th day of July, 1998. Terry Obermaier, City Clerk Charles D. Redepenning, Mayor ASPAALT mermen' Tyre ASPHALT SURFACE ASPHALT ENDER AGGREGATE BASE ROADWAYS 11/2• 11/2• G' rueaNG Lots 1 1/2' 1 7/2' 6• WHOLE AGC£55 TEAL 3' Now 6- GENERAL USE TEALS 2• NODE 6• LEGEND: CORivAL USE 'RAE VEHICLE ACCESS TEAL PROPOSED SHELTER Beim* ON PAD GENERAL NOTES: 511E SURVEY AND SOMALI NFORMATION PROVIDED BY revisON5 TAKE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALE. DIMENSIONS ARE TO FADE Or CIRB WHERE APPLICA1LL. 111.0 mart (re) ITEMS SHALL BE FELD V1111ED BY THE CONTRACTOR AMT D05GREPANces foUND THAT AFFECT THE WORK SHALL BE REPORTED 1'O THE 01WIER/LA. -1 r0R CLARRIGATION PRIOR To ANY ADDITIONAL WORK BENG CONPLETED. CONSTRUCTION ACCESS: THE OWNER WEL MELD LOCATE A 60N5TRUC7ON ACCESS LOCATION AT T11L T114 Of CONSTRUG110t THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VE10fT W /7111 OWNER THAT THE REQUIRED MONTS ARE I55Ib7 race ro Use or ACCESS r0NT5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVGE 4140 mono A 30' woe 14 co' LONG ROCK ACCESS DRIVE rat 7H£ DURATION Of CONSTRUCTION. C51S REM 27- 0105104 UNDER GENERAL R£OIAIeRNTS N S?CGrCATIOINS FOR ADDITIONAL 11fORMATI050 PROJECT LAYOUT NOTES: RACIAL AND WAR SURVEY LATOUT TEG8i0L1E5 WEL BE USED rev SITE LAYOUT AT THE or GON5TRuCTIoN CWI1M COMF1ftER mew= LATOUT rotas). THE LAYOUT 141ORMATION 1RO10ED ON TMs SH1ET 15 fOR BIDDING PURroSrs AND varicAnai of GRRIGAL LAYOUT Df1EN51ON5. THE OWNS/LA-E. RE5ERV15 R1£ WIT TO REVISE THE PROJECT LAYOUT TO A500 ENFOR5E0N 6ON5T1ANT5. 513614 AS MATURE VMS. UNFOR5E1 1 So. CONSTRANTS. THESE AD3UST1®NTS SHALL of colise 1410 1looror E TO THE 0.0141RACt CHANCES N eV OUAN1ITES WU. BE BASED ON A 111 Lin BA95 FOR LWT MD ROMS USTED ON THE Be rove THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSRILE foR GENCRAn011 or LAYOUT 105415 FROM 01$K 5U11UED BY LA-E. ALL PROJECT FELD STAKING DURING THE COARSE Of THE 110310.7. THE OW111/LA. -E. WLL 1ROVDE COMPUTER 11£5 FOR LATOU1 AND GRADE SUING 14 ACCORDANCE MTN STANDARD SURVEY PRACTICES CGO}RUTER FILE mow Wu BE AGAR oz,. 1117 TO 5POW1GAT104S 5£6710145 101 ADD111ONAL 1410RMA7ON 011 SURVETQNG COORDN4nOW PAVEMENT DEPTH SCHEDULE: 4 55007 8612 NOM£ NONE C PAVDENT TYPE RATWOR1 CALL) CL18 + CUTTER TIT! B 601GIETE AGGREGATE 5URPACE BA5E Nf1E1.D AND WARNING TRACK DEPTH 5 COMPACTED AGG - 1.4.14 61.00' .' 24 50 D I 1 5 25• 5Cr 3150 I 4 CONTRACTOR SHALL W1 11' VESTING COMMONS 111OR TO BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION STMT. - CONTRACTOR SHALL DE RL5r0N5tBLL r0* MROTEGING ALL 0145TTI/G STRUCTURES. MITES. TREES. sTE 411047145. ETC. rRO1 DAMAGE DURN6 CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL DE RE5r0N94L1 rot cameo s% ANY DAMAGE cAT cONTRAGTOPS _ Be MARKED ei loe MID FOR REM BY NW OWNER/LA-E. vaTt450. THE CoNntAGToR Stou. OE RESPONSIBLE rat Au. LOCATES. Au. LoCATES SHALL - staa.i000 RS cat. D1 ` coinVoL .GRITS 1/5 - 14'11 m or TrE SLAW - It BROM Met new summit - BT OTHERS r1ITIART u►TOJT comma. 1011' 1OR SITE WOW O'RO!l err Govan x I 3 nrst Cuts DOM 10 1 I .robr cabby that nab 04.1 I prabated by ma or tabor my 1 Abet abbandbaa. 1 L5!SCOF 4Df 77CT 1 l ama= 14597 1 1 i Sheet # 1 i L2 1 t.