07-02-2014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View Planning Commission June 4, 2014 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. VR2014-004 Consideration of Variance for a Second Curb Cut - Revote Applicant: Frands Jensen Address: 7800 Groveland Road Planning Associate Heller indicated the applicant, Frands Jensen, property owner of 7800 Groveland Road, is requesting a variance to allow a second curb cut and driveway on his property. The City Code allows one curb cut on each R-1, Single Family Residential zoned property without a variance. Associate Heller explained this case was discussed at the May 21, 2014 Planning Commission meeting and a vote was taken to act on a resolution which denied the variance. There were six Commissioners in attendance and the vote was 3-3, so the motion to deny the variance did not pass. The case was tabled until the June 4, 2014 meeting for another vote. For any variance to be approved there must be a majority 2/3 vote (at least 5 of 7 votes are needed to approve a variance). Staff did not recommend approval of the case as the City does not agree with adding second curb cuts to residential lots. Chair Stevenson indicated he reviewed the information from staff and the minutes from the previous meeting noting he was prepared to take a vote. He reported that if the Commission does not approve the second curb cut, the applicant can appeal this decision to the City Council. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Birken. To approve Resolution 1005-14, a Resolution Recommending Denial of a Variance for a Second Curb Cut; Planning Case No. VR2014-004. Commissioner Love commented she has given this request some consideration and after reviewing the variance criteria, she believed the variance was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as the resident preserved three mature trees through the placement of their new garage. In addition, the City had an urban design goal to improve the appearance of the community. She believed that the applicant’s second garage improved the curb appeal of the neighborhood. It was her opinion that the current code was behind the times. Commissioner Love further discussed the actions of the applicant noting that Mr. Jensen was made aware that a second curb cut was not allowed. However, she proposed that the Commission consider that trees had been saved and therefore, the variance should be allowed.