06-21-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission June 21, 2000 Regular Meeting Page 2 Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 The motion carried. 5. Discussion Regarding Anticipated Changes to the Zoning Code Pertaining to Sheds, Garages, and Accessory Structures. Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: Staff and the Planning Commission have been directed by the City Council to review the City Code with regard to Conditional Use Permits for accessory structures, sheds, and garages. The Planning Commission initiated discussion on this issue on June 7, 2000, and requested information as to what surrounding communities require, as well as what the City of Mounds View has approved up to the present for oversized garages and sheds. Planning Associate Ericson provided the Commission with a survey of the neighboring municipalities, which outlines their respective Code treatment of oversized accessory buildings and their application of the Conditional Use Permit process for the larger sized structures. He indicated the range varies significantly in that some cities only allow up to 1,000 square feet for accessory structures, however, other cities, such as the city of Maplewood, allow for accessory structures as large as 2,500 square feet, depending upon the size of the lot. He advised that the majority of cities do not differentiate between a shed and a garage, which are both considered accessory structures. Some cities require that accessory structures do not exceed a certain percentage of coverage of the rear or total yard area, whether that ratio be based upon impervious surface or accessory building coverage. Planning Associate Ericson stated the Mounds View City Code requires that an accessory structure shall not cover more than 20 percent of the rear yard area. He explained that there is no restriction with regard to the maximum building coverage on the lot based upon the total lot area, and at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, this was discussed in terms of a potential revision to the Code. The Commission also discussed whether or not they would desire to reconsider the requirement of a Conditional Use Permit for a garage, which is proposed to be larger than the house, regardless of the size of the house. Planning Associate Ericson stated staff has identified a number of issues related to the zoning requirements for accessory structures, and has prepared a list of questions for consideration in this regard. They are as follows: * The maximum area for a shed without a CUP is 216 square feet. Should this limit be increased? If so, at what point should a CUP be required. * Should the maximum shed area with a CUP be increased from 400 square feet? * Should larger sheds be permitted uses in larger yards rather than by CUP.