CR2003-113 Driveway variance - 141 16th Ave N
/ \.
. G\IY OF
~.
HOPKINS
.
July 30, 2003
Council Report 03-113
V ARIANCE-DRIVEW A Y
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 03-64, approving a
two-foot variance to construct a driveway abutting the property line at 141-16th Avenue
North.
At the Zoning and Planning meeting Ms. Halverson moved and Mr. Paul seconded a
motion to adopt Resolution RZ03-16, recommending approval of a two-foot variance to
construct a driveway abutting the property line at 141-16th Avenue North. The motion
was approved unanimously.
Overview.
The applicant has constructed a new garage and would like to replace the existing
driveway. The existing driveway is eight feet wide and abuts the steps on the home on
one side and the property line on the other side.
The ordinance requires a two-foot setback from the property line for driveways. If the
applicant were to have the two-foot setback, the driveway would be six feet wide.
Primary Issues to Consider.
. What is the zoning of the property?
. What does the ordinance require for a driveway setback?
. What are the specifics of the applicant's request?
. What special circumstances or hardship does the property have?
. What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting?
Supportin2 Documents.
. Analysis of Issues
. Site Plans
. Letter from applicant
. Resolution 03-64
~2ecP
Planner
Financial Impact: $ N/ A Budgeted:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.):
Notes:
Y/N
Source:
CR03-113
Page 2
.
Primary Issues to Consider.
. What is the zoning of the property?
The subject property is zoned R-I-A, Single and Two-Family High Density Residential.
. What does the ordinance require for a driveway setback?
The ordinance requires a two-foot setback for a driveway.
. What are the specifics of the applicant's request?
The applicant is requesting to extend the driveway two feet to the lot line.
. 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.
In this case the applicant has an undue hardship that is unique to the property. The
applicant's home is situated in the middle of the property which leaves six feet on one
side and eight feet on the other. Without the variance the applicant would have to drive
on grass or some other surface two feet from the lot line.
One condition the staff would recommend is that the property stake is identified to
ensure the driveway is being placed on the applicant's property.
. What was the discussion at the Zoning and Planning meeting?
Ms. Anderson reviewed the reasons for the variance. The applicant, Peggy Ross-
Dahmen, and a friend, Gary Devon, appeared before the Commission. Ms. Ross-
Dahmen stated she would like to replace the existing driveway; the existing driveway
abuts the property line.
Robert Olson, the abutting neighbor to the south, appeared before the ~ommission. Mr.
Olson asked for a compromise of one foot.
The Commission discussed the option of using the alley for access. Ms. Ross-Dahmen
stated that this would not be possible because of the elevation difference. The
.
.
CR03-113
Page 3
Commission also discussed that the existing driveway was at the property line and if the
driveway were two feet from the property line, the two feet would still be used for
driving over, whatever the surface.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the variance. By approving the variance, the applicant will be able to
construct the driveway next to the property line.
2. Deny the variance. By denying the variance, the applicant will not be able to
construct the driveway next to the property line. If the City Council considers this
alternative, findings of fact will have to be stated that support this recommendation.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates that further
information is needed, the item should be continued.
'- ~ ~",. I j' i I I ' , i' I L_..,-: ' , " '..-'
: ~I- ;"-,='"'1''''''', I'" !"""j"""~l" I r-:'~~" ~-^.~~.:".t'~-l~"--"-':;=-^ -1,'"H"r"~":-"'r--~'~r'rl~-;7";"T-'-\.
, , I.' I I Ii' ' I ' ,I , I ;' .r..ll "\. I I, 'I! II. .+~"r I
! " , j I 1- "i i -I" I : I ~ Iii; - 1"-' " I -- , , t ",," -r:",'", I
, i I Ii' I 'I I, 1 I "I I! , 'I I ' I I ii'
i" r r [---" I"" """1-1 "l i''------~--t---l'-t" --"~ --- "t -Ii- -[----+-- -'(-" m""\ ;; I
Li [ , ! I [I! '" l ---'I--~ -" ""T" "r""~-"l" 1 I" -'," i i, i1:i..i..--+-t7
" I" I fl- I - :" I" 1 """ - I "t "jl' I -tf- 1- I -- 1- I ,"" - t ! "
, i""', ~~~ I : t I 'I - I Iii" -" - ":""" - r "jl"" ...".. 1 ""," I r I i
'I 1 :,-jl l I -J' I I r': I "" ~ i Ii" "..:" " "i 'I I I !
· i - - U "I" i fP11 ~~i~,,"11:~bS-~ ~-~~)lt.\!r ',-!I, ::'r?1 : "[ -7 f';l II! , ~ ,
-I ~ ~ q~' .,'t., ;.t?j"7jl~)'1 -" - -I" I" I
II -" - -I .-:J I I - I ' -,' ,,- I "Jl --'r" J ;::
I i ~, i:~'( ~ / ~...
- - 1- ... __ ~_'_ u-+- _ _ tl .~ __ r-..-t' --..l r-I . 1-1.. ::\--
~ " ' , "" I t I
" -I . ."". -~- .._-~- - -- o'~" ! . ' "r ,-.... 1-. ' I , l j t I
" j - I"'" f""-r- "['''''' ""-1--- "I' -1- I . 1'1.-.' +- ,- --tl -~- --- - ~j.'. + -i, ,. ~I:. ~ ~t;'~. r 'n__' -- \--" -
: ' ' , . j- l-~" --, f --" I --- -t - ---1--- ----- n____~-- +" - - -- .".. ...-,-----~ --~---~ - , - --- i- .-----+- "-" -"'-- '--- -"
I I I I I ! l 1 i i I Ii! -- r-, I I '
. i I I I ,L I ' II III t'h '111 \
: ,- , -- --- --1- J.' i:"--l I~- -..-" -t" II 1-- ,,' I" - "II - ,. ,'. .,- . ' L
: , II j' i: I I J:r I I i ~ I
.-t~ I I I -' _ I i I 'i
I }.): 1",-;1..,. _ i
i I -" if:..
.. I i I-
I \., fi I I 'I I -' 1 I 9 -
'..,,---"---+-----L,,"l--""i.--., iT 1 MJ i ff'lit., !;'j'.' I?it i 1'<II,[t\.l,~ l~k
[' - " LI--r----"'..,,-----------r--.."!"."I' I ~ __ ____,___+_ " I 1-" -- -..1 l-j'--"5.lJ:t-;e}:~ I~~'
- ': ,. 'I -.." - ,,- -..- ..- -- ~ 2.: ~--..,-" -- - ~- - r - ,,_,,'t l'''I:->-1~_f'_ _--_"I'.'\_,.,.~~.,",,-_,
i- +_--.--1.. ,I . l -, +- - . - - -- . .. ' ~. -1- ... - --: ---, - .. ~, __
i' Iii I 'I
· l.:- - _ ! ... '-:_ ..JJ.. -b=: - _.t -. : :_1~=':~ '-.-. _: - .~i.~ Jl~: :JI .:... ~~. ! '! H_
""" ,-- ---- - -. ,,--" --" --- ----- ---,......- --"!"---" ""'2(F ....- -~f-- ",:;-' --l~ ti- ""..
__,. __. ___ - - - __ ___'" ___ ___ __ - __ j' --1 0. __ __ ~ _" _"""" ,,_ _, _!" \ I
...... I 1"- ',#' i I . "
. .m ---.- , -.- -- ---- 'I~. --~. -.' III
: '''l=~ ~~:.:~ _.l~t~=CL ~J~:lE ':, ..J-=~.tf.:: 'IJ)-
---..,.----,.-}- ------~---t-" r---'. r . .--
~ -!
-~-F"":';)+- - -- -- t--- ",,- --+""" --" -- _n""-1-- ---I," _~_.1. "I-~ n'
.. ~ "--~: '" -lL~rr--~. .. ~- '. ~._' ~ :_~~ --:ft--" =t"- ---~:--- ,I j1 t "
-~ ~ ~ .- -.., :.~:::I~) fl: -- j::::L- -- 1,ln .
. [HI:-: 1-: .-- '1.,.:lT ~I- _._1_ " .,.1 __I -- + .., i1,
,~
/e
.: \
,I I
\\ I
'--- /'
e
_\;/
, .
--~
.A.
I
---
July 3, 2003
City of Hopkins
1010 1st Street South
Hopkins, MN 55343
Attention: Nancy Anderson
Dear Madam,
SUBJECT: VARIANCE
I would like to request a variance concerning my property line and driveway replacement.
The existing driveway is 8 ft wide and butts up against my side steps. The opposite side of
the driveway falls on my neighbor's property line. If I were to decrease the width of the
driveway to bring it 2 ft from the property line, the driveway would not be wide enough to
allow a small car through to the garage.
I would like a to be allowed to replace the existing driveway as it now lies.
Sincerely,
? - rz-DJ--
Peggy Ross-Dahmen
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 03-64
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
APPROVING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT DRIVEWAY ABUTTING THE LOT LINE
WHEREAS, an application for Variance VN03-4 has been made by Peggy Ross-
Dahmen; and
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That an application for Variance VN03-4 was made by Peggy Ross-
Dahmen on July 3, 2003;
2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed
notice, held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application on
July 29,2003: 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 23, Block 5 Gibbs 1st Addition to West Minneapolis
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application for Variance VN03-4 is
hereby approved based on the following Findings of Fact:
1. That based on where the house is situated, access to the rear yard is limited.
2. That the extra two feet of driveway will provide a driveway width that is
adequate to provide access to the garage.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Variance VN03-4 is hereby
approved based on the following conditions:
1. That the south property stakes are located.
Adopted this 6th day of August 2003.
ATTEST:
Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor
.
Terry Obennaier, City Clerk