Agenda Packets - 2006/08/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council July 10, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 10 the issue. 1 2 Mr. Slabiak gave the Council a history of himself and his wife and presented someone to speak 3 on his behalf. He stated he has been a resident of Mounds View for eight years. He explained 4 he has been collecting pinball machines for 20 years and is requesting the building be approved 5 so he has a place to display and share his collection. He noted it would not be open to the public 6 and it is a similar situation to someone who enjoys woodworking. 7 8 Mr. Slabiak stated when he began plans to construct the building, he spoke with staff at City Hall 9 who informed him such buildings have been allowed. He stated he purchased his home with the 10 idea of building an accessory building. He stated Staff at the front desk gave him the impression 11 that such a request would likely be granted through a CUP. 12 13 Mr. Slabiak added that when he turned in the CUP, he was informed his proposed building was 14 too big. He stated that when he turned in the variance he was confused, was told he had done 15 everything right, and was under such an impression. 16 17 Michael Calusniak suggested Mr. Slabiak’s neighbors speak in support of the CUP for the 18 garage. 19 20 Jim Bower, 8121 Long Lake Road, stated he is Mr. Slabiak’s next door neighbor and is not 21 opposed to the building. He stated he believes it is a reasonable request. He added Mr. Slabiak 22 is an excellent, respectful neighbor. 23 24 Patty Berglean, 8132 Long Lake Road, stated she is also a neighbor of Mr. Slabiak. She stated 25 that to her knowledge, no person can see the backyard of the property. She added she has no 26 problem with the large building and that she does not mind the large pole building in the property 27 adjacent to her backyard. She stated that Mr. Slabiak keeps up his yard and there are many trees 28 that will cover the building if the permit is granted. 29 30 Jim and Sarah Train, 8145 Long Lake Road, who are neighbors north of the parcel in question, 31 stated they do not object to the proposed building. Mr. Train questioned how the City can have 32 an ordinance related to accessory storage space that does not take into account the size of the 33 property. He stated he has nearly half an acre of property and asked if the same restrictions that 34 apply to a property 1/8 the size of his apply to his property. 35 36 Mr. Calusniak stated there were a few items to be clarified from the June 6th Planning 37 Commission meeting. He stated Mr. Slabiak feels he did not receive a fair review of the facts 38 when he was in front of the Planning Commission. He noted that the property is 2.7 times the 39 minimum lot size required by the City and it is largely undeveloped. He added that the proposed 40 building will not take up a large amount of the land. 41 42 Mr. Calusniak stated Mr. Slabiak’s existing collection will require 1,500 additional square feet 43 and several options were considered, such as knocking down part of the garage or building a 2-44 story structure. He stated in both cases, the negative impacts were far greater than that of the 45