HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-146 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 1994/10/03RESOLUTION NO. 9 4 -14 6
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE IN GARAGE LOCATION FROM
SECTION 14:5-4.1(7) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING
TO PERMIT A DETACHED GARAGE LOCATED BETWEEN THE FRONT
BUILDING WALL AND THE FRONT LOT LINE IN THE R-1, DISTRICT AT
9310 28TH STREET WEST
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
Findings
1. Kye A. Ploen and Kelly E. Ploen have applied for a variance from Section
14:5-4.1(7) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a detached garage located
between the front building wall and the front lot line for a single family home and garage
located in the R-1 Single Family Residence District at the following location, to -wit:
Par 1: The East 60 feet of the West 795 feet of that part of the South 1/2 of
the Southwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 117, Range 21 lying North of
the Great Northern Railway, according to the Government Survey thereof.
Subject to easement for right of way for roadway purposes over a strip 60 feet
wide adjacent to and parallel with the Northerly line of the Great Northern
right of way and across the Southerly portion of said above described tract
pursuant to Order of Court in Torrens Case No. A-18186; (See Order Doc. No.
1149305)
Par 2: The North 511 feet of the East 60 feet of the West 735 feet of that part
of the South 1/2 of the Southwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 117, Range
21 lying North of the Great Northern Railway, according to the Government
Survey thereof.
Subject to certain building restrictions as contained in deed Doc. No. 1083373;
Files of Registrar of Titles; (as Par 2)
Torrens Certificate No. 787428
2. The Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing, received testimony from
the public, discussed the application for a variance (Case No. 94 -35 -VAR) and, upon finding
that the request did not satisfy the Ordinance necessary for granting a variance, approved a
Resolution of Denial.
3. On September 2, 1994, the applicants, Kye A. Ploen and Kelly E. Ploen, filed
an appeal of this decision to the City Council.
4. On Monday, September 26, 1994, the City Council considered the appeal of
Kye A. Ploen and Kelly E. Ploen from the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals.
5. The Council has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,
light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on values of property in the
surrounding area, and the effect of the proposed variance upon the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Because of conditions on the subject property and on the surrounding
property, it is possible to use the subject property in such a way that the proposed variance
will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property, unreasonably
increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the
public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any
other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive
Plan.
7. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are
peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to
other land or structures in the district in which such land is located. The lot on which the
proposed garage would be located is 700 feet long. The existing structure on the site is set
back 6.75 feet from the farthest side lot line from the structure which is not an adequate
width to allow a driveway to a garage in the rear of the building. The proposed garage
would be located behind a lilac hedge which will provide screening from the street.
8. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. It will not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or
difficulty.
9. The following conditions and safeguards are necessary in order to insure and
will in fact insure that there will be no unreasonably adverse consequences to the granting
of the variance:
a. The garage shall be located between a lilac hedge and the house.
b. The lilac hedge and two spruce trees between the proposed garage and the
front line shall be maintained and, in the event the plants die or are removed,
they shall be replaced with an equivalent amount of plant materials.
10. The contents of Planning Case File 94 -35 -VAR are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The application for a variance to permit a detached garage located between the front
property wall and the front lot line is granted based upon the findings set forth above, with
the understanding that this approval is good for one calendar year from this date.
ATTEST:
Reviewed by administration:
94-35-CC:BOZA RES1
Adopted by the City Council October 3, 1994
il ,647,1
Approved as to form and execution:
City Attorney