My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1998 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
1998 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2018 10:25:19 AM
Creation date
2/22/2012 8:14:59 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
882
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
, _ <br />_ L _ � <br />- . °- ; . , -;_ ' � :3 f _ - - <br />---- - , --=-_ =- - --= --- = = ---; " -- - _ _ �' <br />r <br />� — - - --- - - -- _-- � - - i _ - - -�- ----� --� -� <br />Planning Commission Resolution 540-98 <br />April 15, 1998 <br />Page 2 <br />property along with those immediately adjacent to it are '/, of an acre or larger, some of which are <br />heavily wooded. While the proposed shed is larger than what is might be standard for this area, the <br />placement of the building 100 feet behind home hides it street view. The shed would be visible only to <br />the two neighboring properties. The home behind the subject properly is screened by the rolling <br />typography and extensive tree cover. <br />Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. <br />The conversion and relocation of the existing garage will serve to increase the subject property's <br />value without negatively impacting the values of the neighboring properties. However, because the <br />garage's stucco exterior matches the exterior of the home, staff would stipulate that the shed maintain <br />a consistent and uniform appearance with the house until such time that the shed is removed from the <br />property. <br />The demonstrated need for such a use. <br />The existing garage is small, even for a single car garage. The applicant would like to pazk more than <br />one vehicle inside at a time. The siructure, however, is in solid repair, and could be retained as a <br />storage shed, which the applicant currently does not have. The applicant currently stores yard and <br />garden equipment outside, under their deck and in the back yard in the open. <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission makes the following findings regarding the criteria <br />for approval of a conditional use pernut, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 3.b.: <br />(1) The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public <br />facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. <br />(7) The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. <br />(8) Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be <br />provided. <br />The conversion of the garage to a storage shed will not create a greater impact on eYisting public <br />facilities or services, on utilities or access roads, nor will it create an increase in traffic on adjacent <br />streets. The increase in runoff from the larger structure is not significant and will not affect the <br />drainage system. <br />(2) The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening &om adjacent <br />residentially zoned or used land so that e;cisting homes will not be depreciated in value and <br />there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. <br />(3) The siructure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon <br />adjacent residential properties. <br />The placement of the shed 100 feet behind the home will hide it from street view. The shed will, <br />ho�vever, will be in full vie�v of the rivo adjoinir,g properties. Through the CUP, it will be required that <br />the shed maintain the same exterior appearance of the house. <br />(4) The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the <br />Ciry and to the existing land use. <br />(5) The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning <br />district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. <br />(6) The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.