Agenda Packets - 2012/04/23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council March 12, 2012 Regular Meeting Page 7 affected by the change to City Code. City Administrator Ericson did not recall there being any 1 garage building permits outstanding prior to 2009. He stated this was a unique case as the plans 2 submitted were not followed. The difference in the garage height from the plans submitted was 3 approximately two feet. He understood this was to be a small number, but again, the change in 4 plans was not brought to the City for approval before being completed. 5 6 Council Member Hull questioned how much work would be required to bring the garage to the 7 20 foot height which was originally submitted. Mr. Downing stated this would be much more 8 doable than an 18 feet height. He explained he would not have added the extra two feet if the 9 City’s building the inspector at the time had commented he wouldn’t get up and measure the 10 final height. It did not occur to him that Don would retire and not be available to support his 11 request. 12 13 Mayor Flaherty agreed with Council Member Hull’s suggestion to bring the garage height to 20 14 feet. He did not want to see the Council open the floodgates to residents requesting variances 15 after the fact. 16 17 Mr. Carlson questioned if the Council was going to pursue each homeowner within the City to 18 ensure their garage height matched the plans submitted with the City. City Administrator 19 Ericson stated the key difference is that if the City inspector completed the final inspection and a 20 certificate of occupancy was granted, the City could not take action. 21 22 Mr. Carlson asked why the City was applying discretion to this case and not to all garage height 23 cases. He questioned if the City was diligent about following through with final inspections. 24 City Administrator Ericson indicated the City did not have a large number of structural building 25 permits outstanding. Mayor Flaherty added that this was also dependent upon the inspector at the 26 time the project was completed. 27 28 Mr. Carlson felt the Downings were being singled out and felt this wasn’t fair. 29 30 Mr. Downing indicated the suggestion made by Council Member Hull was more agreeable than 31 removing the entire garage roof. 32 33 Council Member Gunn stated she was on the Planning Commission when the garage height 34 requirements were changed. She explained that part of the homeowners’ responsibility with 35 submitting plans was to follow through on the plans submitted. If the plans were changed or 36 altered, this created new circumstances that needed to be reviewed by the City. This needed to be 37 done before completion and not after the fact. 38 39 Council Member Gunn indicated the applicant admitted he did not submit the dormer plans, as 40 they could be rejected. The applicant knew full well that he had changed the plans without City 41 approval. As to the garage height, if the plans were followed, this would not be an issue, but 42 again, the applicant took it upon himself to make a change without seeking City approval. She 43 recommended the garage height be brought down two feet to the originally approved height of 44 20½ feet. 45