HomeMy Public PortalAbout2011-040 Resolution Approving Variances to Janet White for Property at 4642 Brook St.Member Pederson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF MEDINA
RESOLUTION 2011-40
RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES TO JANET WHITE
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4642 BROOK STREET
WHEREAS, the city of Medina (the "City") is a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, Janet White (the "Applicant'), owns property at 4642 Brook Street which is
legally described on Exhibit A, attached hereto (the "Property"); and
WHEREAS, the Applicant has requested approval from the City of the following
variances from the setback requirements of the City Code in order to build a new home on the
Property:
(a) Reduce the required setback from the Brook Street right-of-way from 30 feet to 1.5 feet
(b) Reduce the required setback from the northern property line from 10 feet to 8.5 feet
(c) Reduce the required setback from the eastern property line from 30 feet to 11 feet; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2011, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing where testimony was heard from the Applicant, city staff, and other interested parties;
and
WHEREAS, on May 3, 2011, the City Council reviewed the request, considered the
recommendations of the Planning Commission and heard comments from interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has made the following findings of facts with regards to
the requested variances:
(a) An undue hardship exists as a result of the narrowness of the lot and this circumstance
does not apply generally to other property in the same zoning district.
(b) The literal interpretation of the setback provisions of the City Code would prevent the
Applicant from constructing a single-family home on the subject property, which is a
reasonable use and a right commonly enjoyed by other properties in the district.
(c) The narrow width of the existing lot does not result from the actions of the Applicant.
(d) Granting of the variances does not confer on the Applicant any special privileges that are
denied to owners of other property in the same district.
Resolution No. 2011-40
May 17, 2011
(e) The variances requested are the minimum which would alleviate the hardship.
(f) The variances are not detrimental to the purposes of the zoning ordinances or to property
in the same zone, especially because the property is located on a dead end street with
little traffic.
(g) The construction allowed by the variances is not inconsistent with the comprehensive
plan and will not alter the essential character of the area
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Medina, Minnesota
hereby grants approval of the variances referenced above, subject to the following terms and
conditions:
1) The Applicant shall construct the new home and grade the lot in substantial conformance
with the plans received by the City on March 22, 2011, except as amended herein.
2) The Applicant shall submit an as -built grading survey prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for the new home to verify that improvements where installed as approved.
3) The Applicant shall install rain gutters or alternative measures to direct run-off from the
roof to a location which minimizes potential impacts to adjacent property owners.
4) The Applicant shall construct the driveway within the lot of permeable or porous
materials, the design of which shall be approved by the City Engineer.
5) The Applicant shall abide by the City's tree preservation ordinance, to be reviewed at the
time of building permit.
6) The Applicant acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for damage to any vehicle
parked in the driveway which is partially or wholly within the public right-of-way if
snow plowed from Brook Street should come into contact with the vehicle.
7) The Applicant shall commence construction within one year of the approval of this
variance, or else approval of the variance shall be considered null and void.
8) The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for
the cost of reviewing the request.
Resolution No. 2011-40 2
May 17, 2011
I
Dated: May 17, 2011.
By:
Attest:
Chad M. Adams, City Administrator -Clerk
T. M. Crosby, Jr. yor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Siitari
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Crosby, Martinson, Pederson, Siitari
And the following voted against same: (Absent: Weir)
' Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Resolution No. 2011-40 3
May 17, 2011
Exhibit A
Legal Description of the Property
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ( w, R, Doc, No. 6947368)
That part of Lot 1 and the West 40 feet of Lot 2 and the West 40 feet of Lot 19, all
in Block 26 Independence Beach, described as follows: Commencing at the
Southwest corner of the said tract which is the Southwest comer of said Lot 1;
thence Southeasterly along the Northerly line of Main Street, a distance of 140
feet, more or less to the Southeast comer of said tract; thence North parallel to
the East line of said Lot 1, a distance of 54.33 feet; thence Northwesterly to a
point on the West line of said Lot 1; which paint is 40 feet Southwesterly from the
NorthweslerPy corner of said Lot 1 thence Southwesterly 55 feet to the point of
bear.n ng, according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the
office of the County Recorder.. Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Resolution No. 2011-40 4
May 17, 2011