My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1997/03/24
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
Agenda Packets - 1997/03/24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:47:03 PM
Creation date
6/28/2018 11:47:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/24/1997
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
3/24/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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
City of Mounds View Staff Report <br /> Planning Case No. 473-97, Oversized Garage CUP <br /> March 21, 1997 <br /> Page 2 <br /> a <br /> Applicable Regulations <br /> Section 1106.04 of the Zoning Code states that no garage shall exceed 864 square feet except by <br /> conditional use permit. With a CUP, the maximum area for a garage is 1,264 square feet. The <br /> garage proposed by the applicant, at 1,260 square feet, is 4 square feet shy of the maximum size <br /> allowed by the Code. <br /> Section 1125.01 gives a list of criteria that must be satisfied in order for conditional use permits to <br /> be approved. This development appears to satisfy the criteria with the possible exception of <br /> numbers two and three as follows: <br /> (2) "The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by a distance or screening from <br /> adjacent residentially zoned land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value..." <br /> (3) "The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect <br /> upon the adjacent residential properties." <br /> The issue of compatibility is strong between these criteria. The question that needs to be addressed <br /> is whether or not this garage would be keeping with the character of the neighborhood, or in other <br /> words, would it be a"good fit." A related factor worth considering is how the proposed garage <br /> would compare to the existing principal structure on the site. <br /> Staff Analysis: <br /> Most of the homes in this neighborhood are smaller, one-and-a-half story expansions with small <br /> detached garages. While large, multi-stall garages may be common among newer or larger homes, <br /> a garage of this proportion would be inconsistent with the garages present in this area. The City <br /> Code does not have any provision that restricts or limits the size of a garage to a certain percentage <br /> of the principal structure. Staff considers that this garage would be incompatible with the <br /> surrounding area and incompatible with the house. <br /> In the staff report that went to the Planning Commission for its March 5th meeting, Staff was <br /> favorable toward recommending approval of this project because the garage met all of the <br /> dimensional requirements and the thought that the bulk of the garage would be adequately shielded <br /> from view. In addition, Staff thought that by having the car hauler and race car stored inside the <br /> garage as opposed to outside, it would decrease if not eliminate the clutter present on the site. <br /> Since that meeting, however, Staff has received more phone calls and met with persons stopping in <br /> at City Hall who voiced objections to the proposal. <br /> Staff decided to measure the car hauler to determine whether a smaller garage could be built that <br /> would still be of a size sufficient to store the car hauler. Its length is approximately 28 feet without • <br /> a car, probably 32 feet with a car. Adjusting upwards, a garage 36 feet long would appear to be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.