Agenda Packets - 2006/08/14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council July 10, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 12 the collection currently resides in part of his garage, his lower level, a bedroom, and a storage 1 unit. He stated he does not currently have a display and it will not fit in his current square 2 footage. 3 4 Mr. Caulsniak and Mr. Slabiak explained the dimensions of the areas that are currently occupied 5 by his collection. 6 7 Councilmember Thomas stated she is looking for the difference in the space the collection 8 currently occupies versus the square footage for which Mr. Slabiak is asking. Mr. Slabiak 9 responded he would like to clear out some family areas for his expanding family. He added the 10 property owner behind him approves of the building. 11 12 Councilmember Thomas stated there have been many changes with the allowed accessory 13 building space and all have been to increase allowed accessory storage. She stated the square 14 footage number was put in place to address large lots. She stated there was a significant 15 limitation in the past and the current allowance is much broader and is the most generous amount 16 allowed ever in the City. 17 18 Councilmember Thomas stated she is in favor of more storage space, but the hardship is of the 19 applicant’s creation. 20 21 Councilmember Thomas explained that the issue is a matter of the design of the building and she 22 does believe a variance is detrimental to the code. She stated the Council should not make a 23 determination based on lot size. She added that the Council takes variances very seriously and 24 she believes the applicant could make the building smaller to satisfy the code. She stated that if 25 the applicant wanted to add on to his house, it would be an entirely different issue. 26 27 Mayor Marty stated that many discussions have revolved around accessory buildings in the past 28 and Staff developed a generous accessory building ordinance. He stated he felt at the time that 29 1,800 square feet was large, but the ordinance has since decreased the amount of time spent 30 discussing such variances. 31 32 Mr. Slabiak explained that he had considered an addition to his house, but was under the 33 impression that he would be allowed to build the accessory building when he purchased his 34 home. He stated the costs are continually rising for the proposed building and building a home 35 addition would be even more expensive. He stated his wife would like to remove the collection 36 from the home. He also pointed out the building could be used in many different ways if he were 37 to sell the property. Mr. Slabiak stated that within his constraints, the proposed accessory 38 building is his only option. 39 40 Mr. Calusniak commented that there have been cases in the past where applicants have had 41 similar circumstances that were not determined to have been created by the applicant. He stated 42 if the variance is not approved, he and Mr. Slabiak will have to consider other alternatives, 43 including a less-desirable two-story building. He also suggested the Council reexamine current 44 codes. 45