HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 Planning Commission PacketsMOUNDS VIEW
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
January 2, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Special Order of Business
A. Oath of Office for Commissioners
B. Election of Officers — Chair and Vice -Chair
4. Approval of Minutes:
November 7, 2012
5. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for
the record.)
6. Planning Cases
None
7. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings
8. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. February 6, 2013
B. February 20, 2013
9. Adjourn to Agenda Session
AGENDA SESSION
1. Review Minutes:
a. December 5, 2012
2. Staff Reports
a. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
M i.�
's i(Vi�
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: *A
Meeting Date: January 2 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Proposed Code Amendment for Accessory
Buildings
Introduction:
Community Development staff is asked by residents what styles or types of "buildings" or
materials are allowed to be used as accessory buildings. The zoning code specifies a few
types of materials that are not allowed (such as tubular and canvas structures) and states
that the exterior must be weather resistant.
Discussion:
The Planning Commission has made changes to the zoning code regarding accessory
buildings, and there has been a lot of discussion over how much to regulate the styles of the
accessory buildings. Regulations for the roof pitch and style were added to the Code a few
years ago, but in general, the Planning Commission has decided not to regulate the styles of
accessory buildings that are allowed. The exception to this is when a conditional use permit
is approved for a structure over 952 square feet. One of the conditions is that the accessory
building shall have a uniform appearance with the house.
City staff has recently discovered a residential property in the City that is using a steel
shipping container as a shed. Staff does not feel that this type of structure is appropriate in
a residential district (or possibly in any zoning district), and is suggesting that the Planning
Commission consider adding language to the zoning code that would not allow these to be
used as storage buildings.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss the information, and
provide staff with direction about the proposed amendment.
Respectfully submitted.
CmmvL
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Photo of shipping container
2. Zoning Code sections that regulate accessory buildings
PJ,;:
rmuu
urs
.e ,s
y .sem � .'+' •`�_ �. �+.5 � _ � T r:-,`�.','. ,.. �.�."�.
-201
1102.02: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this Code,
shall be defined as follows: (Ord. 548, 9-24-94; Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
Subd. 1. ACCESSORY BUILDING OR USE: A subordinate building or use which is located on the
same lot on which the main building or use is situated and which is reasonably necessary and
incidental to the conduct of the primary use of such building or main use.
Subd. 11. BUILDING: Any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or
occupancy.
Subd. 14. CARPORT: Space for the housing or storage of motor vehicles and enclosed on not more
than two (2) sides.
Subd. 49. GARAGE, PRIVATE: A detached accessory building or portion of the principal building,
including a carport, which is used for storing vehicles.
Subd. 118. STRUCTURE: Anything erected, the use of which requires more or less permanent
locations on the ground or attached to something having a permanent location on the ground.
1103.06: ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, USES AND EQUIPMENT:
Subd. 1. Connection to Principal Building: An accessory building shall be considered an integral part
of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building by a covered passageway.
Subd. 2. Location in Yards:
a. No accessory building, other than a garage, shall be erected or located within any required
yard other than the rear yard. (1988 Code §40.04)
b. Accessory uses or equipment must be located in the rear yard, except those expressly allowed
in side yards in subdivision 1104.01(5) of this Title. (Ord. 453, 2-27-89)
1104.01: YARD REQUIREMENTS
Subd. 4. Minimum Setbacks for Accessory Buildings, Driveways and Parking Areas:
a. Accessory Buildings (detached from a principal building): (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(1) R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5: (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
(a) front: no accessory building shall be located between the front of the
principal building and the front lot line. (Ord. 590,11-25-96)
(b) side: five feet (5) except the minimum setback shall be thirty feet (30') from
any lot line abutting a public street. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(c) rear, including street frontages at the rear of through lots: five feet (5'). (Ord.
590,11-25-96)
(2) All other districts:
(a) front: no accessory building shall be located between the front of the
principal building and the front lot line. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(b) side: same as principal building. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(c) rear: same as principal building, except accessory buildings having four
hundred (400) square feet or less and not abutting property in a residential district
or a street, may have a minimum rear setback often feet (10'). (Ord.590,11-25-
96)
1106.03: ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted accessory uses in an R-1 District:
(1988 Code §40.10)
Subd. 1. Accessory Buildings: Accessory buildings, which for these purposes shall include garages,
tool houses, carports, sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supply and
noncommercial recreational equipment, whether attached or detached. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
a. Every R-1 zoned property improved with a single-family dwelling is allowed a maximum of
one -thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet of combined accessory building area, subject to
the requirements noted herein. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00; Ord. 693, 3-25-02)
b. Accessory buildings shall not exceed eighteen feet (18') or that of the principal structure,
whichever is less, in height, shall be five feet (5) or more from all lots lines of adjoining lots and
shall have a pitch or slope of at least 2-12, but no steeper than 12-12. Rounded, dome or
geodesic dome roofs are not allowed on accessory buildings. Accessory buildings one hundred
twenty (120) square feet or under shall be three feet (3) or more fiom any other building or
structure. Accessory buildings over one hundred twenty (120) square feet shall meet the
minimum fire separation distance as required by the Minnesota State Building Code. (Ord. 664,
8-14-00; Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
c. No accessory building in an R-1 District shall exceed nine hundred fifty-two (952) square feet
in area, except by conditional use permit. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
d. The combined square footage of accessory buildings in a rear yard shall not exceed twenty
percent (20%) of the rear yard. (Ord. 442, 7-11-88; Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
e. An outdoor living room or patio shall not be used for storage of automobiles or trucks. (Ord.
664-8-14-00)
f. No permit shall be issued for the construction of more than three (3) accessory buildings in
any R-1 District. One (1) of the three (3) permits must be for a garage. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
g. Accessory buildings shall have a weather resistant, treated or finished exterior. Structures
composed of tubular metal and canvas or exposed plywood, particle board or similar materials
shall not be permitted. The City does not allow cloth, canvas, plastic sheets and tarps or similar
materials as primary exterior materials on accessory buildings (except for green houses). (Ord.
664, 8-14-00; Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
h. If any accessory building is to be utilized for the storage of frequently -used vehicles, it shall
be serviced by an improved driveway so as to control dust, drainage and erosion, according to the
requirements as set forth in Section 902.05 of this Code. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
i. The roof of all accessory buildings exceeding two hundred fifty (250) square feet in size shall:
(Added, Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
(1) Match or be similar to the character and style of the roof of the principal structure.
(Added, Ord. 828,10-8-09)
(2) Have a pitch or slope of at least 2-12. (Added, Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
1106.04: CONDITIONAL USES: The following are conditional uses in an R-1 District
(requiring a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Section 1125.01
of this Title):
Subd. 6. Accessory building exceeding nine hundred fifty two (952) square feet. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98;
Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
a. The accessory building must conform with Section 1103.06 and subdivision 1106.03(1) of this
Title.
b. The combined square footage of all accessory buildings on one (1) lot cannot exceed one
thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 701, 9-9-02)
c. The building shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the
dwelling unit.
d. The width of the building cannot exceed thirty five feet (35). (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
e. The building shall be a permanent structure. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
f Should the use for which the permit was granted be changed, the permit shall be subject to
reconsideration, revocation or other action regulated by Section 1125.01 of this Title. (Ord. 664,
8-14-00)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
December 5, 2012
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for December 5, 2012,
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Cramblit, Meehlhause, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen,
Stevenson and Smith.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present:
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Review Planning Commissioner Applications
Set 2013 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule
3. Approval of Minutes
October 3, 2012.
Page
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Meehlhause. To approve the
Minutes of the October 3, 2012 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
December 5, 2012
Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Planning Commissioner Applications
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that the term of three Planning Commission
members, Paul Schiltgen, Holly Smith and Keith Cramblit, expire at the end of the year. The
remaining two years of Gary Meehlhause's term will also need to be filled since he was elected
to the City Council starting in January. She explained the City advertised the vacancies, with
applications due on November 26, 2012. Staff received applications from two current
Commissioners for another term, in addition to two new applications. She noted Holly Smith
would be interested in the two-year term with other three candidates receiving the standard three-
year term. Staff requested the Commission review the applications and make a recommendation
to Council.
The Commission was in favor of the applications received by Holly Smith and Paul Schiltgen.
Chair Stevenson requested the two new candidates come forward and introduce themselves to
the Planning Commission.
John Elofson introduced himself to the Planning Commission noting he has been a resident of
Mounds View since 1973. He explained he was looking forward to serving the community. He
noted he has worked for the Post Office for the last four years.
Cindy Carvelli-Yu, 5255 Irondale Road, introduced herself to the Planning Commission noting
she has been a resident of Mounds View since 1996. She indicated she has worked with the City
in the past with rebranding the City and works diligently with her neighborhood watch. She
loves the Mounds View community and looked forward to being a part of the Commission.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Meehlhause/Commissioner Rundle. To recommend Paul
Schiltgen, Holly Smith, John Elofson and Cindy Carvelli-Yu to serve as Planning
Commissioners beginning in January 2013, with Holly Smith filling the two-year term.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
B. Set 2013 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule
December 5, 2012
Page 3
Planning Associate Heller indicated the Commission establishes a meeting schedule each year by
Resolution. The meeting schedule proposed for 2013 represents the usual first and third
Wednesday of each month. She commented there did not appear to be any conflicts with
holidays in 2013. The only meeting close to a holiday was July 3`d. Staff recommended the
Commission discuss and approve the meeting schedule.
Chair Stevenson recommended the meetings in July be moved to the 10th and the 24th (second
and fourth Wednesdays).
MOTION/SECOND: Chair Stevenson/Commissioner Cramblit. To Approve Resolution 974-
12, Establishing the 2013 Meeting Schedule of the Planning Commission, as slightly amended.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. December 19, 2012
B. January 2, 2013
8. Adjournment to Agenda Session
Motion carried.
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:24 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
MOUNDS VIEW
RM
February 6, 2013 -- 1!
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
December 5, 2012
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for
the record.)
5. Planning Cases
None
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Planning Commission Bylaws
B. Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. February 20, 2013
B. March 6, 2013
8. Adjourn to Agenda Session
AGENDA SESSION
1. Review Minutes:
a. January 2, 2013
2. Staff Reports
a. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: February 6 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
City of Mounds View Staff Report
NEEOF-
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Review the Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws
Introduction:
The Planning Commission's Bylaws state thatthe Commission shall reviewthe Bylaws on an
annual basis.
Discussion:
The Planning Commission should review the attached Bylaws. Staff is not proposing any
changes to the Bylaws.
The last time the Planning Commission amended the Bylaws was in January of 2007. The
last change was about the number of absences a commissioner may have in a given year.
Recommendation:
Adopt the Bylaws for the Planning Commission. If the Commission does not make any
amendments or modifications to the Bylaws, then the Commission may readopt them by
motion.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachment
Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws
City of Mounds View
Planning and Zoning Commission - Bylaws
Page 3
V. COUNCIL LIAISON: The City Council may appoint from among its members a
Liaison to the Commission on an annual basis. It is expected that the Council Liaison
will attend the Commission meetings on a regular basis. In the event of the absence
of the Council Liaison at a Commission meeting, a Commission member may be
appointed by the chairperson to represent the Planning Commission at the next
regular City Council meeting or at the meeting where the City Council will be
considering the planning cases acted upon by the Planning Commission in the
absence of the Council Liaison.
VI. MEETINGS
A. TYPES OF MEETINGS, SCHEDULE: The annual meeting schedule of the
Commission shall be adopted by Resolution at the first regular meeting in
December for the following year.
1. Regular Meetings: Subject to the adopted meeting schedule, the
Commission's regular meetings will occur on the first and third Wednesdays
of each month for the purpose of convening public hearings, making
recommendations to the City Council, conducting business which requires a
vote of the Commission, convening as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals,
conducting long-range planning functions and other official business.
2. Agenda Sessions: An Agenda Session is an informal session of the
Planning Commission, typically held immediately following adjournment of a
Regular or Special meeting, at which time the Planning Commission may
review minutes, informally review proposed or pending planning cases or
ordinance amendments, discuss previous actions of the City Council or other
Commissions, and to perform other matters not requiring a vote of the
Commission.
3. Special Meetings: From time to time, special meetings may be called in
order to process significant caseloads, to review works in progress such as
comprehensive plan updates or municipal code revisions, or to undertake a
retreat or strategic planning session, either amongst itself or in the company
of the City Council or other commissions. Special meetings can be proposed
by any Commission member or at the request of the Director of Community
Development, yet must be approved by a majority vote of the Commission.
4. Emergency Special Meetings. Emergency special meetings can be called
via written notice to the Director of Community Development by the
Chairperson or two Commission members, or by the Director of Community
Development. (Emergency special meetings are those in which the subject
matter is of such an immediate concern that it cannot be delayed until the
next regular meeting of the Planning Commission.) The Director of
Community Development shall post and mail a notice of any special meeting
City of Mounds View
Planning and Zoning Commission - Bylaws
Page 4
in accordance with State Statutes. Planning Commission members shall be
notified by telephone and in writing, if possible, at least seven days prior to a
special meeting.
5. Cancellation of Meetings: Regular or special meetings may be canceled by
the chairperson or Community Development Director in the event that there
are no items of business requiring the attention of the Commission, or for
lack of a quorum, or in response to inclement weather or for any other good
and sufficient reason. Members of the Commission shall be notified by
telephone of any meeting cancellation. A notice of the meeting cancellation
shall be posted as required by State Statutes.
B. QUORUM: A majority of the number of voting members appointed to the
Commission shall constitute a quorum.
C. CONDUCT OF MEETINGS, ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Chairperson: If neither the chairperson nor the vice chairperson is
present to conduct a meeting of the Planning Commission, the Planning
Commission may elect a meeting chair from among those members present
prior to the commencement of business. The election shall follow the
procedures set forth in Section IV.13.3, except that the Community
Development Director, or his or her designee, shall conduct the election.
2. Open Meeting Law: Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the
State of Minnesota Open Meeting Law (Minn. Statutes 471.705).
3. Adjournment: Meetings shall adjourn at or before 11:00 p.m. unless a two-
thirds majority of the members present agree to extend the time of
adjournment. If there is no objection, the Chairperson may declare the
meeting adjourned without the necessity of a motion or vote by the
Commission.
D. MINUTES: Minutes shall be recorded for regular meetings and each
commission member shall receive a copy of the unapproved minutes for review
and approval at a succeeding meeting. Minutes shall be approved by motion.
Approved minutes shall be the official record of the business conducted and
actions taken by the Planning Commission. Commission members may request
copies of approved minutes after they have been corrected, if necessary, and
signed as approved. Copies of the approved minutes shall be filed with the
Community Development Department. Unapproved minutes shall be clearly
marked "DRAFT; approved minutes shall be marked "APPROVED". A policy
statement regarding the content and format of the minutes shall be on file with
the Director of Community Development which may be reviewed from time to
time as needed.
City of Mounds View
Planning and Zoning Commission - Bylaws
Page 5
VII. INFORMATIONAL PACKETS: Each Commissioner shall receive a staff report, plans
and additional information, as appropriate, for each item placed on the agenda for
any regular or special meeting. The Commission packet should be delivered at least
four days prior to the meeting. Each Commissioner is responsible for reviewing the
material within the packet prior to the meeting.
VIII. PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS: Advice from, consultation with, and/or requests
for review by the City Attorney, City Engineer, City Planning Agency, or other paid
consultants shall be in accordance with the Municipal Code, Section 401.07.
IX. SUPPLEMENTARY PUBLICATIONS: All Commission members shall receive a copy
of the Mounds View Municipal Code and a copy of the Municipal Comprehensive
Plan as well as other materials provided by the City Council or City Staff. These
materials shall be retained by each commission member and returned to the
Community Development Director upon the member's resignation or termination of
appointment.
X. CONDUCT OF MEMBERS
A. ATTENDANCE: Commission members shall advise the designated Staff
member or the Commission chairperson of an anticipated absence from any
regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting. Any member absent from
three consecutive regularly scheduled meetings or more than six regularly
scheduled meetings per year without the consent of the Commission shall be
deemed to have vacated the office, and such vacancy shall be filled by the City
Council pursuant to Section 401.03, Subd. 1. A leave of absence may be
granted by the consent of the Commission.
B. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.'
General Standard: No Commissioner shall be appointed with private or
personal interests likely to conflict with the general public interest. If any
person appointed to the Commission shall find that their private or personal
interests are involved in any matter coming before the Commission, they
shall disqualify themselves from taking part in any discussion or action on the
matter; alternatively, they may be disqualified by a two-thirds (2/3) majority
vote of the Commissioners in attendance.
2. Conflict Due to Economic Interests: A Commissioner has a conflict of
interest if, in his or her discharge of official duties, would be required to take
an action or make a decision that would substantially affect the
Commissioner's financial interests or those of an associated business,
unless the effect on the Commissioner is no greater than on other members
of the Commissioner's business classification, profession, or occupation. In
the event a conflict of interest exists with respect to a particular matter before
the Commission, the Commissioner shall disqualify himself or herself from
taking part in any discussion or action on the matter.
C. EX PARTE CONTACTS: Ex parte contacts are contacts between individuals
seeking to influence the decisions of the Planning Commission and individual
Commission members outside the meeting forum. Such contacts include
meetings with project proponents, residents, property owners, and citizens
separate from Commission meetings, communication between Commission
members outside the meeting forum, telephone calls or letters which attempt to
influence a Commissioner's opinion on a matter which will be subject to the
Commissioner's vote. When the Planning Commission is involved in a matter
which is to be heard and decided by the Commission (e.g. variances), Planning
Commissioners shall indicate to the person contacting them that such contact is
inappropriate and all testimony needs to be offered at the hearing to ensure a
fair hearing for all parties. In all other cases, Planning Commissioners should
discourage such contacts and should avoid expressing any opinion as to the
merits of the case. When ex parte contacts occur, the Planning Commissioner
is responsible for notifying the Community Development Director, and for
conveying the substance of the communication at the next commission meeting
at which the matter discussed is under consideration.
ATTEST:
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
James Ericson, City Administrator
Revision History:
January 24, 2007
September 1, 2004
February 21, 2001
February 2, 2000
March 5, 1997
February 3, 1993
October 1990
M�77��T7Item No: 6B
O N—DfVIEWMeeting Date: February 6, 2013
® Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Proposed Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings–
Shipping Containers
Introduction:
Community Development staff is asked by residents what styles or types of "buildings" or materials
are allowed to be used as accessory buildings. The zoning code specifies a few types of materials
that are not allowed (such as tubular and canvas structures) and states that the exterior must be
weather resistant. City staff has recently discovered a couple of residential properties in the City
that are using steel shipping container as sheds. Staff does not feel that this type of structure is
appropriate in a residential district (or possibly in any zoning district), and suggested that the
Planning Commission consider adding language to the zoning code that would not allow these to
be used as storage buildings.
Discussion:
At the January 2, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission agreed with staff that
shipping containers are not appropriate as a permanent use in residential districts, but felt that
there are situations where these, or other portable storage containers, could be allowed
temporarily. Construction projects or moving are the primary reasons that a resident would have a
need for a storage container for a short period of time.
Several ordinance examples from other cities are included in this staff report for the Commission
to review. They all are adding regulations for storage containers. Some cities are only allowing
them temporarily and others also allow them for long term storage. Most of the ordinances
address the same things and are worded very similar. Staff supports allowing the containers for
short periods of time, but not for long term storage. Staff would also recommend not allowing the
existing shipping containers in the City to remain as non -conforming. Language could be added
that addresses the existing containers and gives the property owner a certain amount of time to
remove the container.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss the information, and provide
staff with additional direction about the proposed amendment.
Respectfully submitted.
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Current Mounds View Zoning Code for Accessory Buildings
2. Ordinance examples that regulate shipping containers
Existing Mounds View Zoning Code regulations for accessory buildings
1102.02: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this Code, shall be
defined as follows: (Ord. 548, 9-24-94; Ord. 620, 7-27-98)
Subd. 1. ACCESSORY BUILDING OR USE: A subordinate building or use which is located on the same lot
on which the main building or use is situated and which is reasonably necessary and incidental to the
conduct of the primary use of such building or main use.
Subd. 11. BUILDING: Any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy.
Subd. 14. CARPORT: Space for the housing or storage of motor vehicles and enclosed on not more than two
(2) sides.
Subd. 49. GARAGE, PRIVATE: A detached accessory building or portion of the principal building,
including a carport, which is used for storing vehicles.
Subd. 118. STRUCTURE: Anything erected, the use of which requires more or less permanent locations on
the ground or attached to something having a permanent location on the ground.
1103.06: ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, USES AND EQUIPMENT:
Subd. 1. Connection to Principal Building: An accessory building shall be considered an integral part of the
principal building if it is connected to the principal building by a covered passageway.
Subd. 2. Location in Yards:
a. No accessory building, other than a garage, shall be erected or located within any required yard other
than the rear yard. (1988 Code §40.04)
b. Accessory uses or equipment must be located in the rear yard, except those expressly allowed in side
yards in subdivision 1104.01(5) of this Title. (Ord. 453, 2-27-89)
1104.01: YARD REQUIREMENTS
Subd. 4. Minimum Setbacks for Accessory Buildings, Driveways and Parking Areas:
a. Accessory Buildings (detached from a principal building): (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(1) R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5: (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
(a) front: no accessory building shall be located between the front of the principal
building and the front lot line. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(b) side: five feet (5) except the minimum setback shall be thirty feet (30') from any lot
line abutting a public street. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(c) rear, including street frontages at the rear of through lots: five feet (5'). (Ord. 590,
11-25-96)
EXSISTING MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE
(2) All other districts:
(a) front: no accessory building shall be located between the front of the principal
building and the front lot line. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(b) side: same as principal building. (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(c) rear: same as principal building, except accessory buildings having four hundred
(400) square feet or less and not abutting property in a residential district ora street, may
have a minimum rear setback often feet (10'). (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
1106.03: ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted accessory uses in an R-1 District: (1988
Code §40.10)
Subd. 1. Accessory Buildings: Accessory buildings, which for these purposes shall include garages, tool
houses, carports, sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supply and noncommercial
recreational equipment, whether attached or detached. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
a. Every R-1 zoned property improved with a single-family dwelling is allowed a maximum of one -
thousand eight hundred (1,800) square feet of combined accessory building area, subject to the
requirements noted herein. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00; Ord. 693, 3-25-02)
b. Accessory buildings shall not exceed eighteen feet (18) or that ofthe principal structure, whichever is
less, in height, shall be five feet (5) or more from all lots lines of adjoining lots and shall have a pitch or
slope of at least 2-12, but no steeper than 12-12. Rounded, dome or geodesic dome roofs are not
allowed on accessory buildings. Accessory buildings one hundred twenty (120) square feet or under
shall be three feet (3) or more from any other building or structure. Accessory buildings over one
hundred twenty (120) square feet shall meet the minimum fire separation distance as required by the
Minnesota State Building Code. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00; Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
c. No accessory building in an R-1 District shall exceed nine hundred fifty-two (952) square feet in area,
except by conditional use permit. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
d. The combined square footage of accessory buildings in a rear yard shall not exceed twenty percent
(20%) of the rear yard. (Ord. 442, 7-11-88; Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
e. An outdoor living room or patio shall not be used for storage of automobiles or trucks. (Ord. 664-8-
14-00)
f. No permit shall be issued for the construction of more than three (3) accessory buildings in any R-1
District. One (l) of the three (3) permits must be for a garage. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
EXISTING MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE
g. Accessory buildings shall have a weather resistant, treated or finished exterior. Structures composed
of tubular metal and canvas or exposed plywood, particle board or similar materials shall not be
permitted. The City does not allow cloth, canvas, plastic sheets and tarps or similar materials as primary
exterior materials on accessory buildings (except for greenhouses). (Ord. 664,8-14-00; Ord. 828,10-8-
09)
h. If any accessory building is to be utilized for the storage of frequently -used vehicles, it shall be
serviced by an improved driveway so as to control dust, drainage and erosion, according to the
requirements as set forth in Section 902.05 of this Code. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
i. The roof of all accessory buildings exceeding two hundred fifty (250) square feet in size shall:
(Added, Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
(1) Match or be similar to the character and style ofthe roof ofthe principal structure. (Added,
Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
(2) Have a pitch or slope of at least 2-12. (Added, Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
1106.04: CONDITIONAL USES: The following are conditional uses in an R-1 District (requiring a
conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Section 1125.01 of this Title):
Subd. 6. Accessory building exceeding nine hundred fifty two (952) square feet. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord.
664, 8-14-00)
a. The accessory building must conform with Section 1103.06 and subdivision 1106.03(1) ofthis Title.
b. The combined square footage of all accessory buildings on one (1) lot cannot exceed one thousand
eight hundred (1,800) square feet. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 701, 9-9-02)
c. The building shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the dwelling
unit.
d. The width of the building cannot exceed thirty five feet (35'). (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
e. The building shall be a permanent structure. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
f Should the use for which the permit was granted be changed, the permit shall be subject to
reconsideration, revocation or other action regulated by Section 1125.01 of this Title. (Ord. 664, 8-14-
00)
ORDINANCE NO. 2009-04-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LANCASTER, TEXAS,
AMENDING CHAPTER 3; BUILDING REGULATIONS, OF THE
LANCASTER CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING ARTICLE
3.6000, CARGO CONTAINER$, REGULATING THE USE OF
CARGO CONTAINERS, . REQUIRING A PERMIT, AND
PROVIDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; PROVIDING A
PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO EXCEED FIVE HUNDRED
DOLLARS ($500.06); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; PROVIDING A REPEALING
CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, cargo containers are routinely used during the construction or
remodeling phase of work in commercial and industrial areas; and
WHEREAS, cargo containers, while having a valid temporary construction
purpose, are occasionally placed in residential districts which proves to be unsightly; and
WHEREAS, the City desires, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare, to
regulate and provide for the use of such cargo containers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF LANCASTER, TEXAS.
SECTION 1. That Chapter 3, Building Regulations, of the Lancaster Code of
Ordinances be, and the same is, hereby amended by adding Article 3.6000, Cargo
Containers, which shall read as follows:
"ARTICLE 3.6000. CARGO CONTAINERS
Sec, 3,6001. Definitions.
As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings
subscribed in interpreting the provisions of this article.
Active Buildinu Pwn:Jt. Means an unexpired and unrevoked building
permit for which the Building Official has not performed a final
inspection.
Applicant. Means an owner, occupant, authorized agent, or contractor or
person with control of a property or lot.
Cargo Container. Means a standardized, reusable vessel maximum forty
feet (40') in length, 8 feet (8') in width, and 8 feet, six inches (8'6") in
height that is or appears to be:
(1) originally, specifically or formerly designed far or used in the
parking, shipping, movement, transportation or storage of freight,
articles, goods or commodities; or
(2) designed for or capable of being mounted or moved on a rail car;
or
(3) designed for or capable of being mounted on a chassis or bogie
for movement by truck trailer or loaded on a ship.
Com. Means the City of Lancaster, Texas.
See.3.6002. Cargo Container Use.
(a) No person shall store, maintain or otherwise keep a cargo container on any
lot or property without first having obtained a permit issued by the City Manager
or his designee.
(b) Temporary construction storage use. A person may store, maintain, or
otherwise keep a maximum of two (2) cargo containers on a lot or property within
any non-residential zoning district during the period of an active building permit
for construction, provided that. the Building, Official determines that the
consttuction project. warrants' "the .use of' a cargo container'to facilitate the
construction, taking'into consideration the size of the structure, complexity of the
project, and storage options for materials, The cargo container must be placed on
an approved surface, and the Building Official must approve its location on the
construction site. In the event that a building permit is expired, revoked, or
finalized, any cargo container used on the tot or property must be removed within
ten (10) calendar days from the expiration, revocation, or finalization of the
building permit.
(c) Long-term use. A cargo container may only be stored, maintained, or kept
for a period exceeding twelve (12) months on a lot or property granted an
agricultural exemption from ad valorem taxation. A person whose property meets
this qualification is limited to one (1) cargo container for the first three (3) acres,
and one (1) additional cargo container per every additional ten (10) acres, but not
to exceed five (5) cargo containers total per 100 acres of abutting property.
(d) No person shall store, maintain or otherwise keep a cargo container on any
lot or property after the expiration of ten (I0) calendar days of any valid cargo
container permit issued under this article.
See. 3.6003, 'Temporary Construction Storage Use Permits.
(a) No person shall store, maintain, or otherwise keep a cargo container as
provided in this Section 3.6002(b) without obtaining the required permit, which
shall be 'issued by the City Manager or designee after the applicant complies with
the following requirements.
(1) The applicant must submit a written permit application identifying the
intended temporary use for the cargo container, and provide a scaled site
or location plan showing the size and location of any proposed cargo
containers) on the lot or property, and the location of all existing
buildings and parking spaces.
(2) The applicant shall pay the required permit fee for each cargo container as
provided in this article.
(b) No person shall be issued a permit for the maintenance of a cargo
container unless a current active building permit has been issued for the lot or
property where the cargo container shall be located, and the applicant clearly
demonstrates the need for such container under the building permit issued for the
lot or property. The applicant may provide a written statement identifying the
reasons the cargo container(s) are needed during construction or remodeling
activities for which a building permit has been issued.
(c) The permit for a cargo container shall contain such reasonable conditions
which shall minimize the visual clutter and use of adjacent property.
Section 3.6004. Long-term Use Permits
(a) No person shall store, maintain, or otherwise keep a cargo container as
provided in this Section 3.6002(c) without obtaining the required permit, which
shall be issued by the City Manager or designee after the applicant complies with
the following requirements.
(1) The applicant annually must submit a written permit application for each
cargo container, provide a copy of the most recent property tax valuation
to establish that the lot or property has an agricultural exemption from ad
valorem taxation, and provide a scaled site or location plan showing the
size and Iocation of the cargo container(s) on the lot or property, any
screening features for the cargo container(s), and the location of any
existing buildings or structures.
(2) The applicant shall pay the required permit fee for each cargo container as
provided in this article.
(b) The permit for a cargo container shall contain such reasonable conditions
which shall minimize the visual clutter and use of adjacent property.
Section 3.6005. Standards for Cargo Containers.
(a) The following development standards shall apply to all cargo containers:
(1) The cargo container(s) shall be constructed of steel or aluminum with a
minimum 14 -gauge thickness, except for a wood floor within the metal
shell. Structural plans and calculations are not required.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not exceed forty feet (40') in length, eight
feet (8') in width, and eight feet, six inches (8'6") in height.
(3) The cargo container(s) shall not have any factory -built or field -applied
electrical, plumbing, heating, or air conditioning systems. Further, the
cargo container(s) shall not be connected to a power system.
(4) No fixtures, mechanicals, or equipment of any kind may be affixed to the
cargo container, with the exception of a locking device.
(5) The cargo container(s) shall be installed and maintained in a level and
plumb condition with a maximum differential settlement to grade of two
inches (2"). For long-term use, the container must be placed on a
permanent foundation.
(6) The cargo container(s) shall be a solid, flat, non -reflective neutral color.
Cargo containers with a long-term use permit must be painted a solid, flat,
non -reflective color that matches the surrounding natural environment.
(7) No signage, lettering, text, or artwork may be placed on any cargo
container.
(b) The following standards shall apply to the placement and location of all
cargo containers:
(1) The cargo container(s) may not occupy any required off-street parking
spaces or loading/unloading areas or fire lanes in any district.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not block, obstruct, or reduce in any manner
any required exits, windows, vent shafts, parking spaces, and/or access
driveways.
(3) The cargo container(s) shall conform to the setback and building line
requirements of the zoning district where it will be placed. No cargo
container shall be permitted in a location which is nearer to the public
street than the main building, except for projects with an active building
permit as defined in Section 3.6002(b).
(A) The cargo container(s) shall not be stacked on top of each other or on any
other structure.
(5) The cargo container(s) may not be placed closer than 1,000 feet to any
existing inventoried wetland or identified floodplainifloodway.
(6) The cargo container(s) with a long-term use permit must not be visible
from the portion of any public road that abuts the lot or property.
Acceptable screening features for a cargo container include landscaping,
fencing, pole barns, terrain, or a combination of these features. Applicant
must provide a detailed, to scale site plan for the cargo container(s),
which show any screening features. All structures and fences used for
screening must be permitted through the Building Department.
(c) The following standards apply to use of all cargo containers:
(1) The cargo container(s) shall not be used for human habitation or
commercial purposes.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not be used to store hazardous materials.
(3) Refuse and debris shall not be stored in, against, on, or under the cargo
container(s).
(d) A person may only place a cargo container on a property or lot that has:
(1) an active building permit issued by the City, and on which construction
has commenced; or
(2) an agricultural exemption from ad valorem taxation.
(e) The cargo container(s) shall be secured, structurally sound, stable, and in
good repair. Any cargo container that becomes unsecured, unsound,
unstable or otherwise dangerous shall be immediately repaired or
removed from the property. The Building Official shall provide the
permit holder for the cargo container(s) of any condition in violation of
Us section. After notice to the permit holder, any cargo container stored
or kept in such a manner deemed a dangerous condition and a public
nuisance as determined by the Building Official may be immediately
removed by the City.
(f) Any cargo container in violation of this article shall be removed by the
City, and any cost or expense associated with the removal shall be the
responsibility of the property owner where the cargo container is located.
All associated costs, including but not limited to legal fees and court
costs, shall constitute a debt due and owed to the City, and shall be
recordable as a lien upon the land of the cargo container storage facility
and/or property owner.
See. 3.6006. Revocation and appeal.
(a) Any permit issued under this article may be revoked upon ten (10) days
written notice to the owner, occupant or person in control of the property if such
person is storing, maintaining or otherwise keeping a cargo container in violation
of this article or permit herein issued.
(b) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the City Manager or designee to
revoke a permit may appeal to the Property Standards and Appeals Board whose
decision shall be final."
SECTION 2. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Lancaster,
Texas, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby
amended, repealed, and all other provisions of the Ordinances of the City not in conflict
with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 3. If any article, paragraph or subdivision, clause or provision of this
Ordinance shall be adjudged invalid or held unconstitutional, the same shall not affect the
validity of this Ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof, other than the part
so decided to be invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of
this ordinance or the provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Lancaster,
Texas, as amended hereby, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon
conviction in the municipal court of the City of Lancaster, Texas, shall be subject to a
fine not to exceed the sum of five hundred ($500.00) dollars for each offense, and each
and every day such offense shall continue shall be deemed to constitute a separate
offense.
SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after the
publication of its caption, as the law in such cases provides.
DULY PASSED by the City Council of the City of Lancaster, Texas, on the 27h
day of April 2009.
APPROVED:
m4A6� 4,/ Mk
MARC S E. KNIGHT, YAAYa
CITY OF MOSES LAKE
MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 18.76
CARGO CONTAINERS
Sections:
18.76.010 Purpose
18.76.020 Submittal Requirements
18.76.030 Minimum Conditions
18.76.040 Additional Conditions for Permanent Containers
18.76.050 Additional Conditions for Temporary Containers
18.76.010 Purpose: The purpose of this chapter is to establish minimum standards for the placement of
cargo containers as storage facilities in those zones where they are allowed by conditional use
permit. (Ord. 2144, 12/9/03)
18.76.020 Submittal Requirements: The following shall be submitted along with an application for a
conditional use permit for container placement:
A. A site plan to a standard scale, showing:
1. The location and dimensions of the container(s) and the buildingtowhich itisappurtenant.
2. The access to the building and the containers.
B. A statement of what will be stored in the container(s), for review by the Fire Marshal. (Ord.
2144, 12/9/03)
18.76.030 Minimum Conditions: Where a conditional use permit has been granted for use of cargo
containers as permanent or temporary storage facilities, the following minimum conditions shall
be met:
A. The cargo containers shall be used as an appurtenance to the primary use, such primary use
being situated in an enclosed adjoining building.
B. The cargo containers shall be placed on a level concrete or asphalt surface at all times.
C. The cargo containers shall not be slacked.
D. A fire apparatus access road shall be provided to both the containers and to the building the
containers are appurtenant to. Fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum oftwentyfeet
(20) wide with thirteen feet six inches (13'6") vertical clearance, shall be hard surfaced, and
shall provide access to within one hundred fifty feet (150') of any portion of the container(s).
Access roads shall be either looped or provided with an approved turn around as specified in
Moses Lake Municipal Code Chapter 16.36
E. The cargo containers shall not be visible to the motoring public or from residential
neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the property where it is located unless other measures
approved by the Planning Commission are employed to mitigate the visual impacts of the
containers. However, the Planning Commission does notneedto require mitigation measures
if it determines that the motoring public or adjacent residential neighborhoods are not
impacted.
F. The cargo containers shall abide by all set back requirements applicable to the zone in which
they are located.
G. The recipient of the conditional use permit is the only party allowed to use the container(s).
181
CITY OF MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 18.76 - CARGO CONTAINERS
H. A container placement permit is required for each container. The permit shall be obtained
from the Building Official prior to the arrival of the container on the site. The fee for the
container placement permit shall be as specified in MLMC 3.54. The placement permit and
fee is required each year for temporary containers. (Ord. 2144, 12/9/03)
18.76.040 Additional Conditions for Permanent Containers:
A. The cargo containers shall be painted so as to blend in with the building to which they are
associated.
B. The cargo containers shall have a maximum allowable square footage of container storage
area not to exceed five percent (5%) of the gross floor area of the building with which the
container(s) is associated. In no event shall the number of permanent containers allowed as
appurtenant storage facilities exceed three (3) in number.
C. A cargo container shall not remain on site if the use it is appurtenant to is abandoned or
changes use, unless a separate conditional use permit is granted. (Ord. 2144, 12/9/03)
18.76.050 Additional Conditions for Temporary Containers:
A. The cargo containers shall have a maximum allowable square footage of container storage
area not to exceed five percent (5%) of the gross floor area of the building with which the
container(s) is associated. In no event shall the number of temporary containers allowed as
appurtenant storage facilities exceed fifteen (15) in number.
B. If more than five (5) containers are proposed for a site, an inventory statement must be
provided to the Fire Department in order to determine if the site has adequate fire flow to
support the storage configuration.
C. The use of temporary storage containers shall not exceed ninety (90) consecutive days and
shall be allowed only once in every twelve (12) month period. The applicant shall specify the
placement dates in the application for the placement permit.
D. Cargo containers not removed by the end of the ninety (90) day period may be issued a civil
infraction notice for each day over the allowed ninety (90) days that the container remains on
site.
E. A significant change to any circumstances of container placement from one (1) year to the
next, including an increase in the number of containers, or a different placement location,
requires a new conditional use permit. (Ord. 2144,12/9103)
182
ORDINANCE NO. 09.10-12
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EL
MIRAGE, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF EL MIRAGE,
CHAPTER 154, ZONING CODE, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 154.090
REGULATING THE LOCATION, PLACEMENT AND USE OF CARGO
CONTAINERS IN THE CITY,
WHEREAS, the use of cargo containers for accessory buildings, sheds, storage,
and other purposes has increased within the City causing in some instances a blight;
and,
WHEREAS, cargo containers present unique challenges to public safety, health
and welfare based upon their potential un -viewable contents and the lack of standards
for usage as accessory buildings; and,
WHEREAS, cargo containers, due to their size and Industrial appearance, are
not appropriate for use as permanent accessory buildings or storage sheds in all areas
of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ordained by the Mayor and Council of the City
of EI Mirage that the Code of the City of EI Mirage, Chapter 154, Zoning Code, shall
hereby be amended to add a new § 154.090 fitted "Cargo Containers," which shall read
as follows:
154.090 CARGO CONTAINERS
154.090.1 Definitions
As used in this § 154.090, the following definitions shall apply unless the context
clearly indicates or requires a different meaning;
CARGO CONTAINER: Means an article of transport equipment which falls into any
of the following categories:
(a) Designed or constructed for or used to facilitate the packing, shipping,
movement, or transportation of freight, articles, goods or commodities by one
or more modes of transport; and/or
(b) Designed to be or capable of being (1) mounted or moved on a rail car, or Cil)
mounted on a chassis or bogie for movement by a tractor trailer, or (iii)
loaded on to a ship; and/or
(c) A prefabricated metal structure designed for use as an individual shipping
container in accordance with international standards or a metal structure
designed and built for use as an enclosed truck trailer in accordance with
U.S. Department of Transportation standards.
PERMANENT: Means a period of time limit that exceeds four (4) months on site
without being utilized for transportation purposes.
STACKISTACKING: Means a method of storing cargo containers or a chassis in a
vertical manner where the floor of the container or bed of the chassis remains
parallel to the ground.
TEMPORARY: Means a period of time that does not exceed four (4) months on site
while being used for storage purposes.
154,090,2 Permitted Locations
(a) Except as provided in § 154.090.4, cargo containers may not be placed, stored
or used on property zoned for residential use.
(b) Cargo containers may be placed, stored or used for temporary storage on
property zoned for neighborhood or general business, provided the business has
obtained a temporary storage permit from the Zoning Administrator. Cargo
containers may not be placed, stored or used on a permanent basis on any
property zoned for neighborhood or general business.
(c) Cargo containers may be placed, stored or used on property zoned for general
service or industrial for permanent storage, provided the placement, condition
and use of the cargo container complies with the provisions of § 154.090.3.
154.090.3 Standards and Regulations
(a) Cargo containers shall not be stacked on one another.
(b) Cargo containers shall not be used for living quarters and shall not be provided
with refrigeration, heating, electricity, or plumbing.
(c) Cargo containers used for permanent storage must be placed on an asphalt or
concrete surface and secured thereto.
(d) Cargo containers used for temporary storage must be placed to the rear of the
business and may not be placed within any designated landscape or flood
retention or detention areas.
(d) No cargo containers may be placed, stored or used on property or any area that
Is within the flood plain or flood way.
154.090.4 Exemptions
(a) Contractors licensed by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors may use cargo
containers in any zoning district for the storage of equipment and materials during
the period of construction at the construction site subject to the following:
(i) The construction must be property permitted by the city;
(ii) The container shall be removed from the property no later than seven (7)
calendar days after the final Inspection and approval of the construction by
the city.
2
(iii) If construction ceases for a period of thirty (30) days or is abandoned, the
cargo container shall be removed not later than seven (7) days after notice
to remove issued by the City.
(b) Containers used during moving may be placed on residential zoned property for
a maximum of fourteen (14) days.
164.090.15 Removal by City
Any cargo container(s) placed, stored or used in violation of this § 154.090 may be
removed by the City if the property owner on which the cargo container(s) is located
fails to remove the cargo container(s) within fourteen calendar days of notice by the
City of violation and order to remove. A notice of violation and order to remove shall
be deemed received by the property owner if the notice and order are mailed to the
address of the owner as listed in the records of the county assessor and a copy of
the notice and order are posted on the main entrance door or gate of the property.
The city's cost to remove and dispose of the cargo container shall be recorded as a
lien against the property.
164.90.6 Existing Nonconforming Uses
A cargo container otherwise lawfully existing on property prior to the adoption
of this ordinance that was lawfully placed and maintained under prior zoning
ordinance provisions shall be deemed a legal nonconforming use. Such
nonconforming use shall not be increased, enlarged, extended or altered,
except the use may be voluntarily changed by the operator to a conforming
use within the property's zoning district which meets all other applicable
requirements of the city code.
PASSE A ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the City of EI Mirage this
day of Et --
, 2009.
Mayor:
Adln ayor Michele em
Attest:
Approved as to form:
Richard H. Fiaaen, City Attorney
ORDINANCE NO.ao/n -90I
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DEER PARK, SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 18,61 TO THE DEER PARK
MUNICIPAL CODE, ADDING PROVISIONS RELATED TO ACCESSORY
STORAGE CONTAINERS IN SELECTED ZONES OF THE CITY;
CONTAINING PENALTY AND SEVERABILITY PROVISIONS; AND
SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission and City staff have conducted workshops
and a Public Hearing concerning the adoption of the provisions in this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, following the Public Hearing by the City Planning Commission, the City
Planning Commission voted to recommend adoption of this Ordinance by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has studied the staff report, findings, and
recommendations of the Planning Commission and finds that the amendments to the Deer Park
Municipal Code as proposed in this Ordinance benefit the general welfare of the City and
constitute good zoning practice and determined that a Public Hearing should be held before the
City Council to consider whether or not this Ordinance should be passed; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Deer Park Municipal Code 18.100.010(8), the City Council
held a Public Hearing to consider whether the findings of fact and recommendation of the
Planning Commission and this Ordinance should be adopted and accepted testimony at the
Public Hearing with regard to the Ordinance and determined, following the Public Hearing, that
the amendment to the Deer Park Municipal Code as set forth in this Ordinance is of public
necessity, benefits the general welfare of the City, and constitutes good zoning practice; and
(CDZW0150498,DOC;1\00003,90000)
Page 1 of 7.
WHEREAS, following the Public Hearing the City Council continued to concur with the
findings of the City Planning Commission and recommendation of City staff that the adoption of
this Ordinance is in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of
Deer Park; NOW, THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DEER PARK, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS;
Section 1. A new Chapter 18.61 is hereby added to the Deer Park Municipal Code to
read as follows:
Chapter 18.61
STORAGE CONTAINERS
Sections:
18.61.010
Purpose.
18.61.020
Definitions,
18.61.030
Storage on Residential Use Properties.
18.61.040
Cargo Containers - Permitted Locations.
18,61.050
Permit Required - Development Standards.
18.61.060
Current Violations - Time to Comply.
18.61.070
Conflicts,
18.61.080
Violations - Penalties.
18.61.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this Chapter is to regulate the use of storage containers on
residentially zoned and residentially used properties in the City, which regulations
are adopted to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and promote positive
aesthetics in the City.
18.61.020 Definitions.
A. An "Accessory Storage Building" is:
1. A building originally constructed for use as an
accessory building for the storage of materials and equipment
accessory to a primary use located on the property.
(CDZ W0150498.DOC;1\00003,900000\)
Page 2 of 7.
2, For purposes of this Chapter, Cargo Containers,
railroad cars, truck vans, converted mobile homes, trailers,
recreational vehicles, bus bodies, vehicles and similar
prefabricated items and structures originally built for purposes
other than the storage of goods and materials are not Accessory
Storage Buildings,
B. "Cargo Containers" include standardized reusable vessels that
were;
1, Originally designed for or used in the packing,
shipping, movement or transportation of freight, articles,
goods or commodities; and/or
2. Originally designed for or capable of being
mounted or moved by rail, truck or ship by means of being
mounted on a chassis or similar transport device. This
definition includes the terms "transport containers" and
"portable site storage containers" having a similar
appearance to and similar characteristics of Cargo
Containers,
18.61.030 Storage on Residential Use Properties.
A. Only Accessory Storage Buildings defined in
Section 18,61.020(A) shall be permitted as accessory storage containers
on property in any residential zone of the City, or on any property within
the City the primary use of which is residential. Cargo Containers,
railroad cars, truck vans, converted mobile homes, travel trailers,
recreational vehicles, bus bodies, vehicles, and similar prefabricated items
and structures originally built for purposes other than the storage of goods
and materials are not permitted to be used as Accessory Storage Buildings
on property zoned residential or on property the primary use of which is
residential.
B. Notwithstanding the provisions set forth in subsection A above, the
temporary placement of transport containers and/or portable site storage
containers on residentially zoned properties, or on properties the primary
use of which are residential, for the limited purpose of loading and
unloading household contents shall be permitted for a period of time not
exceeding 30 days in any one calendar year.
C, Notwithstanding the provisions set forth in subsection A above,
licensed and bonded contractors may use Cargo Containers for the
temporary location of an office, equipment, and/or materials storage
(CDZW0150498,DOC;1100003.9000001)
Page 3 of 7.
structure during construction which is taking place on the property where
the Cargo Container is located, if the use of the Cargo Container is
authorized pursuant to a City building permit.
18.61.040 Cargo Containers - Permitted Locations.
A. The placement of a Cargo Container as an accessory storage use is
limited to the following zoning districts:
I . Central Commercial (CC),
2. Commercial Shopping Center (CS).
3. Diversified (DC).
4. Light Industrial (LI).
5. Business Park (BP).
B. The placement of Cargo Containers is further limited to properties
in the above -identified zones only if the property upon which the Cargo
Container is proposed to be located is not primarily used for residential
purposes.
18.61.050 Permit Required - Development Standards.
A. A building permit is required prior to placement of a Cargo
Container larger than 200 square feet in area, ensuring effective
anchoring/foundation according to the then most current edition of the
International Building Code. The application shall show the proposed
Cargo Container is accessory to the permitted use of the property and
meets the placement criteria for the zone,
B. Cargo Containers shall meet the setback requirements of the
underlying zone.
C. Cargo Containers shall not be stacked above the height of a single
container device, except for placement within the Light Industrial Zone
and on the back yard one-half of the lot or parcel,
D. Cargo Containers shall not be used for any advertising purpose and
shall be kept clean of all alpha -numeric signage and writing.
B. As a condition of placement, Cargo Containers may be required to
be fenced or screened from abutting properties and/or right-of-ways
pursuant to the provisions of the underlying zoning regulations.
(CDZW0150498.DOC; 1\00003,900000\)
Page 4 of T
F. Cargo Containers shall be in an approved designated area and on
the same property as the principal use and be included in the calculation of
overall lot coverage.
O. Cargo Containers shall not occupy required off-street parking,
loading or landscaping areas.
R Materials stored within Cargo Containers are subject to review and
approval by the Fire District.
18.61.060 Current Violations - Time to Comply.
All owners of property within the City shall have 120 days from the
effective date of this Ordinance to bring the properties, which currently contain
Accessory Storage Buildings that are in violation of the terms of this Chapter, into
full compliance with the provisions of this Chapter.
18.61.070 Conflicts.
In the event any conflict exists between the provisions of this Chapter and
other currently existing provisions of the Deer Park Municipal Code or other
Ordinances of the City, the terms and provisions of this Chapter shall take
precedence and to the extent of any such conflict, the terms and conditions of any
existing provisions of the Deer Park Municipal Code or other Ordinances of the
City, shall be and hereby are amended insofar as necessary to conform to the
provisions of this Chapter.
18.61.080 Violations -Penalties
Violation of this Chapter shall be enforced pursuant to the procedures and
penalties set forth in Chapter 18,108 of the Deer Park Municipal Code as the same
exists now or may hereafter be amended.
Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance
shall be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance.
(CDZ W 015049 & D O C;1\00003.900000\)
Page 5 of 7.
Effective.Date: July 20, 2012
ORDINANCE NO. 2012-07 (R)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA,
TO ADD ARTICLE 36, CARGO CONTAINERS
TO THE ESCONDIDO ZONING CODE
The City Council of the City of Escondido, California, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN
as follows:
SECTION 1. The use of cargo containers for accessory buildings, sheds,
storage, and other purposes has increased within the City causing in some instances
blight.
SECTION 2. Cargo containers present unique challenges to public safety, health
and welfare based on the lack of specific standards for usage as accessory buildings.
SECTION 3. Cargo containers, due to their size and industrial appearance, are
not appropriate for use as permanent accessory buildings or storage sheds in certain
areas of the City.
SECTION 4. The City desires, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare,
to regulate and provide for the use of such cargo containers.
SECTION 5. That cargo containers are portable personal property, commonly
sold on the open market and two years from the date of approval provides the owner a
reasonable opportunity to recoup the investment if adoption of this ordinance creates a
nonconforming use.
SECTION 6. That proper notice of a public hearing has been given and public
hearings have been held before the Planning Commission and City Council on this
issue.
SECTION 7. That the City Council has determined that this Zoning Code
Amendment clarifies a prior interpretation of the Zoning Code and is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") In conformance with Tale 14 California
Code of Regulations section 15061(b)(3) "General Rule" and finds that no significant
environmental impactwill result from approving this code amendment.
SECTION B. That upon consideration of the staff report; Planning Commission
recommendation; Factors to be Considered, attached as Exhibit "A" to this Ordinance
and incorporated by this reference; and- all public testimony presented at the hearing
held on this project, this City Council finds the Zoning Code Amendment to be
consistent with the General Plan and all applicable specific plans of the City of
Escondido.
SECTION 9. That Article 36 of the Zoning Code is replaced with the following:
Article 36. CARGO CONTAINER RESTRICTIONS
Sec. 33-720. Definition and Purpose.
(a) Definition. A Cargo Container is an industrial, standardized reusable metal
vessel that was originally, specifically, or formerly designed for or used in the
packing, shipping, movement or transportation of freight, articles, goods or
commodities .by commercial trucks, trains and/or ships. A cargo container
modified in a manner that would preclude future use by a commercial
transportation entity shall be considered a cargo container for purpose of this
article,
(b) Purpose. This article establishes minimum development standards for the
placement of metal shipping containers within the City, limits the use of cargo
containers in residential zones and addresses requirements in other zones.
Sec. 33-721. Permitted Locations and Prohibitions.
(a) It shall be unlawful to place, use, allow or maintain Cargo Containers on
residential property zoned R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, or RT; unless specifically
exempted pursuant to this article.
(b) it shall be unlawful to place, use, allow or maintain Cargo Containers on
property zoned R -A or R -E; unless specifically authorized or exempted
pursuant to this article,
(c) It shall be unlawful to place, use, allow or maintain Cargo Containers in any
commercial or industrial zone unless there is a legal primary use on the
property where it is located, required parking is not impacted and access is
maintained.
(d) It shall be unlawful to place, use, allow or maintain Cargo Containers in any
planned development or specific plan zone unless specifically authorized by
the Director of the Community Development, and consistent with provisions of
the specific plan or planned development.
(e) Where permissible, the placement of cargo containers on private property
shall be subject to the issuance of a Minor Development Permit by the
Director of Community Development.
Sec. 33-722. Authorized Residential Use.
A cargo container may be allowed in the RA and RE zones only for storage uses
if it meets all of the following requirements:
(a) A parcel within the RE and RA zone must be a minimum of one acre in size.
Only one cargo container is allowed for the first one acre and one additional
cargo container per every additional five acres.
(b) A legal primary use exists on the property.
(c) The cargo container meets all applicable use, development standards and
maintenance regulations in the Escondido Municipal and Zoning Codes.
(d) The cargo container is appropriately screened from public view by fencing,
landscaping, terrain, buildings, exterior architectural enhancements to the
container (i,e. decorative siding, pitched roof, etc.) or some combination of
these methods.
(e) Cargo containers must meet setback requirements for primary structures, but
shall not be allowed closer than ten feet to any property boundary. A
container also must maintain a separation of ten feet from the primary
structure and other accessory structures, except for other authorized cargo
containers.
Sec. 33-723. Cargo Containers in Nonresidential Zones.
(a) Cargo containers used for the routine transportation of goods and temporarily
stored in commercial and industrial zones are exempt from the provisions of
this article, but subject to other use restrictions found.in both the Escondido
Municipal and Zoning Codes. Cargo containers may be used for long term
storage on industrial zoned property in areas where open storage has been
approved.
(b) Cargo containers may be used on a temporary basis In commercial zones for
additional storage to support seasonal events, but shall not be located on the
site for more than 90 consecutive days. The containers shall be located to
the rear or other non -conspicuous areas of the site. The containers shall not
be located within the front areas of the site or highly visible areas from the
public way.
(c) Cargo containers may be used for long term storage in commercial zones if
all of the following requirements are met:
(1) The containers meet all applicable use, development standards and
maintenance regulations in the Escondido Municipal and Zoning Codes.
(2) The cargo container is appropriately screened from public view by
fencing, landscaping, terrain, buildings, exterior architectural enhancements
to the container (i.e. decorative siding, pitched roof, etc.) or some combination
of these methods.
Sec. 33-724. Cargo Containers for Sports Fields.
(a) Cargo containers may be used for storage purposes in conjunction with
schools that maintain sports fields, and also for parks, golf courses,
governmental facilities, and other similar uses as determined by the Director
of Community Development.
(b) The container(s) shall be located, in a non -conspicuous location on the site
and conform to the setbacks of the underlying zone, but no closer than ten
feet to any exterior property boundary. Appropriate screening may be
required, as determined by the Director of Community Development.
Sec. 33-725, Temporary Storage.
(a) Cargo containers are allowed on private property in all zones temporarily to
store building materials and/or construction tools during construction pursuant
to an active building permit on the same property. if the building permit is
expired or finaled, the container shall be removed within ten calendar days of
the permit expiration or building permit final. If construction ceases for a
period of thirty days or is abandoned, the container shall be removed no later
than ten calendar days after notice to remove is issued by the City. The
temporary placement on lots smaller than one acre shall never exceed 180
days in any calendar year.
Sec. 33-726. Permit Administration
(a) A Minor Development Permit shall be required prior to the placement of a
cargo container on private property, unless expressly exempted by this
article. An application for a Minor Development Permit shall be made to the
Planning Division on forms prescribed by the Director of Community
Development. The application shall be accompanied by the following:
(1) Three copies of a detailed site plan showing the location of the
proposed container, including, but not limited to setbacks from property
lines and other structures located on the site, drive aisles, parking
spaces, etc.).
(2) Details regarding the container (including height, width, length, color,
etc.).
(3) Method of screening.
(4) Such other information the Director of Community Development may
require to adequately review an application
(5) Minor Development Permit fee, as adopted by City Council Resolution.
Sec, 33-727. Standards.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any property
to use, allow or maintain a cargo
provided in this section.
owner, tenant or other responsible party
container in violation of any standard
(b) Cargo containers shall not be stored in a manner that impedes access to
public right-of-ways, public utility or drainage easements or adjacent
structures and buildings. The cargo container(s) shall not block, obstruct, or
reduce in any manner any required exits, windows, vent shafts, parking
spaces, and/or access driveways.
(c) Cargo containers may be used for storage only and shall not be used for
human habitation or for commercial business purposes.
(d) Cargo containers shall not be used to store hazardous materials in violation of
any local, state or federal requirements.
(e) Cargo containers may not occupy any required off-street parking spaces,
loading/unloading areas, or fire lanes. Parking spaces may be used for
temporary storage in commercial zones to support seasonal events provided
the amount of spaces is not more than 20% of the required parking spaces for
the sponsoring business or 5% of the overall spaces within a commercial
center containing multiple tenants.
(f) No signage shall be allowed on any permanent cargo container.
(g) Cargo containers shall not be stacked on top of each other or on another
structure.
(h) Containers shall be prohibited from having windows, heating and cooling,
plumbing, or multiple entrances. Cargo containers may include passive
systems to provide appropriate ventilation. Utility services shall not be
provided to the container.
(i) All cargo containers shall be operated in a safe manner, and be structurally
sound, stable and in good repair. The container shall not contain any holes,
peeling paint, rust, damage or structural modifications.
Q) Cargo Contalner(s) used for long-term storage shall not be visible from the
portion of any public or private road that abuts the lot or property. Acceptable
screening features for a cargo container include landscaping, fencing, terrain,
existing structures, exterior architectural enhancements, or a combination of
these features.
(k) Cargo container(s) used for temporary storage in commercial zones may not
be placed within any designated landscape or storm water facility.
(I) Cargo container(s) shall be painted a non -reflective neutral color that is
compatible with the primary structure or to blend In with the surrounding
environment.
Sec. 33-728. Nonconforming Use Expiration
(a) A cargo container that was lawfully on private property prior to the, effective
date of this ordinance may be allowed to continue as a nonconforming use for
two years after the effective date.
SECTION 10. SEPARABILITY. If any section, subsection sentence, clause,
phrase or portion of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by
ORDINANCE NO. 5-20-2010
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERKEL, TEXAS,
AMENDING THE CITY OF MERKEL'S CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING
CARGO CONTAINERS REGULATIONS, REQUIRING A PERMIT, AND PROVIDING
DEVLEOPMENT STANDARDS; PROVIDING A PENALTY OF FINE NOT TO
EXCEED FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($500.00); PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY
CLAUSE;, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, cargo containers are routinely used during the construction or Remodeling phase of
work in commercial and industrial areas; and
WHEREAS, cargo containers, while having a valid temporary construction Purpose, are
occasionally placed in residential districts which proves to be unsightly; and
WHEREAS, the City desires, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare, to regulate and
provide for the use of such cargo containers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MERKEL, TEXAS:
CARGO CONTAINERS
As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings subscribed in interpreting the
provisions of this article.
Active Building Permit. Means and unexpired and unrevoked building permit for which the
Building Official has not performed a final inspection.
Applicant, Means an owner, occupant, authorized agent. Or contractor or person with control of a
Property or lot.
Cargo Container. Means a standardized, reusable vessel maximum forty feet (40') in length, 8
feet (8') in width, and 8 feet, six inches (8'6") in height that is or appears to be:
(1) Originally, specifically or formerly designed for or used in the parking, shipping,
movement, transportation or storage of freight, articles, goods or commodities; or
(2) Designed for or capable of being mounted or moved on a rail car; or
(3) Designed for or capable of being mounted on a chassis or bogie for movement by
truck trailer or loaded on a ship.
City. Means the City of Merkel, Texas.
Carpo Container Use.
(a) No person shall store, maintain or otherwise keep a cargo container on any lot or
property without first having obtained a permit issued by the City Manager or his
designee.
(b) Temporary construction storage use. A person may store, maintain, or otherwise keep
a maximum of two (2) cargo containers on a lot or property within any non-
residential zoning district during the period of an active building permit for
construction, provided that the Building Official determines that the construction
project warrants the use of a cargo container to facilitate the construction, taking into
consideration the size of the structure, complexity of the project, and storage options
for materials. The cargo container must be placed on an approved surface, and the
Building Official must approve its location on the construction site. In the event that a
building permit is expired, revoked, or finalized, any cargo container used on the lot
or property must be removed within ten (10) calendar days from the expiration,
revocation, or finalization of the building permit.
(c) Long-term use. A cargo container may only be stored, maintained, or kept for a long
period exceeding twelve (12) months on a lot or property that has been an approved
site by the City Manager or his designee, A person whose property meets this
qualification is limited to one (1) cargo container for the first three (3) acres, and one
(1) additional cargo container per every additional ten (10) acres, but not to exceed
five (5) cargo containers total per 100 acres of abutting property.
(d) No person shall store, maintain or otherwise keep a cargo container on any lot or
property after the expiration of ten (10) calendar days of any valid cargo container
permit issued under this article.
Temporary Construction Storage Use Permit.
(a) No person shall store, maintain, or otherwise keep a cargo container as provided in
this section without obtaining the required permit, which shall be issued by the City
Manager or designee after the applicant complies with the following requirements.
(1) The applicant must submit a written permit application identifying the
intended temporary use for the cargo container, and provide a scaled site or
location plan showing the size and location of any proposed cargo container(s)
on the lot or property, and the location of all existing buildings and parking
spaces.
(2) The applicant shall pay the required permit fee for each cargo container as
provided in this article.
(b) No person shall be issued a permit for the maintenance of a cargo container unless a
current, active building permit has been issued for the lot or property where the cargo
container shall be located, and the applicant clearly demonstrates the need for such
container under the building permit issued for the lot or property, The applicant may
provide a written statement identifying the reasons the cargo container(s) are needed
during constructions or remodeling activities for which a building permit has been
issued.
(c) The permit for a cargo container shall contain such reasonable conditions which shall
minimize the visual clutter and use of adjacent property.
Long-term Use Permits
(a) No person shall store, maintain, or otherwise keep a cargo container as provided in
this Section without obtaining the required permit, which shall be issued by the City
Manager or designee after the applicant complies with the following requirements.
(1) The applicant annually must submit a written permit application for each
cargo container, provide a copy of the most recent property tax valuation to
establish that the lot or property has an agricultural exemption from ad
valorem taxation and provide a scaled site or location plan showing the size
and location of the cargo container(s) on the lot or property, any screening
features for the cargo container(s), and the location of any existing buildings
or structures.
(2) The applicant shall pay the required permit fee for each cargo container as
provided in this article.
(3) If the container is in a non agricultural zoning, the applicant annually must
submit a written permit application for each container, provide a specific use
for the container, provide a scaled site or location plan showing the size and
location of the cargo container(s) on the lot or property, any screening features
for the cargo container(s), and the location of any existing buildings, This
must be approved by the building inspector to ensure it will not be an eyesore
to the area.
(b) The permit for a cargo container shall contain such reasonable conditions which shall
minimize the visual clutter and use of adjacent property.
Standards for Cargo Containers
(a) The following development standards shall apply to all cargo containers:
(1) The cargo container(s) shall be constructed of steel or aluminum with a
minimum 14 -gauge thickness, except for a wood floor within the metal shell.
Structural plans and calculations are not required.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not exceed forty feet (40') in length, eight feet
(8') in width, and eight feet, six inches (8'6") in height.
(3) The cargo container(s) shall not have any factory -built or field -applied
electrical, plumbing, heating, or air conditioning systems. Further, the cargo
container(s) shall not be connected to a power system.
(4) No fixtures, mechanicals, or equipment of any kind may be affixed to the
cargo container, with the exception of a locking device.
(5) The cargo container(s) shall be installed and maintained in a level and plumb
condition with a maximum differential settlement to grade of two inches (2")
For long-term use, the container must be placed on a permanent foundation.
(6) The cargo container(s) shall be a solid, flat, non -reflective neutral color. Cargo
containers with a long-term use permit must be painted a solid, flat, non -
reflective color that matches the surrounding natural environment.
(7) No signage, lettering, text, or artwork may be placed on any cargo container
except when located in a commercial zoning and is approved by the City
Manager or his designee.
(b) The following standards shall apply to the placement and location of all cargo
containers:
(1) The cargo container(s) may not occupy any required off-street parking spaces
or loading/unloading areas or fire lanes in any district.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not block, obstruct, or reduce in any manner any
required exits, windows, vent shafts, parking spaces, and/or access driveways.
(3) The cargo container(s) shall conform to the setback and building line
requirements of the zoning district where it will be placed. No cargo container
shall be permitted in a location which is nearer to the public street than the
main building, except for projects with an active building permit as defined in
the City of Merkel's Zoning Ordinance.
(4) The cargo container(s) shall not be stacked on top of each other or on any
other structure.
(5) The cargo container(s) may not be placed closer than 1,000 feet to any
existing inventoried wetland or identified floodplain/floodway.
(6) The cargo container(s) with a long-term use permit must not be visible from
the portion of any public road that abuts the lot or property. Acceptable
screening features for a cargo container include landscaping, fencing, pole
barns, terrain, or a combination of these features. Applicant must provide a
detailed, to scale site plan for the cargo container(s), which show any
screening features. All structures and fences used for screening must be
permitted through the Building Department.
(c) The following standards apply to use of all cargo containers;
(1) The cargo container(s) shall not be used for human habitation or commercial
business purposes.
(2) The cargo container(s) shall not be used to store hazardous materials.
(3) Refuse and debris shall not be stored in, against, on, or under the cargo
container(s).
(d) A person may only place a cargo container on a property or lot that has:
(1) An active building permit issued by the City, and on which construction has
commenced; or an active cargo permit issued by the City.
(e) The cargo container(s) shall be secured, structurally sound, stable, and in good repair,
Any cargo container that becomes unsecured, unsound, unstable or otherwise
dangerous shall be immediately repaired or removed from the property. The Building
Official shall provide the permit holder for the cargo container(s) of any condition in
violation of this section. After notice to the permit holder, any cargo container stored
or kept in such a manner deemed a dangerous condition and a public nuisance as
determined by the Building Official may be immediately removed by the City.
(f) Any cargo container in violation of this article shall be removed by the City, and any
cost or expense associated with the removal shall be the responsibility of the property
owner where the cargo container is located. All associated costs, including but not
limited to legal fees and court costs, shall constitute a debt due and owed to the City,
and shall be recordable as a lien upon the land of the cargo container storage facility
and/or property owner.
Revocation and Appeal.
SECTION I.
(a) Any permit issued under this article may be revoke upon ten (10) days written notice
to the owner, occupant or person in control of the property if such person is storing,
maintaining or otherwise keeping a cargo container in violation of this article or
permit herein issued.
(b) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the City Manager or designee to revoke a
permit may appeal to the Planning and Zoning Board whose decision shall be final."
SECTION 2. That all provisions of the Ordinances of the City of Merkel, Texas, in
conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same are hereby amended, repealed, and
all other provisions of the Ordinances of the City not in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTIONS. If any article, paragraph or subdivision, clause or provision of this
Ordinance shall be adjudged invalid or held unconstitutional, the same shall not affect the
validity of the Ordinance as a whole or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
decided to be invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION4. Any person, firm or corporation violating any of the provisions of this
ordinance or the provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Merkel, Texas, as amended
hereby, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction in the municipal court of
the City of Merkel, Texas, shall be subject to a fine not to exceed the sum of five hundred
($500.00) dollars for each offense, and each and every day such offense shall continue shall be
deemed to constitute a separate offense.
SECTIONS. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately from and after the
publication of its caption, as the law in such cases provides.
DULYPASSED by the City Council of the City of Merkel, Texas, on the 201" day of
May 2010.
APPROVED:
B. An adult entertainmenl facility shall not be permitted to locate within 330 feet of any of the
following sensitive zones or uses in the City of Burien, or their equivalent sensitive zones or
uses outside of the city limits:
i. Any RS zone, F -M zone, or any dwelling unit;
ii. Any day care operation or rea-eationalfaci/ity attended by minors;
iii. Any rebool, preschool or nursery school;
iv. Any public park and recreation facility;
v, Any religions fadlity;
vi. Any public library or community center; and
C, An adult entertainruent facility shall not be permitted to locate within 1,000 feet of any other
adult entertainment facility.
D. The 330 foot distance in BMC 19.17.030.4.13 shall be measured by extending a straight line
between the nearest boundary line of a sensitive zone or nearest property line of the lot
containing the sensitive use, to the closest point of the structure containing an adult
entertainment facility, whichever is the greater distance.
5. Waiver of separation requirements.
An applicant may obtain a waiver of the separation requirements required by BMC 19.17.030.4.13 and
C through a Type 3 review, only if the applicant demonstrates that all of the following criteria are met:
A. The extent to which physical features would result in an effective separation between the
proposed adult entertainment facility and any uses or zones identified in BMC 19.17.030.4.B in
terms of visibility and access; and
B. The extent to which the proposed adult entertainment fadlity complies with the goals and
policies of the Burien Comprehensive Plan; and
C. The extent to which the proposed adult entertainment facility is compatible with adjacent and
surrounding uses; and
D. The availability or lack of alternative locations for the proposed adult entertainmentfadl7y; and
E. The extent to which the proposed adult entertainment facility can be avoided by alternative
vehicular and pedestrian routes; and
F. The extent to which the applicant can minimize the adverse secondary effects associated with
the proposed adult entertainment facility. (Ord. 529, 2009, Ord. 396 § 1, 2003, Ord. 291 § 2,
=CargoCntainrs
1. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to promote vibrant, attractive pedestrian mixed use areas
while protecting residential neighborhoods and allow use of cargo containers by Burien businesses,
Chapter 19.17 -Mist. Standards ( City of Burien, Washington
(Revised 8/10) \ Page 17-9
contractors and community -related rues to provide secure, easily accessible accessoy storage at
relatively inexpensive levels.
2. Temporary Use. Cargo containers may be used for temporary storage of equipment and/or
materials at a construction site during active construction that is authorized by a city permit.
3. Cargo containers are not allowed in the Downtown Commercial (DC), Office (0), Neighborhood
Center (CN), Professional Residential (PR) and Special Planning Area 1 (SPA -1) zones, except as
permitted in BMC 19.17.040.2.
4. Cargo containers me permitted as accessoy user in residential Zones at a rommnnity fadkh% government
fadlily, hospital, pub,'ic park and recreation fadlity, or school
A. All requirements, permits and approvals of BMC Tides 15, 18 and 19 pertaining to structures
shall apply, including but not limited to setbacks, lot coverage, annual area and transition area
requirements.
B. Cargo containers located within a residential Zone shall be no greater in size than ten (10) feet by
twenty (20) feet, and shall have a stick -built sisudure constructed to completely enclose the
cargo container. Upon removal of the cargo rontainer the screening structure shall also be removed.
No stick -built strrulu+e shall be required if the cargo container is totally screened from abutting
residential tone lots as determined by the Director.
C. Cargo containers shall not be stacked.
D. C'a+go containers shall not occupy any required off-street parking spaces, vehicular access,
pedestrian facilities or landscape areas for the site,
5. Cargo containers are permitted as accessory uses in the Industrial (1), Intersection Commercial (CI),
Community Commercial (CC -1 and CC -2), Regional Commercial (CR), Special Planning Area 3
(SPA -3), Airport Industrial (AI) zones and in the SPA -2 zone as part of the master plan review
(pursuant to BMC 19.15.060.1). Cargo containers in these zones are subject to the requirements
below. Airplane unit load devices located in the I and AI zones are not regulated as cargo containers.
A. All requirements, permits and approvals of BMC Titles 15, 18 and 19 pertaining to structures
shall apply, including but not limited to setbacks, lot coverage, aidnal area and transition area
requirements.
B. Cargo containers shall be screened from abutting rights -of -+way and adjoining lou with a minimum of
10 feet of Type I landscaping. The Director may approve alternate screening that achieves the
intent of a visual barrier. In reviewing alternate screening, the Director shall consider the
proposed location of the cargo container, amount of usable space on the site for landscaping,
view of the cargo containr from abutting righh-of--+way and adjoining lots, and the physical
condition of the cargo container. All proposed screening shall be submitted for the review and
approval by the Director.
C. Cargo containers shall not be located between a building and front properly line. On a site with all
front p+nperty liner, the cargo container shall be placed in a location that minimizes visual impact
of the cargo container from surrounding streets and properties.
Chapter 19.17 -Mist. Standards City of Burien, Washington
(Revised 8110) Page 17-10
D. Cargo containers shall be painted to match the primay color of the adjacent building. If the cargo
container is located within a building or not visible from abutting rights -of -may and adjoining lots as
detemvned by the Director, painting is not required.
E. A cargo container located within 100 feet of a residential Zone shall be no greater in size than ten
(10) feet by twenty (20) feet, and shall have a stick -built structure constructed to completely
enclose the cargo container. Upon removal of the cargo container the screening slrzrcU{n shall also
be removed. No stick -built structure shall be required if the cargo containeris totally screened from
abutting residential Zone lots as determined by the Director.
F. Cmgo containers shall not occupy any required off-shret parking *aces, vehicular access,
pedestrian facilities or landscape areas for the site.
G. Cargo containers may be stacked two -high in the Industrial p) zone, and shall not be stacked in
any other zone.
H. Cargo containers shall not be used for warehouse/storage as the primary use of the property.
I. Outdoor cargo containers shall not be refrigerated.
6. Legal Nonconforming Cargo Containers: Cargo containers that have been legally located on a site
prior to November 12, 2002 shall be a legal nonconforming shvatum In addition to the provisions
for nonconforming structures in BMC 19.55, cargo containers shall lose legal nouerorfonning status
under the following circumstances:
A. Any legal nonconforming cargo container that is moved to a different location on a site shall
comply with the requirements of BMC 19.17.040.
B. If a legal nonconforming cargo container is removed from a site, any subsequent cargo containers
placed on the site shall comply with the requirements of BMC Titles 15,18 and 19.
7. Illegal Cargo Containers: Cargo containers located on a site prior to (Effective date of ordinance)
that do not have all required permits and approvals are considered illegal and shall have until (12
months after effective date of ordinance) to either come into compliance with BMC Titles 15, 18
and 19 or be removed.
8. Permits for cargo containers shall include all necessary approvals from the Director, Building Official
and Fite Marshal. Required permits include a building permit and a General Use Fire Permit.
Use of the container shall not inhibit the Building Official and/or Fire Marshal from conducting
all necessary inspections. (Ord. 529, 2009, Ord. 396 51, 2003, Ord. 369 §1, 2002; Ord. 313 §l,
2000]
19.17.050 Repealed. (Ord. 479 §l, 2007]
19.17.060 Residential Accessory Uses.
1. General. User, structures and activities that are customarily associated with residential uses are
allowed in all residential Zones and in any zone hi which residential user are allowed. The residential
accessory use shall be subordinate and incidental to the residential use of the property. Such uses
include but are not limited to: acressory !ming quarters; storage of yard maintenance equipment;
storage of private vehicles and recreational equipment; pools, private docks and piers; antennae
for private telecommunications services; on-site rental o> ice for apartment complexes; and
Chapter 19.17 -Mist. Standards City of Burien, Washington
(Revised 8110) Page 17.11
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
January 2, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Carvelli-Yu at 7:06 p.m. for January 2, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen,
Stevenson (arrived at 7:13 p.m.) and Smith.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Special Order of Business 1
Approval of Minutes 2
Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings 2
3. Special Order of Business
A. Oath of Office for Commissioners
Planning Associate Heller administered the Oath of Office to Commissioners Cindy Carvelli-Yu,
John Elofson, Paul Schiltgen and Holly Smith.
Mounds View Planning Commission January 2, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 2
B. Election of Officers — Chair and Vice -Chair
Commissioner Schiltgen nominated Gary Stevenson to be the Chair of the Planning
Commission.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Rundle. To Elect Gary Stevenson
as the Chair of the Planning Commission for 2013.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Commissioner Smith nominated Schiltgen to be the Vice Chair of the Planning Commission.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Smith/Chair Stevenson. To Elect Paul Schiltgen as the
Vice Chair of the Planning Commission for 2013.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
4. Approval of Minutes
November 7, 2012.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve the Minutes
of the November 7, 2012 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
5. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
6. Planning Cases
None.
7. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that staff has been asked by residents what
styles of types of "buildings" or materials are allowed to be used as accessory buildings. The
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
January 2, 2013
Page 3
zoning code specifies a few types of materials that are not allowed (such as tubular and canvas
structures) and states that the exterior must be weather resistant.
Associate Heller indicated the Planning Commission has made changes to the zoning code
regarding accessory buildings, and there has been a lot of discussion over how much to regulate
the styles of these buildings. Regulations for the roof pitch and style were added to the Code a
few years ago, but in general, the Planning Commission has decided not to regulate the building
style. The exception to this is when a conditional use permit is approved for a structure over 952
square feet. One of the conditions is that the accessory building shall have a uniform appearance
with the house.
Associate Heller explained that staff has recently discovered a residential property in the City
that is using a steel shipping container as a shed. Staff does not feel that this type of structure is
appropriate in a residential district (or possibly any zoning district) and is suggesting that the
Planning Commission consider adding language to the zoning code that would not allow these to
be used as storage buildings. Staff requested the Commission discuss the information and
provide staff with direction on how to proceed with the proposed amendment.
Commissioner Smith indicated that the flat roof of the steel shipping container was not allowed
per the existing zoning code, so is that enough to eliminate the concern of residents using these.
Associate Heller feared that the property owner could build a make -shift pitched roof over this
container in order to make it compliant with the code.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu understood the shipping containers could be rented for moving
purposes. She asked how long the unit has been onsite.
Associate Heller stated the container has been on this property for several years.
Chair Stevenson inquired how long a "pod" unit could be stored on a property.
Associate Heller explained the City worked with homeowners that are moving or working
through remodeling projects on the length of time that a storage container is kept on the property.
Chair Stevenson suggested that temporary "pods" and roll -off dumpsters be addressed in
conjunction with the accessory building zoning code language.
Associate Heller stated timelines could be developed for temporary use of storage pods and
dumpsters.
Chair Stevenson did not see that the shipping container was an acceptable storage shed.
Commissioner Rundle agreed.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
January 2, 2013
Page 4
Commissioner Smith did not oppose the steel container being used for storage and suggested the
unit could be roofed and sided.
Commissioner Schiltgen asked if the homeowner were to build a structure around and over the
container, if this would be acceptable.
Associate Heller stated that steel containers were not typically found in residential districts. She
commented that a flat roof would still not be allowed.
Chair Stevenson asked how other cities addressed this concern.
Associate Heller commented there were many ways to address this issue. She explained she
could provide the Commission with language examples from other cities at a future meeting, and
the Commission could decide how to proceed after reviewing more information.
Chair Stevenson was in favor of proceeding in this manner.
8. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. January 16, 2013
B. February 6, 2013
C. February 20, 2013
9. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:40 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
March 20, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
January 2, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for
the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-001 Variance for a Second Driveway and Curb Cut
Address: 7900 Greenfield Avenue
Applicant: Colvert & Theresa People
6. Other Planning Activity
A. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. April 1, 2013 — Joint Meeting with the City Council at the Council Worksession
B. April 3, 2013
C. April 17, 2013
8. Adjourn to Agenda Session
AGENDA SESSION
1. Review Minutes:
a. February 6, 2013
2. Staff Reports
a. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
MOr ��S MEW
Item , 2 13
lJ1VlJ V1t.�Y Meeting Date: March 20, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to allow a 2nd Driveway to Remain
at 7900 Greenfield Avenue; Planning Case VR2013-001
Introduction:
The applicants, Colvert and Theresa People, property owners of 7900 Greenfield Avenue
are requesting a variance to be able to keep a second driveway that has existed since
1994. The City Code allows R-1,single family, zoned properties to only have one curb
cut/driveway without a variance. The applicants are applying forthe variance now because
Hillview Road will be reconstructed this year and they didn't want to lose their second
driveway. The City is attempting to bring driveway curb cuts into compliance as much as
possible during the street reconstruction projects.
Discussion:
7900 Greenfield Avenue is a corner lot with a detached garage and driveway, and a
second driveway and curb cut. Both driveways access Hillview Road. In 1994, the former
owners applied for a variance in order to construct a second driveway that lead up to the
back of the house because of health and mobility difficulties. The detached garage is a
distance away from the house which is why the second driveway was wanted. The
Planning Commission approved the variance with the condition that this second driveway
be removed 10 years after the variance approval or upon the sale of the property. It is now
almost 19 years later, the house was sold to the applicants in 2002, and the second
driveway still exists. The applicants were not told of these conditions when they purchased
the house, and one of the selling points for them was this second driveway because
Theresa also has mobility difficulties.
The Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission may issue a variance to provide
relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical difficulties to the
property owner in the use of the property owner's land. This is true for all variance
requests. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria
for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria
are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. A variance may be
granted only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these
regulations.
The City Code limits the amount of curb cuts and driveways for aesthetics and for
safety by having less vehicle entry points onto a street.
7000 Greenfield Variance Report
March 20, 2013
Page 2
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties to meetthe livability
needs of residents, such as accessibility.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable mannernot permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The applicants are asking for the second driveway to remain as it has been for
many years. One of the property owners has mobility difficulties and uses the
second driveway most often because it is close to the house. There is a detached
garage and driveway at the rear corner of the property, much further from the house
than the second driveway.
d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title
has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The unique circumstance is that a variance for this second driveway was approved
in 1994, but with a condition that the driveway could exist for only 10 years. The
previous property owner did not remove the driveway before selling the property.
The applicants purchased the property with two driveways installed, and have done
nothing to change or alter what was there.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
This driveway has been the same for 19 years, so there will be no change to the
existing character of the neighborhood.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The variance for a second driveway is the minimum variance needed since that is
what currently exists.
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises
benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards
established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon
other properties in the neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the
variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough
proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
7900 Greenfield Variance Report
March 20, 2013
Page 3
Public Hearin
As with any requested variance, this application requires a public hearing. Staff mailed
notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant's property and a notice was
published in the Sun Focus newspaper on Thursday, March 7, 2013. Staff has not
received any comments as of March 15, 2013.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant
and the public. The Commission may take one of the following actions related to the
request:
1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 975-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variance. The Commission should direct staff to draft
resolutions of denial with findings appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before
making a decision or if they decide there is a need for more discussion, the Commission
can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided.
Respectfully Submitted By,
upyj-u r/l-�
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. 1994 Variance Approval Resolution
4. Statement from Applicant
5. Resolution 975-13
t
ZONING MAP
8070
N
8044
M
.,, ."',
... "
W
�Q
p
w
LA -
w
�
- 7947
7943
7— 939
7.945
7944
801
801
7941
-------
7937
7940
--
7936
7935
7933
7932
7928
7924
7931
7988
F.
7929
7927
7925
7921
7923
7919
7920
—_-7968
7948
7948
7917
7914
7913
7909
790
�11L
0
j
7913
7910
7906
7930
0
782
!05
i7O
` —
i
I N
790
1
N�}
M
N
Co
N
N
N
N
0
X69
7860
7855
557
785
� -
N
N
845
7840
o 784
W
7830
837
782
ani
782
GRIENFIELD
7 r)rrn leN
RT
561 +561
561 cii 560 5601
Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
561 +561
561 cii 560 5601
Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
V
iIjj11 M1
��yy�� r• r��A.1.�L�' � yl I �y
jj
Lei
't:'44
I yjj•• sit `
ril i• �T h �'l�e:, 1 [:f '1� �, IT e) Z
i -
N
�a
I
1994 Variance Approval Resolution
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMI
RESOLUTION NO. 391-94
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A SECOND
DRIVEWAY AT 7900 GREENFIELD AVENUE, PLANNING CASE NO. 384-94
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has
reviewed the request of Harold Ihnot for a variance to allow a
second driveway access to his property at 7900 Greenfield Avenue;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the
criteria used to evaluate all variance requests; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has presented a hardship
statement to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the special conditions of the property do not
result from the actions of the applicant; and
WHEREAS, the variance requested is the minimum
necessary to alleviate the hardship.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission approves the request of Harold Ihnot for a
second driveway contingent upon the following:
1) The Variance shall become null and void and the
second driveway removed 10 years after the
adoption of this Variance or upon sale or transfer
of the property.
2) The width of the driveway shall not exceed 12
feet.
3) A copy of this Resolution shall be recorded with
Ramsey County.
Adopted this 6th day of July, 1994.
ATTEST:
Cha rman.-•- -
(SEAL)
1 ( Community Developme�F Coordinator
Statement from Applicant
.4-t:�
CC:D `�.ctYt...l`'.�t� c.L�„L.4>'G',..+ G'i���.'� r....u- (y., d�-r-'z--�✓
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 975-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY TO REMAIN
AT 7900 GREENFIELD AVENUE; PLANNING CASE VR2013-001
WHEREAS, the applicants, Colvert and Theresa People, property owners of 7900
Greenfield Avenue, have applied for a variance to allow the existing second driveway to
remain indefinitely; and,
WHEREAS, 7900 Greenfield Avenue is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is
legally described as follows:
Pinewood Terrace No. 5, Lot 11, Block 15, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 05-30-23-31-0051
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Statement from Applicant
4. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give
relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements
restricts the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or
extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's
control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on March 20, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which
all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard
to the property located at 7900 Greenfield Avenue, and makes the following findings of fact
related to its decision:
Resolution 975-13
Page 2
1. The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding a limit on the amount of driveways
and curb cuts is for aesthetics and for safety by reducing the number of vehicle
entry points onto a street.
2. The variance could be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that keeping the
second driveway allows the property to better fit the home owners physical needs.
3. The applicants are requesting this variance because the second driveway has
existed for many years and one of the property owners has mobility difficulties and
uses this second driveway regularly since it is much closer to the house than the
garage.
4. The unique feature of this property is that a variance was approved for this second
driveway to be installed initially for the previous owner's health reasons, but had the
unusual condition of a time limit. The current residents want to keep the second
driveway for their health and mobility difficulties.
5. The second driveway has been in the same location for many years, so there will be
no change to the existing character of the neighborhood.
6. The variance to allow the second driveway is the minimum variance required since
that is what currently exists.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approvesthe variance request of Colvert and
Theresa People, property owners of 7900 Greenfield Avenue, to allow the second driveway
to remain indefinitely.
Adopted this 20th day of March, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
JI-
Id
t
City of Mounds View
Premium Stop
0
IN -
December 2006
Prepared for. City of Mounds View
Community Development Authority
Prepared by. DSU/Bonestroo
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
2 City of Mounds View
ir,rizu���r•�l
This technical memorandum signals the
completion of the research and analysis and
redevelopment concept development stages
of the Premium Stop Redevelopment Area
project. The purpose of this memorandum is
to summarize and document the process that
has been completed to date.
The document begins with a
Background section that provides basic
information about the project site. This section
includes information about both the physical
characteristics of the site and its
surroundings, and information
regarding its comprehensive plan and zoning
designation. Also included in the report are:
• Description of the physical
redevelopment of the Premium Stop
Area.
• Summary of goals and objectives.
BACKGROUND
Study Area
The Premium Stop Redevelopment
Area is a series of parcels combined
to create a 12.3 acre project area
located along County Road 10 in the
City of Mounds View.
This project area is generally
bordered on the northeast by County
Road 10, the south west by a
combination by O'Connell Drive, the
west by Edgewood Drive, and the
south by Woodale Drive. The site is
surrounded by single family
residential neighborhoods on the
southwest and by commercial
development along County Road 10.
The site currently contains a variety
of commercial and residential uses
including the two restaurants, a car
wash and single family homes.
Along County Road 10, the City is
currently engaged in a trail
improvement project which will have
some impact on the proposed
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area.
Some of the improvements
proposed along County Road 10
include; a new 10' multi -use trail,
seating areas, bicycle racks,
wayfinding signs and markers,
landscaping, stormwater
management areas and City
monumentation.
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Existing Site
City of Mounds View 3
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
4112, lgk
lit . ." I�•`I'°°"uw� _ �'� .• ♦ • e,� h �; ,.
P
1C�i ,•J I RWd.
rem11Y
1 Qi Rei14.p0a1
I,
Nl9hwB o InMf \' ♦ i
Existing Site Zoning
ai[ "
f
Enlargement of EDA owned parcel
4 City of Mounds View
t, n;
SUMMARY OF SITE ANALYSIS
Site Zoning and Data
The current 12.3 acre Premium
Stop Redevelopment Area is guided
as business and zoned as B-3
— Highway Business according to
the City of Mounds View's Zoning
ordinance.
The site is divided into four
distinct areas:
a) The upper portion of the site
at the intersection of County
Road H2 and County Road 10
with existing commercial uses,
including the City owned and
recently removed Premium
Stop Gas Station;
b) The middle portion located
along County Road 10 with the
Car wash and vacent parcel;
c) And the lower portion of the
site along County Road 10 with
existing single family homes
and numerous existing trees.
d) The City currently owns the
former Premium Stop Gas
station site which is 1.159
acres and has approximately
518 lin. feet of frontage along
County Road 10.
Development Pattern
Conventional Suburban
Development Pattern
Very much like residential areas
within close proximity to this site,
the development pattern of the
Premium Stop Redevelopment
Area is consistent with suburban
trends. As with most suburban
commercial areas, the existing site
is characterized by widely spaced
buildings set back and isolated from
the street in order to accommodate
highly visible parking lots. Since
land uses are compartmentalized,
residents are forced to make most
trips by car. As a result, streets
and signs have been designed
to accommodate the automobile,
creating a cluttered environment
lacking a distinct sense of place that
is not very pedestrian friendly.
The ultimate challenge for a
suburban environment is to balance
the functional needs of vehicles with
those of pedestrians, to create a
sense of personal safety and comfort
while also nurturing a memorable
image. The challenge for this
particular site also involves defining
a focus to the area, reducing clutter,
and fostering a sense of community
pride.
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Existing Site Development Pattern
Traditional Community
Development Pattern
Older, more traditional development patterns include more closely
spaced buildings that collectively shape the street corridors and
create a more compact, pedestrian -friendly environment. This is the
basic development pattern that the City of Mounds View desires for
this project which has been articulated as a redevelopment goal.
City of Mounds View 5
I - Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Existing Site Ownership
I
I
�w wr
i w
I1C
F
Existing Site Uses
6 City of Mounds View
Site Ownership
The 12.3 acre Premium Stop
Redevelopment Area currently has
twelve different property owners,
including the City of Mounds View
Economic Development Authority
which owns approximately 1.16
acres of land within the site at the
intersection of County Road 10 and
County Road H2. The significant
number of different property owners
has created a non -unified site
and has directly resulted in the
existing uncoordinated conventional
development pattern. In addition,
the ownership patterns contribute
to the challenge of redeveloping the
site. A more unified ownership of the
site would contribute to improving
site access and circulation as well
as creating a more compatible and
cohesive development pattern for
the redevelopment of the site.
Site Access and Circulation
The Premium Stop Redevelopment
Area is located along County Road
10, which is the main northwest to
southeast vehicular corridor in the
City of Mounds View. Each of the
individual properties along County
Road 10 has a private driveway
creating potential pedestrian/
vehicular conflicts. Current access
into the project area is limited to
right -in and right -out only. Full
access to the redevelopment
site occurs at the intersection of
Edgewood Drive and County Road
H2.
Future access to the redevelopment
project site will be as limited as
currently exists with the opportunity
to consolidate driveways and
remove some altogether.
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Existing Site Access and Circulation
The internal circulation on the redevelopment project site is defined by a series of residential streets with
limited pedestrain sidewalks. The existing bicycle and pedestrian network adjacent to the redevelopment site
will be enhanced with the creation of a multi -use trails along the entire lenght of County Road 10 within the City
limits.
The City has expressed a desire to enhance the pedestrian connection between the redevelopment project site
and the adjacent single family residential neighborhoods to County Road 10.
City of Mounds View 7
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Redevelopment Master Plan
The Premium Stop Redevelopment Area plan envisions the creation of a compact, walkable commercial node
with a mix of retail, office and housing. The development will connect to community amenities along County
Road 10 as well as existing adjacent neighborhoods, local parks and new multi -use trail, neighborhood schools
in the City, all while providing a pedestrian friendly environment.
The master plan proposes a development that will be tied together by a new multi -use trail along County Road
10 as well as a series of new pedestrian connections providing access to the redevelopment site and creating
a backbone for internal circulation. The proposed commercial properties that front County Road 10 will define
the edge of the corridor and provide necessary services to the neighborhood and community as a whole. The
commercial uses will be backed by a series of shared surface parking lots that will serve as parking for the
commercial and office uses, as well as provide overflow public parking during events and weekends. The
proposed housing within the redevelopment project site will include housing that blends with the traditional
surrounding neighborhoods providing affordable options for current residents and free up housing for new
residents.
As a direct result of conversations with City staff, a set of draft goals was created for the Premium Stop Gas
Station Area Redevelopment Plana and are listed below:
8 City of Mounds View
e'er
II
+i
Streetscapa Enha.,on s I
I4ovide 6daraaLk 1191an, and street trees
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area
Concept A
Short Term
Premium Slop Redevelopment Area Study
County Road 10 Streetscape
Improvements
New Infill Retail
-I story inddug
.26 ps,d, RalR
5,0]0sl
Trall Counactlon
-Come:tadj�cent rdgM1Earhaodw Cq 10
Short -Term:
• Commercial infill
— 1 commercial space with a total of 5,000sf located on the old Premium Stop Gas Station site
— Building one story in height
— Potential drive-thru opportunity
— Front yard outdoor dining spaces
— Potential users - Office for local services with good visibility to County Road 10
• New shared parking lot
— 26 shared parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road 10
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
Existing Japanese restaurant to remain (however, facade improvements are recommended)
— Parking to be reconfigured to create shared parking opportunities
— Access maintained from Greenfield Avenue
• Streetscape improvements
• Maintain single access drive located along County Road 10 (right -in and right -out only)
• Shared parking lot located on site
• Pedestrian connection from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
City of Mounds View 9
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
i
/// �4'b
CoOnly Road 10 Streels0a� )4��� e•
ImproveMeMt.
0 Li
N.I.I 11 Mlaed.Nse
-146aybuildly
.IAM4
-ReIaIVI DIT. m
-SMledpadbg
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area
} Concept B
Short Term
� ®! P
✓>
t��i���'r 1.
M
31
New Inflinli tall
-I a., wild,g
.26pad'n,106
. S,O 'r
stalls(sharod)
-Can. adannl neiiilbodwd w CR 10
Short -Term:
• New Mixed -Use infill - Commercial and Office
— Add 1 commercial space with a total of 10, 000sf at the corner of County Road 10 and County Road H2
— Building two story in height
— Front yard outdoor dining spaces
— Requires the cooperation and easements with adjacent Japanese restaurant
• New shared parking lot
— 86 shared parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road 10
— Reconfigured parking lot with two driveway access to Greenfield Ave
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
• Existing Japanese restaurant to remain (however, facade improvements are recommended)
— Parking to be reconfigured to create shared parking opportunities
— Access maintained from Greenfield Avenue through shared parking
• Streetscape improvements
• New access drive located along County Road 10 (right -in and right -out only)
• Shared parking lot located on site
i
• Pedestrian connection from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
10 City at Mounds View
❑ I
V
IJ
ao�
o
�❑
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area
} Concept B
Short Term
� ®! P
✓>
t��i���'r 1.
M
31
New Inflinli tall
-I a., wild,g
.26pad'n,106
. S,O 'r
stalls(sharod)
-Can. adannl neiiilbodwd w CR 10
Short -Term:
• New Mixed -Use infill - Commercial and Office
— Add 1 commercial space with a total of 10, 000sf at the corner of County Road 10 and County Road H2
— Building two story in height
— Front yard outdoor dining spaces
— Requires the cooperation and easements with adjacent Japanese restaurant
• New shared parking lot
— 86 shared parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road 10
— Reconfigured parking lot with two driveway access to Greenfield Ave
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
• Existing Japanese restaurant to remain (however, facade improvements are recommended)
— Parking to be reconfigured to create shared parking opportunities
— Access maintained from Greenfield Avenue through shared parking
• Streetscape improvements
• New access drive located along County Road 10 (right -in and right -out only)
• Shared parking lot located on site
i
• Pedestrian connection from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
10 City at Mounds View
County Road 10 Streets0ape — 7
ImProvamants /_ _-
New 101111 mi..
.2aorvb.1do,
10000st,
. Rna l/Me u,�
. S1mcd ,,W,,
Senlor[ondos �
a0 -ms /
.UndeegaurMpuking
-oamoorgnrercry.uas
-anarybuldlnq
Townhomes
'Cantrar Parkreatun J
-Sldewalkardpu61kge1M1eringarsar
=J
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area
Concept C -1
Mid Term
H
W
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
BC total parking stalls (sharod)
Newlnrlll Commardal
Nioudtototal8,00 0
-I@atme H psnese anw.. into dis sp¢e
It
Mid -Term:
• Expand Commercial infill
— Expand current commercial infill along County Road 10 to 8,000sf
— Building remains 1 story in height
— Relocate Japanese Restaurant into this expanded building space
— 84 shared parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road 10
— Reconfigured parking lot with two driveway access to Greenfield Ave
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
— Requires redevelopment of the Sports Bar site
New Senior Condo infill
— 40 total units
— Building three stories in height
— Underground parking
— Parking to be reconfigured to create shared parking opportunities
— Access maintained from Greenfield Avenue
• New Townhome infill
— 13 total units
— Building two stories in height, with rear garage entries
• Streetscape improvements
• Public park with connections to residential neighborhoods and County Road 10
City of Mounds View 11
-- Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
7
P
C
M
Mid -Term:
• New Commercial infill
— 5,000 total sf
— Building one story in height
— Parking to be reconfigured to create shared parking opportunities
— Access maintained to County Road 10
— Requires the redevelopment of the Sports Bar, Japanese Restaurant and Car Wash sites.
New shared parking lot
— 40 shared parking stalls located behind the building that front County Road 10
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
• Streetscape improvements
• Pedestrian connection from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
12 City of Mounds View
- - - — Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
F
F
C
L
Long -Term:
• New Mixed -Use infill -Commercial and Office
— Add 1 commercial space with a total of 10,000sf
— Building two story in height
— Reconfigured parking lot with 93 shared parking stalls
— Staged redevelopment of remaining parcels along County Road 10
New Condo/ Apartment infill
— 60 total units
— Building three stories in height
— Underground parking with 41 surface parking stalls
— Access to Woodale Drive
• New Town home infill
— 20 total units
— Building two stories in height, with rear garage entries
• Streetscape improvements
City of Mounds View 13
_ --- Premium StopRedevelopment Area Study
Pi
R,
C1
Lc
Long -Term:
• New Corporate Office infill
— 60, 000 sf in two buildings
— Buildings each 2 stories in height
— 190 parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road 10
— Driveway access to Woodale Drive
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
• Streetscape improvements
• Pedestrian connections through campus from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
• On-site stormwater management
• Maintain existing trees
14 City of Mounds View
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Premium Stor
Redevelopme
Concept E
Long Term Alk
Long -Term:
• New Mixed Use infill
— 5 New buildings (Both Mixed -Use and Residential) J
— Buildings each 2 stories in height %
— All buildings would require underground parking
— 200 total parking stalls located behind the buildings that front County Road
— Requires closure of Greenfield Ave at County Road H2
— Requires extension of O'Connell Drive to Edgewood Drive
— Greenfield Ave would terminate at O'Connell Drive and pedestrian promen
intersection of County Roads 10 and H2.
— New road connection Jeffery Drive to County Road 10
— 24 total infill Townhomes shown
— Landscaped islands and parking lot edges to screen the parking
would connect out to
• Streetscape improvements
• Pedestrian connections through project site from single family neighborhood to County Road 10
• On-site stormwater management
• Maintain existing trees
City of Mounds View 15
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Redevelopment Project Staging
The redevelopment master plan for the Premium Stop Redevelopment Area has been designed in a way to
be phased in over time as parcels located in the redevelopment site become available. The master plan has
been defined as short-, mid- and long-term redevelopment potential, which will allow the plan to be flexible
and redevelopment to occur regardless of which parcels become available for development. In addition, the
master plan will allow for existing buildings to remain as part of the overall redevelopment of the Premium Stop
Redevelopment site as long as these buildings were altered in their location and their exterior appearance to
be in keeping with the site plan and design guidelines articulated in the master plan.
Implementation Strategy: Planned Unit Development Overlay District
To accomplish the goals of the Premium Stop Redevelopment Study, the city will consider an overlay zoning
district that would provide standards and procedures beyond what is contained in the zoning ordinance for
the underlying districts along the Highway 10 corridor. This Planned Unit Development Overlay District, to be
developed in detail by city staff and consultants in conjunction with the Planning Commission and City Council,
could include the following:
1) All projects on property within a certain defined area along the corridor - perhaps 300 feet from the right-
of-way, or another distance to be determined - would be approved only upon application for a planned
unit development (PUD) in accordance with the standards for PUDs in the Mounds View zoning code, the
additional standards of the overlay district, and the goals of the corridor study.
2) The uses allowed within the overlay will include all permitted, conditional, and accessory uses in the
underlying district, plus other uses integrated into the project, upon a finding by the City Council that such uses
within the overall project further the goals of the corridor study. Specifically, mixed use projects, integrating
retail, office, and residential uses both horizontally and vertically will be encouraged.
3) Site planning standards within the overlay district will include requirements for building placement close to
the street, parking to the side and rear, maintenance of a street edge by means of a fence, railing, or hedge,
and screening of loading areas and trash receptacles from view of public streets, the front yard of neighboring
properties, and adjacent residential areas. Setbacks within the overlay district will be modified from the
standards in the underlying district to encourage this building placement through the use of build -to lines,
reduced or zero side setbacks where appropriate, and other considerations to implement the overall intent of
the corridor study.
4) Architectural standards within the overlay district will be more rigorous than in the underlying district,
including increased use of durable building materials such as brick, stone, and glass, and reduced use or
prohibition of wood, sheet metal, and plain concrete block
Commercial Development
The desired outcome for the commercial development on the Premium Stop Redevelopment Area is to
maintain and improve the commercial area as a vital retail and service location along County Road 10. The
main objectives for the commercial development are as follows:
1. Identify and recruit business types that will be successful in this location and support land use densities
and values that make redevelopment financially feasible. This may require authorization of some
16 City of Mounds View
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
flexibility from the current zoning standards related to setbacks, density, parking, open space and building
height.
2. Strive to retain existing local businesses when possible, or to relocate them into places that will allow
them to continue to contribute to the prosperity of the community. Identify and support the location of
businesses that will contribute to the drawing power of the redevelopment site.
3. Implement strategies to reduce parking requirements, including reduced parking ratios, creation of private/
public shared parking, and trails/sidewalks.
Residential Development
The desired outcome for the residential development within the Premium Stop Redevelopment Area is
to provide the City of Mounds View a series of new housing options that currently do not exist within the
community that relate in character and scale to the adjacent neighborhoods.
The main objectives for the residential development are as follows:
1. Provide additional housing alternatives in close proximity to the County Road 10 that will fill a need in the
current housing market.
2. Successfully integrate the new housing into the surrounding older established neighborhoods.
3. Require high quality community design and construction standards.
Architectural and Site Design Guidelines
Site architecture has the most significant impact on site character. Buildings define edges and spaces,
establish a level of quality, and serve as inherent destinations for pedestrians moving adjacent to and through
the site. They must therefore be well designed, relate to surrounding uses and utilize high quality materials.
The Premium Stop Redevelopment Area will benefit from architecture that is consistent in quality and relates to
adjacent buildings throughout the County Road 10 corridor. The proposed new buildings will be located along
County Road 10 and should employ high quality materials such as stone, brick, and masonry with metal, can-
vas and stone accents.
Basic Architectural Principles and Overall Site Character:
• Define spaces with buildings, not with parking lots.
Create a "Downtown" character on the site that will reinforce a pedestrian friendly environment through
the site location of buildings close to the property lines, use of high quality building materials and building
fagade articulation.
• Create building facades and entrances that are interesting and inviting.
• Accomplish a level of consistency between commercial, office and residential buildings through similar
detailing, materials, other building materials and context.
City of Mounds View 17
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Commercial Buildings
The new commercial buildings proposed on the Premium Stop
Redevelopment Area site should be designed to be consistent in
character with adjacent uses. Design elements of the buildings
should include:
Create dual (front and rear) building facades and well defined
entrances that are interesting and inviting, allowing people to
access the businesses from the street or parking lot. Utilize
covered entrances and window canopies to reinforce a
pedestrian scale.
• Columnar forms at key building corners.
• Variety in building planes both vertically and horizontally.
• Utilize high quality materials, including stone, brick,
decorative masonry units, prudent use of EIFS (Exterior
Insulation and Finish Systems), and a variety of ornamental
metals.
• Commercial buildings should maximize frontage along
County Road 10 and should be 1 to 2 stories tall to create
a desired character along County Road 10 and to frame the
site.
• Setbacks for the commercial buildings should be 5' to 10'
max. for buildings without outdoor dining components and 15'
to 20' max. for buildings with a outdoor dining component.
Existing commercial buildings that may remain within the
redevelopment project area must be compatible with the master
plan for the overall site. This will require existing buildings to
undergo exterior architectural renovations that would result in
an exterior image consistent with newly constructed commercial
buildings in the area. The architectural elements described for
new commercial buildings should be used as a guide to retrofitting
existing buildings.
18 City of Mounds view
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Residential Buildings
The new residential buildings on the Premium Stop
Redevelopment Area site should be designed to
communicate a high quality living experience for all
income levels and be consistent in character with
single family uses. The design should include visual
interest throughout, with special attention paid to
street and sidewalk frontages. Design elements of
the buildings should include:
• Well defined entrances with creative use of
colorful materials and texture.
• Unique detailing that reinforces the character
and image of adjacent neighborhoods.
Buildings should utilize compatible high
quality materials and design that relates to
and reinforces the character of adjacent
neighborhoods. These materials should include
stone, brick, decorative masonry units, and a
variety of ornamental metals.
• Setbacks for the residential buildings should
be 15' to 20' minimum from public sidewalk.
Building heights should be no more than two
stories.
City of Mounds View 19
Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study
Pedestrian and Bicycle
Network
Integral to the function of the Premium Stop
Redevelopment Area is the creation of an integrated
system of pedestrian linkages. All streets in the site
will accommodate pedestrian movement either with
sidewalks or trails. In addition, pedestrian connections
to adjacent neighborhoods and commercial areas will
be enhanced with decorative crosswalk treatments,
signs, and landscape improvements. In addition to the
improved pedestrian connections, a new multi -use trail
adjacent to the Premium Stop Redevelopment Area has
been proposed within the public R.O.W. (right of way) of
County Road 10.
20 City of Mounds View
300 FIRST AVE N TEL: 6123393300 COMMUNITY PLANNING
SUITE 210 FAX: 612337.5601 LAND PLANNING
MINNEAPOLIS, MN WEB: DSUPLAN.COM URBAN DESIGN
55401-2609 LANDSCAPE ARCNITECTL
MARKET RESEARCII
TECHNICAL MEMO - MARKET OVERVIEW
DATE: October 24, 2006
TO: City of Mounds View, Minnesota
Jim Ericson, Director of Community Development
FROM: Jay Demme, DSU/Bonestroo
RE: Market Overview
INTRODUCTION
�J VL
7� V
DSU
This memorandum focuses on the market conditions for residential and commercial development in
the City of Mounds View along a stretch of County Road 10 from Edgewood Drive and County
Road H2 to Woodale Drive. The analysis explores existing demographic conditions and trends and
the potential derived from the expansion of nearby Medtronic and the redevelopment of TCAAP in
adjacent Arden Hills.
STRUCTURE OF THIS MEMO
This memo contains the following sections:
• Community Assets Related to Development/Redevelopment;
• Critical Growth Issues;
Impact of Community Assets and Growth Trends on Redevelopment Potential for County
Road 10.
COMMUNITY ASSETS RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT
The City of Mounds View holds many highly -marketable qualities. Its central location, stable
neighborhoods, and an increasing concentration of highly -skilled employment pique the interest of
prospective residents, businesses and developers. Due to limited reserves of developable land,
however, new construction of residential or commercial properties has been extremely limited over
the past decade. Through the targeting of strategic undeveloped or under developed sites, the City
has a unique opportunity to expand its residential and commercial base in order to capture some of
the ongoing and renewed energy being created along the Interstate 35W corridor.
This section of the report explains the City's strategic community assets and describes how these
assets strategically enhance County Road 10's redevelopment potential while underscoring the
market challenges for some types of development. Specifically, we discuss the City's location, the
location of the subject site, the residential base, and institutional/commercial strengths.
Market Overview
Road 10 Redevelopment Study
Location
Mounds View is located
approximately nine miles
northeast of Downtown
Minneapolis and 11 miles
northwest of Downtown St.
Paul. Mounds View enjoys
numerous locational
advantages. The City is
situated in close proximity to
transportation networks,
major employment centers,
colleges and universities,
regional shopping centers and
numerous recreation spots.
Under consideration for
redevelopment is a site that,
until recently, contained a gas
station. The subject site is
1
Iids� - 1 i Blaine`
65 •(�
Bro klyn;,
S. L ark
�.._.._..
P rk
,_.._l_
i i
N*"sIarc0mro0br
Fridley
Plarm" 09
(Plan09d 30W)
�
a
P. --
Page 2
nowacoonyakpoN fH1
N Runway Exp ... mmn
'rcle Pidea`
medhmnlc 1 u ao cnn.N'.Camuf Lino Lakes
rConJobsen, l.___.._.._.L.._.._...,
U. View .._.._.._..---- tcW
(9,00 12.00
Subject rQt' l�n�
Property 1
�..
New I e --7
Brighton ,Arden I
rL -, Hills
of subject site and important surrounding developments
located on the south side of County Road 10 just east of Edgewood Drive. Because of the limited
potential of redeveloping such a small parcel, consideration for redevelopment is also being given to
the prospect of assembling adjacent parcels that stretch between Edgewood Drive and Woodale
Drive. In addition to the favorable locational advantages noted in the paragraph above, the subject
site is also strategically positioned between two very large redevelopment efforts that will profoundly
affect the character of the region for many years to come; the Medtronic expansion and the TCAAP
site in Arden Hills. The map above displays the City of Mounds View (highlighted in orange), the
subject site (outlined in blue), and several important development projects located nearby.
Existing Laud Use and Urban Environment
County Road 10 is a four -lane divided highway that bisects the City of Mounds View. Until the US
Highway 10 bypass was completed several years ago, just north of Mounds View, County Road 10
was designated as US Highway 10 as it was the main thoroughfare linking St. Paul and Ramsey
County to Anoka County and St. Cloud. Although no longer a US Highway, County Road 10 has an
average annual daily traffic volume of almost 22,000 vehicles and is a wide thoroughfare with an
approximately 250 -foot right-of-way. Therefore, very little development along the highway is
conducive to non -automobile access.
Most businesses dependent on traffic along the corridor are food establishments, retail stores, or
service -retail, such as banks and weight loss centers. Immediately after the US Highway 10 bypass
was completed, there was a drop in traffic volumes along County Road 10, which led to sporadic
store closings and relocations and conspicuous gaps in an already spread out urban fabric. However,
traffic levels have steadily increased, which has led to new investment along the corridor, such as
high density senior housing and new neighborhood -oriented retail, especially to the north and west
Market Overview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24.2006
Page 3
of the subject site. The area closest to Interstate 35W, -,vhich is southeast of the subject site, tends
to be characterized by more commercial/industrial development rather than traditional
neighborhood -oriented retail.
The recent change in the business composition along County Road 10 is a reflection of changing
demographics and size of achievable trade areas. At one time, businesses along County Road 10
were able to capture the needs of customers from a wide region in search of motels, entertainment,
and specialty goods shopping. Now businesses must adapt to smaller trade areas that are
increasingly populated by older households with few or no children.
The small table to the right emphasizes that the existing
development pattern within walking distance of the
subject site supports only a modest sized population and
household base. Therefore, the success of more intense
commercial development along County Road 10 will be
contingent on adding numerous new households while at
the same time enhancing the environment to attract
households outside the immediate vicinity.
Nearby Development
Medtronic is building a new corporate campus located one mile north of County Road 10 at the
intersection of Interstate 35W and US Highway 10. The first phase of the campus Nvill
accommodate over 3,000 employees, while a second phase is planned that will increase the total
number of employees to over 6,000 when complete. The new campus will consist of cardiac and
disease management units supporting research and development, accounting, sales and marketing,
and legal activities. Therefore, most jobs at the campus will be highly -skilled professional positions.
Typical wages at the campus will be about $70,000 per year. The first phase of the campus is
currently under construction.
Although the Medtronic campus is only one mile from County Road 10, the linkages between the
two thoroughfares via local streets are poor. Thus, the most direct connection between the
Medtronic Campus and County Road 10 is via Interstate 35W. As a result, daytime employees of
Medtronic who may consider traveling outside the campus for goods and services will be accessible
to a number of equally convenient business districts in addition to County Road 10. This lessens the
likelihood that businesses located along County Road 10 can depend on Medtronic employees as a
captive market.
The dormant TCAAP site located just east County Road 10 in Arden I - Ells is the largest
undeveloped contiguous area in the built-up portion of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Initial
planning for the TCAAP site indicates that as much as 3.5 million square feet commercial space and
2,400 units of housing could be built on the site over the coming decades. One of the key access
points to TCAAP would be via County Road H, which also provides excellent access to County
Road 10 in Mounds View.
— 1/4 -mile
— 1/2 -mile
Radius
Radius
fi•mn Site
from Site
Total Population
500
4,212
Population age 65+
46
213
Households
182
1,639
Source: 2000 U.S. Census
Medtronic is building a new corporate campus located one mile north of County Road 10 at the
intersection of Interstate 35W and US Highway 10. The first phase of the campus Nvill
accommodate over 3,000 employees, while a second phase is planned that will increase the total
number of employees to over 6,000 when complete. The new campus will consist of cardiac and
disease management units supporting research and development, accounting, sales and marketing,
and legal activities. Therefore, most jobs at the campus will be highly -skilled professional positions.
Typical wages at the campus will be about $70,000 per year. The first phase of the campus is
currently under construction.
Although the Medtronic campus is only one mile from County Road 10, the linkages between the
two thoroughfares via local streets are poor. Thus, the most direct connection between the
Medtronic Campus and County Road 10 is via Interstate 35W. As a result, daytime employees of
Medtronic who may consider traveling outside the campus for goods and services will be accessible
to a number of equally convenient business districts in addition to County Road 10. This lessens the
likelihood that businesses located along County Road 10 can depend on Medtronic employees as a
captive market.
The dormant TCAAP site located just east County Road 10 in Arden I - Ells is the largest
undeveloped contiguous area in the built-up portion of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Initial
planning for the TCAAP site indicates that as much as 3.5 million square feet commercial space and
2,400 units of housing could be built on the site over the coming decades. One of the key access
points to TCAAP would be via County Road H, which also provides excellent access to County
Road 10 in Mounds View.
Market Overview Page 4
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24.2006
Tianrpottotion
Interstate freeways, US highways, state highways and county highways all intersect the City of
Mounds View in one way or another, offering immediate access to the remainder of the Metro Area
and beyond. The graphic below highlights these major thoroughfares in red. Less than a quarter -
mile to the east, County Road 10 intersects Interstate 35W, the primary artery feeding traffic from
the Northern Metro into Downtown Minneapolis. Mounds View is bisected by County Road 10
and US Highway 10, two primary carriers of east -west traffic in the Northern Metro.
In addition to immediate
highway access, the site is
located very near the Blaine -
Anoka County Airport Qanes
Field), the largest reliever airport
in the Twin Cities metro area. It
supports over 130,000 takeoffs
and landings per year. A recent
expansion increased the length
of the east -west runway to 5,000
feet, making it usable by more
planes in more weather
conditions, ander 600,000 square
foot hangar is planned for the
near future. Also, the planned
Northstar Commuter Rail may
have a station stop located near
University Avenue and 61"
Avenue in Fridley. Though
proposed the station would be
about four miles southwest of Mounds View, when completed, it would provide Mounds View
residents an alternative route to access Downtown Minneapolis other than highway travel or by bus.
The existing and planned access to transportation enhances the desirability of sites along County
Road 10 to both residents and businesses.
Major Employment
The maps below show the concentration of jobs in TAZs (Traffic Analysis Zones) surrounding
Mounds View and along a portion of the Interstate 35W corridor. The darker tones highlight job
clusters, with brown indicating the highest level of employment (more than 4,000 jobs).
For the 2000 map, the dense job clusters are identifiable both in Arden Hills and Roseville, to the
south and east of Mounds View. The cluster in Arden Hills represents higher -earning jobs at office
and research complexes at Guidant Corporation, Land O'Lakes, Syntegra and MSI Insurance.
Market Ovetview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
Ocmhet 24.2006
Page 5
The 2030 map, however, shows a different landscape in which significant job clusters emerge close
to County Road 10. The Medtronic complex, one mile to the north of County Road 10, and the
TCAAP site, '/i mile to the east, will introduce between 15,000 and 20,000 new jobs in or adjacent to
Mounds View. Not only will the job growth be significant, but it will occur in locations where few if
any jobs currently exist. Therefore, new retail/service centers and housing will be desired within
close proximity to these areas as well as demand from other businesses that want to locate near this
emerging concentration of employment.
Regional Shopp hs
Mounds View lies in close proximity to six
major regional commercial centers. The
closest is Northtown Mall, located
immediately to the northwest. In addition,
three other regional shopping centers
(Rosedale, Brookdale Center and
Maplewood Mall) and the Minneapolis and
St. Paul downtown business districts are all
within a 10 to 20 minute drive from
anywhere in the City. Each of these centers
is located along a major freeway directly
accessible from Mounds View.
Y L n
11 Are .plowntowi
-� Map of Regional Shopping Areas Near the Subject Site
Market Overview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October24, 2006
Residential Base
In addition to the physical attributes of the
community and region, Mounds View is at
the heart of a rapidly evolving corridor in
the north metro, which enjoys a strong
residential base. The charts below provide
a 2000 Census comparison of resident
characteristics between Mounds View, a
ten -community study area (including Arden
Hills, New Brighton, Shoreview, Circle
Pines, Lexington, and portions of Blaine,
Fridley, Spring Lake Park, and Roseville)
and the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
Owner -Renter Occupancy (lennre)
Page 6
...11sakthe........... ...... ..
t._.._.._..1.
Map of Study Area
I
Coon ni Biala. IGAnirrvl0 Nueo' I
Chamldln'�• v i �- — Llno Lakea t
X V r MouMataipg n r
Blo.hlyPPad + ' r -da V aM1aravlvw J" V`1W IS...T I hl a•
t1._ fff
Y j
Noah Oaks j
�� Bra.8lyn I� I Now
C.nt.
1 .............
etlohlon m . 1N
CMlal _ _li Hp' P HI � Vatlnala H�7(hgfili I�NBoar r_
(!�._a
..aY-. ��._-..._......
01 ii an.mM i God
BJaamy
aos.vlllo C I tlal
t"�=•_.,� i._.I IMlnn a
laugerAlw
••_• 1 •• IWPlawoodl:_••V'
BOMen Vl l.y � ' AIWn N.�"_.._.._..1•s. aN "_.._._....... z
I Seventy percent of all households in Mounds
View are homeowners. This proportion is below
the study area but similar to the metro area, which
suggests that Mounds View has an adequate mix
of renter -occupied and owner -occupied
properties, but that communities surrounding
Mounds View tend to skew toward more
ownership housing, particularly to the east of
Mounds View in Arden Hills and Shoreview.
Housebold Type
In 2000, two-thirds of all households in Mounds
View were families (related individuals in the same
household). Just over one-half of all households
consisted of married couples and only one -thud
were individuals living alone or with other
unrelated individuals. Mounds had a similar
proportion of families when compared to other
neighboring communities or in the Twin Cities as
a whole.
Household Type (family vs. non -family)
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
2000
80%
7m6--6606____._....66% _-64%______
2 60%
500/.
40% - 31%3416 �:36%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Mama Kmv Siad, Are. Metro Arc.
•Family B Munn •NurtFomil,
Tenure (own vs. rent)
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
2000
90%
60%
k
a 50%
.
40%
e
0%
29%
o' 20%
-
-
0%
Mounds Yew Study Aree Metro Area
■ Own ■ Aent
Household Type (family vs. non -family)
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
2000
80%
7m6--6606____._....66% _-64%______
2 60%
500/.
40% - 31%3416 �:36%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Mama Kmv Siad, Are. Metro Arc.
•Family B Munn •NurtFomil,
Market Overview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24.2006
Honsebold Income
Mounds View consists primarily of modest -
income households with a median household
income below the study area and metro area
medians, as reported in the 2000 Census. The
median income in Mounds View was just under
$52,000. Despite the prevalence of modest
incomes in Mounds View, neighboring
communities are more affluent. The study area
had a reported median income of $57,500, which
was well above the metro area median of $54,300.
Although incomes in Mounds View may be
Page 7
modest, the proportion of households with
incomes below poverty is below the metro -wide proportion. This suggests that Mounds View does
not have a wide disparity of household incomes like one may find in other communities.
Home Vakie
A lower median income relative to the Metro
Area is also reflected in lower home values.
The chart to the right displays the distribution
of estimated home values for owner -occupied
households in Mounds View, the study area,
and the metro area from the 2000 Census. In
2000, over 80% of Mounds View
homeowners valued their home at under
$150,000, and only 3% valued their homes at
over $200,000. This is in stark contrast to the
study area and the metro area, both of which
include a significantly lower proportion of
home values under $150 000 and a much
Estimated Home Values in 2000
Owner -Occupied Households
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
60%
50% - - - ■ Maundy View
iq ■ Study Area
W40% - --- ❑Metra Area --
2o°i
a
mr,
o%
CYiderY 00,000 $00,000- 4150,000- $200,000- $250,000~
$09999 $09999 5249,999
Estimated Home Values
higher proportion over $200,000. Despite the preponderance of older, modest homes, recent
development indicates that when desirable sites are available achievable home prices can exceed
$650,000 as evidenced by the Hidden Hollow and Hidden Hollow South subdivisions on the
western border of Mounds View.
Rapid appreciation in home prices since 2000 has clearly increased dollar amounts in recent years.
Although Mounds View may have a preponderance of older, modest homes, these same homes have
been appreciating at rates similar to the metro area. The chart on the following page shows the
increase in the median price of homes sold in Mounds View/New Brighton, Arden
Hills/Shoreview, and the 13 -County Metro Area from 2000 to 2005.
Household Income
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
2000
7.0%
$5000
$57,000
6.0%
$56,000
`5 $55,000
e $300040%
.9 $53,000
3.0%
$52,000
.0% w
fsl,00o
$50,000
1'0%
$49,000
0.0%
Mom&Ww Surly Arca Mctm Arca
Med no Incomes ousIidow P9vcrty
modest, the proportion of households with
incomes below poverty is below the metro -wide proportion. This suggests that Mounds View does
not have a wide disparity of household incomes like one may find in other communities.
Home Vakie
A lower median income relative to the Metro
Area is also reflected in lower home values.
The chart to the right displays the distribution
of estimated home values for owner -occupied
households in Mounds View, the study area,
and the metro area from the 2000 Census. In
2000, over 80% of Mounds View
homeowners valued their home at under
$150,000, and only 3% valued their homes at
over $200,000. This is in stark contrast to the
study area and the metro area, both of which
include a significantly lower proportion of
home values under $150 000 and a much
Estimated Home Values in 2000
Owner -Occupied Households
Mounds View, Study Area, Metro Area
60%
50% - - - ■ Maundy View
iq ■ Study Area
W40% - --- ❑Metra Area --
2o°i
a
mr,
o%
CYiderY 00,000 $00,000- 4150,000- $200,000- $250,000~
$09999 $09999 5249,999
Estimated Home Values
higher proportion over $200,000. Despite the preponderance of older, modest homes, recent
development indicates that when desirable sites are available achievable home prices can exceed
$650,000 as evidenced by the Hidden Hollow and Hidden Hollow South subdivisions on the
western border of Mounds View.
Rapid appreciation in home prices since 2000 has clearly increased dollar amounts in recent years.
Although Mounds View may have a preponderance of older, modest homes, these same homes have
been appreciating at rates similar to the metro area. The chart on the following page shows the
increase in the median price of homes sold in Mounds View/New Brighton, Arden
Hills/Shoreview, and the 13 -County Metro Area from 2000 to 2005.
PI
Market OveMew
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24. 2006
Home Sale Prices 2000-2005
Mounds View/New Brighton, Arden Hills/Shoreview,
MetroArea
a
9
$25p0u
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Sou¢a51.Poul Area AszocwlonoBeoYors
CRITICAL. GROWTH ISSUES
Page 8
Despite its strong demographic profile, Mounds View faces significant growth issues. With little
developable land, Mounds View lacks the kind of housing choices that would normally keep a
community's housing stock turning over and would permit the community's resident base to be
continually regenerated and demographically balanced. This section looks at trends in local
demographics and explores the relationship between housing, demographic balance, and sustainable
economic health.
Shifts From Younger To Older Households
The following series of three
charts show changes in the
composition of households in
Mounds View compared to the
Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
and the US total. The lines and
bars on the charts show the
share of all households in each
of seven household age ranges,
first in 1990 and then in 2000.
Mounds Views household base
has aged significantly since 1990
and is outpacing the aging trend
in both the US and Twin Cities.
The City in 1990 was
characterized by young family
households ages 25 to 34 years
(28 percent).
30%
25%
3
0 20%
5%
0%
Distribution of Households by Age
US, Metro Area, Mounds View
1990
� Mounds View
6 Metro Area
— mus
LT 25 Yrs 25-34 Yrs 35-44 Yrs 45-54 Yrs 55-64 Yrs 65-74 Yrs 75+yrs
Household Age Range
Market Overview Page 9
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
j October 24, 2006
Senior households (age 65 or
older) accounted for 10 percent of
all households in the community at
30%
that time. By 2000, as residents
25%
aged in place, the number of
younger households had dropped
a 20%
off sharply. The number of senior
15
households grew significantly and
the dominant age group (ages 35
10%
to 44) was aging into its later child-
°
rearing years.
5
0%
The third chart in this group
shows how the City can expect to
change over the next 20 years if
current turnover patterns were to
continue. This chart indicates that the
age distribution will flatten out
considerably as younger households
rebound somewhat from current
declines and older households
continue to increase as a proportion of
the household base. While the share
of young households (under age 35)
will rebound as they move into homes
vacated by older adults, the most
significant decline is expected in the
established family households between
the ages of 35 and 54. By 2020, senior
households are projected to account
for up to 24 percent of all households.
Community Settlement Patterns
Distribution of Households by Age
US, Metro Area, Mounds View
2000
LT 25 Yrs 25-34 Yrs 35-44 Yrs 45-54 Yrs 55-64 Yrs 65-74 Yrs 75+Yrs
30%
25%
Household Age Range
Change in Age Distribution of Households
Mounds View
2000-2020
Over eighty percent of all housing in Mounds
View was constructed during a forty year
period from 1950 to 1990, with the 1970s
alone accounting for over one-third of all
homes. Less than 10 percent of the City's
housing was built after 1990. Much of the
growth in the 70's and 80's was driven by
Baby Boomers seeking starter housing. With
little new construction and limited land
development options in Mounds View, many
of these original homeowners are choosing to
LT 25 Yrs 25-34 Yrs 3544 Yrs 45-54 Yrs 55-64 Yrs 65-74 Yrs 75+Yrs
Household Age Range
X2000 ♦2005 1200 —2015 x-2020
Age of Housing Stock
Mounds, StudyArea, Metro Area
2000
40%
35% �Mowds Mmv ---
30% •SNdpArea _ _ _
m .Herm Ama
•P 25% _.
X 20%
15%
a"
10%
s%
0%
1939- 194010 195010 196010 19]01. 19 N0 . 19901u 200010
cart r N49 1159 1969 ell 1999 1999 2005
Ycar Built
Market Overview Page 10
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24. 2006
remain in their homes. According to the 2000 Census, nearly forty percent of all current residents of
Mounds View have lived in their homes for at least 10 years.
IMPACT OF COMMUNITY ASSETS AND GROWTH TRENDS ON THE REDEVELOPMENT
POTENTIAL FOR COUNTY ROAD 10
The redevelopment potential for sites situated along County Road 10 is promising. The expansion
of Medtronic and the build out of the TCAAP site will add roughly 15,000 and 20,000 jobs within
one mile of County Road 10 and Edgewood Drive over the next 25 years. The magnitude of this
growth will likely cement the Interstate 35W corridor between Flighway 36 in Roseville and Highway
10 in Blaine as the major employment center for the north and northeast metro of the Twin Cities.
At the heart of this corridor are sites situated along County Road 10.
As workers fill -up the Medtronic campus and the first phases of the TCAAP site are developed, any
site along County Road 10 will become inherently more valuable because of its proximity to these
new developments and markets. Therefore, once a critical mass of new jobs are in place nearby,
demand will substantially increase for housing, retail, and additional office space, especially if the
new development is connected to and incorporates a variety of amenities.
It is important to note as well that although County Road 10 is very accessible to Medtronic and
TCAAP, the non -vehicular connections are poor. Interest in redeveloping sites along County Road
10 will be influenced by the Medtronic campus and TCAAP, but not dependent on them. Office
workers will find County Road 10 convenient for a variety of goods and services, but they will not
constitute the critical mass needed to support significant development along County Road 10.
Significant development, the type that begins to create appeal because of its critical mass, will only
be achieved through tapping into the market generated by households that live conveniently near
County Road 10 as well as nearby workers.
This includes existing as well as future
households that relocate to new, higher -
density housing along or proximate to County
Road 10. In essence, the development
potential of sites along County Road 10 are
limited in the near future (1 to 5 years), but
greatly increase as new infrastructure and
development occurs within the Interstate 35W
corridor. The following schematic illustrates
how the potential for development along
County Road 10 will increase exponentially in
the coming years.
Market Overview Page 11
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
Octobet24, 2006
Conclusions
The type of new development that can occur on the gas station site and/or adjacent parcels is
dependent on timing, surrounding land uses, scale of the development, and design of the project.
As noted previously timing is important because key drivers of demand won't begin to significantly
affect the site for a number of years. Therefore, given the existing household base and traffic
patterns around the site, any new development expected to occur in the short-term (one to five
years) on the subject site will likely be limited to highway -oriented businesses with small trade areas
of one to three miles in radius. Examples of likely businesses include small- to medium-sized
restaurants, hair salons, coffee shops, and bank branches, to name a few.
With that being said, some infrastructure changes to CR 10 can subtly influence the nature of
development in the short-term while at the same time position the site for more substantive changes
in the long-term when demand for higher -density land uses increases. For example, if significant
highway and streetscape improvements were made in the short-term, this may influence the nature
of new short-term development by attracting
developers who believe higher standards for rM
aesthetics and design may capture a greater
proportion of Medtronic employees and others. Such
new development will still need to be accessible to
automobiles, but it may also feature pedestrian -
oriented elements that could be easily incorporated
into long-term development done at higher densities.
Examples of short-term streetscape improvements _
include highway monuments that alert travelers that
they are entering a commercial district. At right is the
Arbor Lakes monument situated along I-94 in Maple tlrhox Lakes Highway Monument in Maple Grove
Grove.
The matrix on the following page details the type of developments we believe are achievable given
the timing of market forces affecting the subject site.
Market Overview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24.2006
Page 12
Timeframe
Land Use
Accessibility
Trade Area
Example Uses
Site Size
1-5 Years
Commercial
Highway -oriented
Neighborhood-
Small- to medium-sized
1-3 Acres
(retail or
oriented (1 to 3
restaurant, dry cleaner, hair
service -retail)
miles)
salon, video rental
5-9 Years
Commercial
Highway -oriented
Community-
Multi -tenant office; if
3-5 Acres
or \fixed -Use
unless significant
oriented (4 to 8
mixed-use, neighborhood
change in
miles)
retail with high-density
surrounding land
housing oriented toward
uses substantially
the rear of the site away
increases household
from roadway along with
and/or worker
connectivity to trails and
population within
other nearby commercial
walldng distance
uses
10+ Years
Commercial
Highway -oriented
Regional
Multi -tenant office; if
5+ Acres
or mixed-use
unless significant
numerous amenities are
change in
connected to or included in
surrounding land
the site, mixed-use could
uses substantially
include a variety of higher -
increases household
density housing types as
and/or worker
well as specialty or
population within
shopping retail stores
walking distance
Recommendations
In order to maxim ze the potential of the site once employment begins to substantially increase in
the study area, we recommend the following course of action:
• Hold site for three to five years for future potential;
• Assemble adjacent parcels or partner with property owners of adjacent parcels in order to
create a sizable site that can incorporate amenities (e.g., public gathering spaces, sidewalks,
etc.) and have a mix of complementary uses (e.g., housing or office space with retail);
• If assembling adjacent parcels or parmering with adjacent property owners, be mindful that
it would be advantageous to have as much depth as possible to the site in the interest of
being able to situate any housing as far from CR 10 as possible;
• Introduce signage or monuments that indicate to CR 10 motorists that they are passing
through a defined district (e.g., gateway monument at I -35W);
• Promote redevelopment of nearby sites into higher -density land uses, as these new
developments will enhance the potential of the subject site to be developed at higher
densities;
• Where feasible, enhance connections to nearby neighborhoods, commercial developments,
and parks through the use of trails and sidewalks; or
• If it is necessary to develop the gas station site within one to five years, anticipate a small-
scale, highway -oriented development, but consider design guidelines that could make it
Market Overview
County Road 10 Redevelopment Study
October 24. 200a
Page 13
easier for the development to be incorporated into a larger, mixed-use development at a
future date.
Given the projected growth of the study area, pressure to redevelop sites along CR 10 will increase
regardless of the recommended course of action above. In the absence of the above
recommendations, development potential will be limited to highway -commercial in the short term
and then shift to multi -tenant office over the long-term.
Mohs VIEW
City of Mounds View Staff Report
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: March 20, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Proposed Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings—
Shipping Containers
Introduction:
Community Development staff is often asked by residents what styles or types of "buildings" or
materials are allowed to be used as accessory buildings. The zoning code specifies a few types
of materials that are not allowed (such as tubular and canvas structures) and states that the
exterior must be weather resistant and there must be a slope to the roof, but not much more. City
staff has recently discovered a couple of residential properties in the City that are using cargo
shipping containers as sheds. Staff does not feel that this type of industrial structure is
appropriate in a residential district, and suggested that the Planning Commission consider adding
language to the zoning code that would not allow these to be used as storage buildings.
Discussion:
At the January 2, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission agreed with staff that
shipping containers are not appropriate as a permanent use in residential districts, but felt that
there are situations where these, or other types of portable storage containers (such as PODS),
could be allowed temporarily. Construction projects or moving are the primary reasons that a
resident would have a temporary need for a storage container.
At the February 6, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission and staff reviewed
several ordinance examples from other cities, and the Commission gave staff feedback on what
regulations they would like to see in an ordinance. The Commission supported allowing the
containers for short periods of time, but not for permanent use, and also recommends not allowing
the existing cargo containers in the City to remain as non -conforming. Staff reviewed this code
amendment with the City Council at the March 4, 2013 Worksession, and the Council is
supportive of moving forward with this amendment.
Recommendation:
Staff has put together an ordinance adding regulations for cargo containers in to the City Code for
the Commission to review.
Respectfully submitted.
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Proposed Ordinance
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. XXX
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 XX REGULATING THE USE
OF CARGO CONTAINERS IN THE CITY
The City of Mounds View ordains:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 1100, Section
11 XX of the Mounds View City Code pertaining to "Cargo Containers."
1102.02 Definitions:
Subd. XX CARGO CONTAINER: An article of transport equipment which falls info any of the
following categories:
a. Originally, specifically or formerly designed for or used in the parking, shipping,
movement, transportation or storage of freight, articles, goods or commodities; and/or
b. Designed for or capable of being (1) mounted or moved on a rail car, or (2) mounted on
a chassis or bogie for movement by a truck trailer, or (3) loaded on to a ship; and/or
c. A prefabricated metal structure designed for use as an individual shipping container or
a metal structure designed and built for use as an enclosed truck trailer.
Subd. XX PERMANENT: Means a period of time that exceeds six (6) months.
Subd. XX TEMPORARY: Means a period of time that does not exceed six (6) months.
1 1X CARGO CONTAINERS
Subd. 1. Permitted Locations and Prohibitions
a. Cargo containers may not be placed, stored or used permanently on property zoned for
residential use.
b. Cargo containers may be placed, stored or used for temporary storage on property
zoned for residential use. Each residential property may use only one cargo container
at a time.
Subd. 2. The following standards shall apply to all cargo containers:
a. Cargo Containers shall not be stacked on one another.
b. Cargo containers shall not be used for human habitation or commercial purposes, and
shall not be provided with refrigeration, heating, electricity or plumbing.
c. Refuse and debris shall not be stored in, against, on or under the cargo container.
d. The cargo container may not occupy any required off-street parking spaces or
loading/unloading areas or fire lanes in any district.
e. The cargo container shall not block, obstruct, or reduce in any manner any required
exits, windows, vent shafts, parking spaces, and/or access driveways.
f. The cargo container shall be placed on an asphalt or concrete surface and be located a
minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the street.
Ordinance XXX
Page 2
g. The cargo container shall be structurally sound, stable, and in good repair. Any cargo
container that becomes unsound, unstable or otherwise dangerous shall be
immediately repaired or removed from the property. The City shall provide notice to the
owner of the property where the cargo container is located of any condition in violation
of this section. After notice to the property owner, any cargo container stored or kept in
such a manner deemed a dangerous condition and a public nuisance as determined by
the City may be immediately removed by the City. Any cost or expense associated with
the removal shall be the responsibility of the property owner where the cargo container
is located.
11XX Current Violations — Time to Comply
Cargo containers located on residential property prior to the effective date of this ordinance are
considered illegal. All property owners within the City shall have 6 months from the effective date
of this ordinance to bring the properties, which currently contain cargo containers or accessory
storage structures that are in violation of the terms of this Chapter, into full compliance with the
provisions of this Chapter.
1106.03 (this is existing language —the underlined is proposed additional wording)
Subd. 1. Accessory Buildings: A building originally constructed for use as an accessory building for
the storage of materials and equipment accessory to a primary use located on the property.
Accessory buildings, which for these purposes shall include garages, tool houses, carports,
sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supply and noncommercial recreational
equipment, whether attached or detached. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
of Mounds U/ew Staff
Item No: 66
Meeting Date: March 20, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
In 2012, the City Council started talking about various ways to improve the County Road 10 corridor
- everything from landscaping to renaming the road to Northtown Boulevard. Mounds View banners
were hung on the trail light poles around City Hall last spring as a first step toward beautification,
and other landscaping ideas are being discussed.
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and they are asking the Planning Commission to
start the process of reviewing the Zoning Code in regards to redevelopment. They are also
interested in updating the Code to embraced sustainable and green building and technologies (e.g.
windmills, turbines, solar energy, etc.). The Council wants to discuss the consideration of creating a
"Corridor Overlay Zoning District" to better promote and accommodate redevelopment along County
Road 10. A few of the objectives for the overlay district would be to reduce front building setbacks,
require parking in the rear, encourage vertical development and mixed uses, consider density
bonuses and reductions in parking counts, promotion of creative stormwater management, etc.
Please try to watch the video that I previously emailed a link to — "Land Matters: Reinventing Main
Street." The Council and staff have watched this video, and while we remain realistic as to what's
possible, the City Council is motivated to do what they can to affect positive change in the City.
I have included a redevelopment study that the City had done in 2006 for the "Premium Stop" area
(south side of County Road 10 from County Road H2 to Woodale). The City purchased the small
parcel at 2390 County Road 10 that had a deteriorated Premium Stop gas station, and demolished
the buildings in order to make the parcel more attractive for redevelopment. The City then hired a
planning firm (DSU/Bonestroo) to do a market review and provide redevelopment ideas forthe area
surrounding the gas station parcel since the entire block was available for redevelopment. This
study is for a specific area, but ideas and strategies from the study and market overview can be
used all along the corridor. The section of the Redevelopment Study starting on page 16,
Implementation Strategy, talks about creating overlay districts.
The Planning Commission is invited to the Monday, April 1St City Council Worksession to have a
joint discussion about the future of the County Road 10 Corridor.
Sincerely,
UM--�
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Premium Stop Redevelopment Area Study— December 2006
2. Market Overview — October 2006
2013 City Council Priority Statement
On February 5, 2013, the Mounds View City Council and members of the management team
held a planning and goal -setting retreat at the Mounds View Community Center. After
reviewing accomplishments from the previous year and assessing previously established goals
and priorities, the Council deliberated as to how best to focus its present and future efforts.
Not unlike other municipalities, the City of Mounds View provides a variety of core and essential
services to its residents, property owners and business owners. Each of these service delivery
areas is an acknowledged and supported priority and each supports the City's stated Mission,
Vision and Values statements (which appear on the following pages.) Recognizing that
important services such as Code Enforcement, Street and Infrastructure Improvements, the
Community Center, Parks, Public Safety, Economic Development, and Sewer and Water
delivery (to name a few) are ongoing priorities which strengthen and enhance the City's
livability and social fabric, the City Council has chosen to focus particular attention this year to
the County Road 10 Corridor.
County Road 10 is the City's primary commercial corridor carrying more than 20,000 vehicles
per day through the community. Previously a MnDOT highway now under the jurisdiction of
Ramsey County, the corridor and many abutting properties have long suffered from deferred
and neglected maintenance and are in a state of disrepair which reflect poorly on the City as a
whole. Without direct control over the roadway or adjacent properties, the City understands its
ability to affect a meaningful, positive change will be a challenge. In recognition of this, the City
will endeavor to:
• Partner with Ramsey County concerning corridor maintenance and appearance
• Consider targeted property acquisitions on a case-by-case basis to eliminate blight
and to encourage redevelopment and land assembly
• Improve and enhance visual corridor aesthetics through sustainable landscaping and
pedestrian -friendly streetscaping
• Explore creation of a Corridor Overlay Zoning district to promote ideals of vertical,
mixed use development, minimized building setbacks, parking in rear and more
desirable design guidelines
• Complete corridor trail and sidewalk system and plan for internal and external linkages
to promote and enhance walkability and connectivity
• Actively recruit new business development and work with existing businesses for
purposes of retention and expansion
• Pursue grants and leveraged funding opportunities to foster desired improvements
• Partner with MnDOT and Ramsey County to effectuate the naming of the County
Highway 10 corridor as "Northtown Boulevard"
The above action steps and goals are not exhaustive --the City will consider additional
endeavors that ultimately support the revitalization and redevelopment of the County Road 10
corridor specifically while continuing to support and improve the community as a whole.
(Approved March 11, 2013, Res. 8075)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
February 6, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for February 6, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Elofson, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen, Stevenson and Smith.
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes I
Review Planning Commission Bylaws 2
Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings 2
3. Approval of Minutes
December 5, 2012.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Smith. To approve the Minutes
of the December 5, 2012 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
February 6, 2013
Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Planning Commission Bylaws
Planning Associate Heller explained the Planning Commission's Bylaws state that the
Commission shall review and approve the Bylaws on an annual basis.
MOTION(SECOND: Chair Stevenson/Commissioner Rundle. To Adopt the Planning
Commission Bylaws.
Ayes — 6
Nays — 0
B. Discuss City Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings
Motion carried.
Planning Associate Heller noted this was a continued discussion from the January 2"d Planning
Commission meeting. At that time, the Commission agreed with staff that shipping containers
are not appropriate as a permanent use in residential districts, but felt that there are situations
where these, or other portable storage containers, could be allowed temporarily, such as moving
or for construction projects.
Associate Heller reviewed several ordinances from other cities with the Commission noting
many cities are adding regulations for storage containers. Staff supports allowing the containers
for short periods of time, but not for long term or permanent storage. Staff also recommended
not allowing the existing shipping containers in the City to remain as non -conforming. She
suggested property owners be given a certain amount of time to remove the container.
Associate Heller requested the Commission discuss the code amendment in further detail and
provide staff with direction on how to proceed.
The Commission reviewed the definition of a cargo container in detail.
Chair Stevenson questioned if the City currently had a time limit for temporary storage
containers, such as PODS.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
February 6,2013
Page 3
Associate Heller indicated the City did not have an established timeline, but any that the City
sees are monitored by Code Enforcement Officer Anderson. She suggested a maximum time
limit be set within the code amendment. Staff did not feel it was necessary to create a permitting
process for temporary container units. She recommended storage containers be allowed on a
temporary basis on a hard surface for 120 or 180 days. The Commission agreed with this
recommendation and suggested allowing them for up to 180 days.
Commissioner Rundle expressed concern that companies were now renovating cargo storage
containers, adding windows and doors. He wanted to be assured that the new code would not
allow this to be a permitted storage shed.
Associate Heller stated the language could address the renovation of the cargo containers.
Commissioner Smith was in favor of allowing renovated containers so long as they were
properly remodeled to appear like a typical storage shed with a peaked rook, with doors and
windows. She then asked if the containers had to be located on an improved surface.
Associate Heller stated that is what staff was recommending.
Commissioner Schiltgen questioned if other cities in Minnesota were experiencing the same
concerns.
Associate Heller stated this was a growing concern everywhere as cargo containers are more
available and an alternative for storage buildings that people assume are long lasting and
maintenance free.
Chair Stevenson recommended the current cargo containers in the residential zoning district the
City be removed and not allowed to be grandfathered in as non -conforming uses.
Associate Heller indicated the City would allow them 180 days to remove the units from their
property before action would be taken against them.
Commissioner Smith requested the code language state that temporary cargo containers could
not be stacked and that no utilities be run to them.
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input. She noted she would put together an
ordinance based on the suggestions received for the Commission to review at a future meeting.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. February 20,2013
B. March 6, 2013
Mounds View Planning Commission February 6, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 4
S. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:30 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
MOUN IS VIEW
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
April 17, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
February 6, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for
the record.)
5. Planning Cases
None
6. Other Planning Activity
A. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
B. Review City Code to Promote Development & Sustainability
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. May 1, 2013
B. May 15, 2013
8. Adjourn to Agenda Session
AGENDA SESSION
1. Review Minutes:
a. March 20, 2013
2. Staff Reports
a. Upcoming Planning Cases
3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports
4. Meeting Conclusion
MOUNDS VIEW
City of Mounds View Staff Report
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: April 17, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
Prom: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Proposed Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings—
Shipping Containers
Discussion:
At the January 2, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission agreed with staff that
shipping containers are not appropriate as a permanent use in residential districts, but felt that
there are situations where these, or other types of portable storage containers (such as PODS),
could be allowed temporarily. Construction projects or moving are the primary reasons that a
resident would have a temporary need for a storage container.
At the February 6, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission and staff reviewed
several ordinance examples from other cities, and the Commission gave staff feedback on what
regulations they would like to see in an ordinance. The Commission supported allowing the
containers for short periods of time, but not for permanent use, and also recommends not allowing
the existing cargo containers in the City to remain as non -conforming. Staff reviewed this code
amendment with the City Council at the March 4, 2013 Worksession, and the Council is
supportive of moving forward with this amendment.
At the March 20, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission wanted to table this to the
next meeting in order to work on additional wording that would not allow the containers
permanently in residential districts at all, even modified with pitched roofs and different siding.
The rest of the language in the ordinance seems to be acceptable and ready to move forward.
Recommendation:
Discuss the additional language pertaining to not allowing permanent cargo containers in
residential districts, even when modified.
Respectfully submitted.
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Proposed Ordinance
MTV
OF CARGO CONTAINERS
The City of Mounds View ordains:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby amends Chapter 1100, Section
1 1X of the Mounds View City Code pertaining to "Cargo Containers."
1102.02 Definitions:
Subd. XX CARGO CONTAINER: An article of transport equipment which falls info any of the
following categories:
a. Originally, specifically or formerly designed for or used in the parking, shipping,
movement, transportation or storage of freight, articles, goods or commodities; and/or
b. Designed for or capable of being (1) mounted or moved on a rail car, or (2) mounted on
a chassis or bogie for movement by a truck trailer, or (3) loaded on to a ship; and/or
c. A prefabricated metal structure designed for use as an individual shipping container or
a metal structure designed and built for use as an enclosed truck trailer.
Subd. )0C PERMANENT: Means a period of time that exceeds six (6) months.
Subd. XX TEMPORARY: Means a period of time that does not exceed six (6) months.
1 1X CARGO CONTAINERS
Subd. 1. Permitted Locations and Prohibitions
a. Cargo containers may not be placed, stored or used permanently on property zoned for
residential use.
b. Cargo containers may be placed, stored or used for temporary storage on property
zoned for residential use. Each residential property may use only one cargo container
at a time.
Subd. 2. The following standards shall apply to all cargo containers:
a. Cargo Containers shall not be stacked on one another.
b. Cargo containers shall not be used for human habitation or commercial purposes, and
shall not be provided with refrigeration, heating, electricity or plumbing.
c. Refuse and debris shall not be stored in, against, on or under the cargo container.
d. The cargo container may not occupy any required of%street parking spaces or
loading/unloading areas or fire lanes in any district.
e. The cargo container shall not block, obstruct, or reduce in any manner any required
exits, windows, vent shafts, parking spaces, and/or access driveways.
f. The cargo container shall be placed on an asphalt or concrete surface and be located a
minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the street.
Ordinance XXX
Page 2
g. The cargo container shall be structurally sound, stable, and in good repair. Any cargo
container that becomes unsound, unstable or otherwise dangerous shall be
immediately repaired or removed from the property. The City shall provide notice to the
owner of the property where the cargo container is located of any condition in violation
of this section. After notice to the property owner, any cargo container stored or kept in
such a manner deemed a dangerous condition and a public nuisance as determined by
the City may be immediately removed by the City. Any cost or expense associated with
the removal shall be the responsibility of the property owner where the cargo container
is located.
1 1X Current Violations — Time to Comply
Cargo containers located on residential property prior to the effective date of this ordinance are
considered illegal. All property owners within the City shall have 6 months from the effective date
of this ordinance to bring the properties, which currently contain cargo containers or accessory
storage structures that are in violation of the terms of this Chapter, into full compliance with the
provisions of this Chapter.
1106.03 (this is existing language —the underlined is proposed additional wording)
Subd. 1. Accessory Buildings: A building oriqinallv constructed for use as an accessory building for
the storage of materials and equipment accessory to a primary use located on the property.
Accessory buildings, which for these purposes shall include garages, tool houses, carports,
sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supply and noncommercial recreational
equipment, whether attached or detached. (Ord. 664, 8-14-00)
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 66
Meeting Date: April 17, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Review City Code to Promote Development and Sustainability
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been asked to
start the process of reviewing the Zoning Code in regards to development, such as possibly creating
a "Corridor Overlay Zoning District" or a "Corridor Guiding Plan" to better promote and
accommodate development along County Road 10.
At the April 1, 2013 Council Worksession, the City Council and Planning Commission sat down
together to hear the Council's thoughts about what they want the Planning Commission to work on.
Many ideas were mentioned at the Worksession, so the Commission's first step is to start
discussing ideas that could work here and how the City Code should be amended to accommodate
these ideas.
Some of the ideas that were talked about at the Worksession include:
— Reduce parking space requirements
— Require parking lots be placed behind building
— Reduce setbacks for parking lots and buildings
— Allow higher density (more housing units per acre)
— Increase building height limits
— Allow mixed-use developments
— Create a Corridor Overlay Zoning District
Other ideas:
— Encourage shared parking between adjacent uses, if appropriate
— Require that any new development on County Road 10 use the Planned Unit Development
process, no matter how many acres the property is
— Develop a "Corridor Guiding Plan" for all properties located on County Road 10
— Encourage and support innovative stormwater solutions & renewable energy systems
— Sign changes:
o Reduce sign setback requirements along County Road 10
o Prohibit new pole signs going forward — only monument signs allowed
o Require all pole signs be replaced with monument signs within X years
Aprfl 97, 2093 Staff R -port
Page 2
Sustainability, Green Building, Renewable Energy, Etc.
Another topic that the City Council would like expand and encourage more of is the use of solar
energy, renewable energy, etc. There has been a lot of activity and articles in the last several
years regarding these topics as more residents and businesses install renewable energy systems,
buy more fuel efficient vehicles and become more aware of the financial and environmental
impacts that these changes can make. A simple way that the City can promote renewable energy
is to have City Codes that don't hinder the installation of these systems. Our City Code does
make it more difficult by requiring a property owner to go through the conditional use permit
process to install a solar system, but requires nothing except a building permit to install a wind
generator. These sections of the City Code should be reviewed and amended.
The nearby cities of Roseville and St. Anthony have strongly embraced promoting sustainability in
their communities. Both cities have a lot of information on their websites about how to live
greener, recycling, composting, etc. St. Anthony has adopted a "Sustainability Plan" with goals
and guides for residents, businesses and city government activities and development.
Recommendation.
Begin the discussion about City Code amendments that would promote and support development
and renewable energy systems.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Code Sections 1103.04 and 1104.05
Current Mounds View City Code for Solar Energy and Wind Generator Systems
1103.04: SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES:
Subd. 1. Qualification: To qualify as a solar energy system, the system must be permanently located for not
less than ninety (90) days in any calendar year beginning with the first calendar year after completion of
construction. Passive solar energy systems are included but not to the extent that they fulfill only
recreational uses.
Subd. 2. Conditional Use: Solar energy systems and solar structures shall be permitted by conditional use in
all districts; provided, that the system and/or structure is in compliance with minimum lot requirements
and setbacks and meets the requirements of subdivision 1125.01(3) of this Title, but in no event shall a
conditional use permit be granted for a solar energy system or structure which, when installed, would
prevent abutting properties from being developed in conformance with all applicable codes or
regulations.
Subd. 3. Casting of Shadows: No owner, occupier or person in control of property shall allow vegetation or
structures to be placed so as to cast a shadow on a solar energy system which is greater than the shadow
cast by a hypothetical wall ten feet (10') high located along the boundary of said property between the
hours of nine thirty o'clock (9:30) A.M. and two thirty o'clock (2:30) P.M. Central Standard Time on
December 21; provided, however, this standard shall not apply to vegetation or structures which cast a
shadow upon the solar energy system at the time of installation of said solar energy system or to
vegetation existing at the time of installation of said solar energy system.
Subd. 4. Violation Declared Nuisance: Violation of this standard shall constitute a private nuisance, and any
owner or occupant whose solar energy system is shaded because of such violation so that performance
of the system is impaired may have in tort for the damages sustained thereby and may have such
nuisance abated. (1988 Code §40.04)
1103.05: WIND GENERATOR SYSTEMS:
Subd. 1. Height: The height of a wind generator system shall not exceed thirty feet (30') above the height of
the principal structure.
Subd. 2. Anchorage: Anchorage of the system's tower shall not be located within ten feet (10) of the
property line.
Subd. 3. Protection from Climbing: The tower or support for the system shall be of climbproof design or
protected by fencing.
Subd. 4. Compliance with Other Laws: Location and height must be in accordance with all other governing
jurisdictions and laws as they exist and are amended.
Subd. 5. Noise: The system shall have a silent operation and be subject to the requirements of Chapter 604,
Nuisances, of this Code.
Subd. 6. Plans and Specifications: All systems will require plans, specifications and a site plan approved by a
registered engineer or architect if deemed necessary by the City. (1988 Code §40.04)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
March 20, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for March 20, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Rundle, Stevenson and Smith.
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Miller and Schiltgen.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
VR2013-001. Consideration of a Variance for a Second Driveway 2
and Curb Cut
City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers 3
County Road 10 Corridor Discussion 3
3. Approval of Minutes
January 2, 2013
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Smith. To approve the Minutes of
the January 2, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
March 20, 2013
Page 2
A. VR2013-001 Variance for a Second Driveway and Curb Cut
Applicant: Colvert & Theresa People
Address: 7900 Greenfield Avenue
Planning Associate Heller requested the Commission consider a variance for a second driveway
and curb cut for the property at 7900 Greenfield Avenue. She explained a variance was
approved for the second driveway in 1994 with the condition that it could remain in place only
for 10 years or until the property was sold. She described the case in further detail stating the
second driveway was requested by the previous property owners because the detached garage is
quite a distance from the house.
Associate Heller indicated the property was sold in 2002 to the applicants, and they were not
made aware of the driveway conditions and would like the second driveways to remain in place
due to Mrs. People's mobility difficulties. She noted the City Code limits driveway curb cuts for
single family residential lots to one without a variance. This property has had two driveways in
place for 19 years, and a temporary variance was approved to install the second driveway.
Chair Stevenson recalled this case from 19 years ago, stating originally the property owners were
parking in the yard to be near the house and had created a dirt driveway from the repeated
driving on the grass. The owners wanted to install a concrete driveway in this location and were
told by City Staff that they needed to apply for a variance for the second curb cut. The
Commission was split on whether to approve the variance, so they compromised and added the
time limit for the driveway. He stated in most cases he opposed second driveways, however
with this case, the situation was unique and he recommended the variance be approved.
Commissioner Rundle did not oppose the second driveway either.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned what additional expense the City would incur for the
second curb cut.
Associate Heller explained that the expense for the second curb cut and apron would be paid by
the property owner during the street reconstruction project.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
March 20, 2013
Page 3
Theresa People, 7900 Greenfield Avenue, reiterated that she was not made aware of the fact that
the second access would be negated upon the sale of the home. She stated she was not
requesting to change anything on the property, but just that both driveways be allowed to remain
as is.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Smith/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution 975-
13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance for a Second Driveway and Curb Cut;
Planning Case No. VR2013-001.
Ayes — 5 Nays 0 Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
Planning Associate Heller presented the Commission with a Code Amendment for Accessory
Buildings addressing the use of shipping containers. She noted this amendment was discussed
with the City Council earlier this month. The Council supported the proposed amendment and
requested that only one container be allowed on a residential lot at a time. She then requested
the Commission review the proposed ordinance language and direct Staff how to proceed.
Chair Stevenson questioned how the City would address temporary cargo containers that were
sided and roofed to resemble a shed.
Associate Heller stated this had been discussed with the City Council who felt that by putting a
roof and siding around the cargo container, it was now a cargo container inside of a shed, and the
City does not regulate what is inside sheds.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu suggested this issue be further addressed and defined, as "prepping"
or remodeling cargo containers by adding roofs, windows or doors, was becoming more and
more popular. She did not want to see a large number of "eyesore" sheds creeping up throughout
the City. She did not feel cargo containers belonged in residential neighborhoods in any way.
Chair Stevenson asked who would determine if the encased cargo containers had become sheds.
Associate Heller commented this would have to be determined by Staff.
Commissioner Smith reconmiended that the surrounding shed should match the principle
structure.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
March 20, 2013
Page 4
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu recommended additional language be written into the proposed
amendment to assure that remodeled or altered cargo containers do not become an issue in the
future. She stated she was willing to work on drafting a statement to add into the ordinance
regarding this prior to the next meeting.
Commissioner Smith questioned if the cargo container has to be placed on a specified improved
surface.
Associate Heller indicated that the ordinance had language requiring the containers be placed on
a hard surface.
Chair Stevenson recommended this item be tabled to the next Planning Commission meeting.
S. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that the City Council was working to
improve the County Road 10 corridor. This involved landscaping the streetscape, in addition to
renaming the corridor. The improvement of this corridor would assist with redevelopment
efforts. She explained some TIF funds were available as well.
Associate Heller explained an overlay district was suggested for the County Road 10 corridor to
assist with the discussed improvements. An overlay district would allow for specific design
guidelines for all future redevelopment.
Associate Heller then discussed the recent redevelopment study for the Premium Stop lot and the
surrounding properties.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned if the City has contacted neighboring cities to discuss
their redevelopment strategies.
Associate Heller was not aware of any conversations, but understood that the use of TIF may
assist with spurring redevelopment.
Associate Heller noted a joint meeting between the Planning Commission and City Council has
been scheduled for the April 1, 2013 City Council Worksession, to discuss this matter in further
detail. She encouraged each of the Commissioners to attend. She reported she would forward
the agenda to the Commissioners when completed.
Mounds View Planning Commission March 20, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 5
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. April 1, 2013 — Joint Meeting with the City Council at the Council
Worksession
B. April 3, 2013
C. April 17, 2013
8. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:46 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
May 1, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Special Order of Business
A. Recognition of Jean Miller for Her Years of Service on the Planning Commission
4. Approval of Minutes:
March 20, 2013
5. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
6. Planning Cases
A. CU2013-001 Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Sales and Display
Address: 2701 County Road 10
Applicant: Northwood Industries, Hayward, WI
B. CU2013-002 Conditional Use Permit for an Auto Repair Business
Address: 2975 County Road 10
Applicant: North Metro Motors, Ham Lake, MN
7. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Applications for the Planning Commission Vacancy
B. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
8. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. May 15, 2013
B. June 5, 2013
9. Review Minutes:
A. April 17, 2013
1
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Item No: 6A
MQ NDi fE—W Meeting Date: Planning
1.2013
lJ1VlJJ v 1L�Y Type of Business: Planning Case
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Sales and
Display at 2701 County Road 10; Planning Case CU2011-001
Introduction:
The applicant, Clair Martin with Northwood Industries, is requesting approval of a conditional use
permit to have outdoor sales and displays on the property located at 2701 County Road 10. This
is the site of the former Hostess Bakery Outlet store. Northwood Industries is based in Hayward,
Wisconsin, and manufactures and sells lawn furniture, gazebos, accessory buildings and small
cabins. They want to open a store in the Twin Cities metro area and are proposing to use an
asphalt area on the southeast side of the parking lot for outdoor sales to display gazebos and
sheds. This property is zoned B-3, Highway Business, and the City Code allows outdoorsales as
a conditional use in B-3 districts.
City Code Requirements:
Section 1114.04 (Conditional Uses in the B-3 zoning district)
Subd. 5: Open or outdoor service, sale and rental as a principal or accessory use and including
sales in or from motorized vehicles, trailers or wagons for a period greater than ten (10) days.
a. Outside services, sales and equipment rental connected with the principal use is limited
to thirty percent (30%) of the gross floor area of the principal use.
b. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring identical uses or
an abutting R District in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(1) through (5) of this Title.
c. All lighting shall be hooded and so directed that the light source shall not be visible from
the public right of way or from neighboring residences and shall be in compliance with
sections 1103.08 and 1103.09 of this Title.
d. Sales area is grassed or surfaced to control dust.
e. The open or outdoor service, sale or rental use does not take up parking space as
required for conformity of this Title.
f. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily
met.
Northwood Industries CUP Deport
May 1, 2013
Page 2
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1e: The Planning Commission is required to review the possible
adverse effects of a requested conditional use.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1g: This section of the City Code states that the Planning Commission
shall make findings of fact and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the request as
it deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code and forward such
findings to the City Council.
Discussion:
Northwood Industries is a lawn furniture and accessory building and small cabin manufacturer.
They have a facility and retail store in Hayward, Wisconsin, but participate in many of the large
home and garden shows that are held in the Minneapolis and St. Paul area. They want to have
a store in the metro area to better serve and be closer to their Twin Cities customers.
Northwood Industries plans to lease the currently vacant building that, until a few months ago,
had been a Hostess Bakery Outlet store for many years. The building was built in 1973 and is
4,544 square feet. Inside the building there is a large open sales area, and a warehouse/storage
area with outside access from two garage doors that are on the southeast side of the building.
Since some of Northwood's products are sheds and gazebos, these would need to be displayed
outside. An asphalt parking lot covers almost the entire property, so there is space to designate
an area of the parking lot for the accessory building displays and still meet the parking needs for
this use. The parking requirement is 13 spaces, and the site plan shows 17 spaces could be
available.
The City Code states that outside sales connected with the principal use is limited to 30% of the
floor area of the principal use. Since the building area is 4,544 square feet in size, Northwood
Industries can use 1,363 square feet of space outside for the sales and display area. The
submitted site plan shows closer to 2,000 square feet being used, but the applicant will modify
the site plan to comply with the area size limit.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and address
any potential adverse effects which include, but are not limited to, relationship with the
Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential depreciation, the character of the
surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a use. I have addressed each of these
potential adverse effects below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages existing
businesses to remain and grow in the city, along with the introduction of new businesses within
Mounds View when compatible with surrounding uses. The City has zoned the property at 2701
County Road 10, B-3, Highway Commercial, and the Comprehensive Plan land use designation
for this area is neighborhood commercial. If the requested conditional use permit were
approved, this CUP would be in line with the Comp Plan land use designation for this area.
Northwood Industries CUP Report
May 1, 2013
Page ,3
The Location and Character of the Surrounding Area. The property at 2701 County Road 10 is
located on the City's commercial corridor. This business is adjacent to commercial and office
uses, along with single family residential in the rear. The applicant is proposing to use some of
the asphalt area on the southeast side of the building for the outdoor sales and displays.
Depreciation. The proposed outdoor sales and display should not have an adverse effect on
surrounding properties. The property was previously a retail bakery store with regular customer
traffic and truck deliveries. The traffic patterns and hours of operation should not change much
from the previous business, and any noise should be minimal. There is currently a six-foot tall
privacy fence along the rear property line to provide screening for the adjacent single family home.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. Northwood Industries has a large geographical area
from which they draw customers, and now want to locate a second retail store in Mounds View to
be closer to their metro area customers. The north metro location with good access, and this
specific property with the large parking lot and freestanding building fit their needs. There are no
businesses in Mounds View that offer the Adirondack style lawn furniture, and accessory buildings
that Northwood Industries sells.
Summary:
The site plan will need modification to reduce the amount of outside display area uses, but all of
the other requirements stated in the Zoning Code are met.
After taking testimony from staff and the applicant, the Commission can take one of the following
actions related to the request:
1. Recommend approval of the conditional use permit. Resolution 976-13 is attached if the
Commission chooses this action.
2. Recommend denial of the conditional use permit. If the Planning Commission selects this
option, Staff would need to be directed to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact
appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or
if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such
information has been provided. Because of 60 -day requirements, the Commission would need
to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
�1.
Narrative from Applicant
2.
Zoning Map
3.
Aerial Photos
4.
Site Plan
5.
Site Photos
6.
Resolution 976-13
Narrative from Applicant
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View MPV 55112
Rhone; 763-717-4020
Fax; 763-717-4019
,
If approved, we would plan to use the former Hostess Building (now
vacant) for our Twin Cities location. It would need to include an outside
display of 10 to 12 Sheds, gazebos, playhouses and pre -fab buildings. They
would be displayed in the parking lot as described on the attached site plan.
They would be confined to the locations proposed.
If the outside display is approved we will utilize this store for our mix of
outdoor furniture, (adirondack chairs) interior lodge furniture, gift store;
etc. (old country gift store mix)
We believe the following property features make it a good choice for the
proposed use.
® Fence/screen along the back line.
• Blacktop parking lot. Very sufficient parking for proposed use.
® Easy access on both ends of lot.
® Freestanding location.
® Well lit area.
Thank you.
Northwood Industries Inc.
'10463 Hwy 27
Hayward Wisconsin 54843
Office; 715-634-7725
Cell; 7'15-699-0673
www.northwoodoutdoor.com
Zoning Map
935
B21
801
791
781
773
771
)767
729
723
715
711
IN
%
I
N
I N (N 179001
17901 7900
I N I
N
I� I
ia�vli
N
L�
HILLVIEWto
't
�
7886
LLI
p
7691
co
m
7860
7895
N
Western
N
N
—_-
M
N
N
_.... __.
Bank
7875
r
z
7885
7866
7867
_ _.
3 O°
13-2 -
7870
Z
:D
7877
-
7854
—
7851
�yAN
7863
7842
7841
CVS
r�
Holiday
,�?a
7851
78300
n
---
R-4
W
J
7815
7809
7801
7767
7761
7755
7745
7715
* Properties not irAcated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
Aerial View
Aerial View
Western
Bank
Proposed Site Plan Sunnyside Road
rLIE `
_N1� d
4 l7Y °L.
N f � N3
J
F`Y
I
f -r• �Y.r.Y�..YrrrS� y
An-
I f\J
1
%iSFI
k
1 �iriYyFd rryp'7d .Y.�w ..
County Road 10
I
I
Photographic Documentation
Front of building
Northwest•- of building
- T
sWWII _
Examples of some products sold by Northwood Industries
(www. northwoodoutdoor.com)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 976-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW OUTDOOR SALES AND DISPLAYS AT 2701 COUNTY ROAD 10 FOR
NORTHWOOD INDUSTRIES; PLANNING CASE CU2013-001
WHEREAS, Clair Martin with Northwood Industries, has applied for a conditional use
permit for outdoor sales and displays at 2701 County Road 10; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 2701 County Road 10, is zoned B-3, Highway
Business, and legally described as follows:
Subject to Highway Easements, Except the Northeasterly 150 feet of Lot 106 and Lot 107,
Spring Lake Park Hill View, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 06-30-23-43-0028
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows outdoor sales in B-3
zoning districts; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents about this
proposal:
1. Staff Report
2. Zoning Map
3. Photographic documentation
4. Site Plan
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request:
1. The proposed outdoor sales meets the requirements as outlined in Chapters 1114
and 1125 of the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the
outdoor sales would be a type of land use that is consistent with the "commercial" land
use designation for the subject property.
3. The outdoor sales would not be out of place given the existing commercial character
of the surrounding area.
4. The proposed outdoor sales should not depreciate the neighboring properties.
5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists.
Resolution 976-13
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the conditional use permit for outdoor sales and displays, with
conditions as follows:
1. The outdoor sales and display area is limited to a maximum of 1,363 square feet in
the parking lot.
2. All outdoor sales and displays must always be placed on a hard surface.
3. This Conditional Use Permit may be reviewed by the City Council if any problems
develop, or if there are any changes to the operation deemed substantial enough to
warrant such a review, in the estimation of the Community Development Director or
the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Conditional Use Permit shall
have no expiration date and shall remain in force so long as the conditions agreed upon herein
are observed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the
minutes.
Adopted this 1St day of May, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
7�T `� Item No: 6B
MOUNDS VIEW Meeting Date: May 1, 2013
Type of Business: Planning Case
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Auto Repair
Business at 2975 County Road 10; Planning Case CU2012-002
Introduction:
The applicant, Jacob Marrs with North Metro Motors, is requesting approval of a conditional use
permit to operate an auto repair business at 2975 County Road 10. This property is zoned B-3,
Highway Business. The applicant has a purchase agreement for the property which was formerly
a "Thrifty Car Rental" and is planning to open a second location of his auto repair business in
Mounds View.
Requirements:
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1e: The Planning Commission is required to reviewthe possible adverse
effects of the requested conditional use.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1q: which states that the Planning Commission shall make findings of fact
and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the request as it deems necessary to carry
out the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code and forward such findings to the City Council.
Chapter 1114: B-3 Highway Business District
Section 1114.04: Conditional Uses:
Subd. 3. Motor fuel station, auto repair, minor and tire battery stores and service; provided, that:
a. Regardless of whether the dispensing, sales or offering for sale of motor fuels and/or oil
is incidental to the conduct of the use or business, the standards and requirements imposed
by this Title for motor fuel stations shall apply. These standards and requirements are,
however, in addition to other requirements which are imposed for other uses of the
property.
b. The architectural appearance and functional plan of the building and site shall not be so
dissimilar to the existing buildings or area as to cause impairment in property values or
constitute a blighting influence within a reasonable distance of the lot.
c. The entire site, other than that taken up by a building, structure or plantings, shall be
surfaced with a material to control dust, drainage and erosion which is subject to the
approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
d. A minimum lot area of twenty two thousand five hundred (22,500) square feet and
minimum lot dimensions of one hundred fifty feet by one hundred thirty feet (150' x 130') be
provided.
North Metro Motors CUP Deport
May 1, 2013
Paye 2
e. A drainage system, subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer,
shall be installed.
f. A curb not less than six inches (6") above grade shall separate the public sidewalk from
motor vehicle service areas.
g. The lighting shall be accomplished in such a way as to have no direct source of light
visible from adjacent land in residential use or from the public right of way and shall be in
compliance with Section 1103.09 of this Title.
h. Wherever fuel pumps are to be installed, pump islands shall be installed.
i. At the boundaries of a residential district, a strip of not less than ten feet (10') shall be
landscaped and screened in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(1) through (5) of this
Title.
j. Each light standard island and all islands in the parking lot shall be landscaped or
covered.
k. Parking or car magazine storage space shall be screened from view of abutting
residential districts in compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(1) through (5) of this Title.
I. Vehicular access points shall create a minimum of conflict with through traffic movement,
shall comply with Chapter 1121 of this Title and shall be subject to the approval of the
Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
m. All signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be minimized and
shall be in compliance with the Mounds View Sign Code.
n. Provisions are made to control and reduce noise
o. No outside storage except as allowed in compliance with subdivision 4 of this Section
shall exist.
p. No outside sale or service except as allowed in compliance with subdivision 5 of this
Section shall exist.
q. Sale of products otherthan those specifically mentioned in this Section shall be subject
to the conditional use permit.
s. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily
met.
North Metro Plotors CUP Report
May 1, 2013
Page 3
Discussion:
North Metro Motors plans to purchase the property at 2975 County Road and open an automotive
repair shop. They currently operate an auto repair and bodywork shop in Ham Lake, and the
Mounds View store would be their second location, but with only auto mechanical work. No body
work or painting would be done at the Mounds View location.
The property at 2975 County Road 10 is zoned B-3, Highway Business, and 0.58 acres in size.
The 1,421 square foot building was built in 1959 and has always been auto -related businesses,
most recently as a Thrifty Car Rental. The building has two garage bays and an office/sales area.
There is room for more than twenty parking spaces in the existing parking lot.
The CUP will remain in effect indefinitely so long as there are no changes to the operation, and
there have been no problems or reasons which would warrant the City Council to re-examine the
CUP.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and address any
potential adverse effects which include, but are not limited to, relationship with the Comprehensive
Plan, geographical area involved, potential depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and
the demonstrated need for such a use. Each potential adverse effect is addressed below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages existing
businesses to remain in the city along with the introduction of new businesses within Mounds View
when compatible with surrounding uses. 2975 County Road 10 is zoned B-3, Highway Business
and has always been used for auto related businesses, and is designated as "Neighborhood
Commercial" in the Comp Plan. If the requested conditional use permit were approved, this CUP
would be in line with the Comp Plan land use designation for this site.
The Location and Character of the Surrounding Area. The property is located on the northwest
corner of County Road 10 and Spring Lake Road. It is immediately adjacent to single and two-
family residential land uses. Across County Road 10 there are commercial uses, including an auto
repair and sales business (which are in Spring Lake Park). All traffic for this business will be using
Spring Lake Road for access. This property has been various types of automotive businesses since
it was built in 1959, and the proposed auto repair business should not change the existing character
of the neighborhood.
Depreciation. A car rental business purchased the property in 1999, but the building has been mostly
unused for the last couple of years. The auto repair business will be a more intense use than car
rentals, and will likely bring more regular traffic to the site. The applicant plans to paint the building
and sealcoat and stripe the parking lot. There is an existing privacy fence on the north and west
sides to screen the adjacent duplex homes from the business. The new business will be a change
from how quiet this site has been over the last couple of years, and there hasn't been an auto repair
business here for over fourteen years. If the new business maintains the property and limits the
amount of vehicles parked on-site, any adverse effects upon the surrounding area should be minimal.
North Metro Motom, CUP Re -.port
May 1, 2013
Page q.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicant is proposing an auto repair business.
There are three other businesses in the city that offer auto repair services (35W Auto Repair, Pat's
Muffler and Tires N' More). The proposed North Metro Motors business appears to be providing the
same or similar services as the other auto repair businesses in Mounds View, but they have a
strong business and feel this is a good option for their second location.
Summary:
The parking requirements are met as nine parking spaces are required and there are at least 20
spaces on the site. The lot meets the minimum size and square footage requirements. Water runoff
from the site will drain to the ditch along County Road 10. Staff recommends approval of this
conditional use permit with conditions.
Recommendations:
After taking testimony from staff and the applicant, the Commission can take one of the following
actions related to the request:
Recommend approval of the conditional use permit. Resolution 977-13 is attached if the
Commission chooses this action.
2. Recommend denial of the conditional use permit. If the Planning Commission selects this
option, Staff would need to be directed to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact
appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if
more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such
information has been provided. Because of 60 -day requirements, the Commission would need
to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Narrative from Applicant
2. Zoning Map
3. Aerial View
4. Photos of site
5. Resolution 977-13
Narrative from Applicant
North Metro Motors is complete car care center. The services that we currently offer are mechanical
work, paint and body work, towing, and auto sales. We are a very small business with only 6
employees however; we have a very large workload. That is where the second location comes into play.
We would like to hire more employees to increase productivity this is why we are looking to expand
our business to the Mounds View location. Our plan for the Mounds View location is to offer
mechanical work and towing services only. We are hoping to add at least 2 more employees to staff the
new location.
Our plans for the Mounds View location for the building and property would be to re-sign and paint the
building, and seal coat and stripe the parking lot.
Zoning Map
8270 Q 8265 I -
-8260 8255
18250 8245?
PLE9
8233
8235 Sj
8213
819 <
8201
8177
914
8248 NI N N i N N (•
8245
8210 8217
8191
8200
n 8123 8180 8175
ti
R-2 8160 8161 N ^o '.
(\ 3CD
003 H N N
8 411 owOD PLACE 2
co
O `
?I \ 8 31 N N N N 1�
�I \ 0 rn
N
I \ \ rtni
\ N LO
\ N
N
13-3
10
a I Spring Lake Park
U) I (white area)
�I N
IMI
R-4
N
t7S
M
ARDAN
8206
8202
11PeP
8192 zl
8160 g
8148 n
ANU!.
8132
811
8106
8100
8060
8040
8020
Properties not bearing a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
N n
8227
8205
8127
NT
now"
Entrance off Spring La
GUN
=i:' >es�eaea�o
Entrance off Spring La
I
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 977-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW AN AUTO REPAIR STORE AT 2975 COUNTY ROAD 10;
PLANNING CASE NO CU2013-002
WHEREAS, Jacob Marrs with North Metro Motors, has applied for a conditional use
permit to operate an auto repair store at 2975 County Road 10; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned B-3, Highway Business, and is legally described
as follows:
AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 89, SUBJECT TO RD; THE E 166 FT OF PART NEWLY OF
HWY OF LOT 13, RAMSEY COUNTY, MN
PIN 06-30-23-23-0045
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows auto repair stores in B-3
and higher zoning districts; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding
this proposal:
1. Comprehensive Plan
2. Zoning Map
3. Staff Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit request:
1. The proposed auto repair store meets the requirements as outlined in Chapters 1114
and 1125 of the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the auto
repair store use is consistent with the Neighborhood Commercial land use designations
for this area.
3. The proposed auto repair store would not be out of place given it is located on County
Road 10, which is the main commercial corridor in the City.
4. The proposed auto repair store is located on County Road 10, the City's commercial
corridor. The property has been auto -related uses since 1959, and should not depreciate
the neighboring properties.
5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists
Resolution 977-13
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the auto repair store at 2975 County
Road 10, with conditions as follows:
1. Hours of operation shall not exceed lam to 8pm Monday through Friday, and 9am to
3pm on Saturdays and Sundays.
2. The property and/or business owner must always keep and maintain a privacy fence
along the west and north sides of the property to provide screening for the adjacent
residentially zoned properties.
3. Service of vehicles shall only be performed inside the building.
4. All motorized or power equipment, such as generators, air compressors and the like,
shall be installed, stored, utilized and operated inside the building.
5. Service and overhead doors should be kept closed in order to minimize noise
nuisances to the neighborhood.
6. There shall be no outside storage allowed without the prior approval of an amendment
to this conditional use permit.
7. No vehicles or trailers shall be parked on unimproved surface on the property at any
time.
8. This Conditional Use Permit may be reviewed by the City Council if any problems
develop, or if there are any changes to the operation deemed substantial enough to
warrant such a review, in the estimation of the Community Development Director or
the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that all other Conditional Use Permits on file
with this property pertaining to previous uses shall hereby be revoked, rescinded and
considered null and void because the provisions pertaining to those uses are longer being
observed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Conditional Use Permit shall
have no expiration date and shall remain in force so long as the conditions agreed upon herein
are observed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the
minutes.
Resolution 977-13
Page 2
Adopted this 1 st day of May 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
of Mounds View .Staff
Item No: 7A
Meeting ®ate: May 1 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Review Applications for Planning Commission
Vacancy
Longtime Commissioner Jean Miller is resigning from the Planning Commission. The
remaining time of Jean's three year term needs to be filled. The City advertised the
vacancy, with applications due on April 22, 2013. Staff received three applications.
The Planning Commission should reviewthe applications, meet the candidates and a ballot
vote will be taken during the meeting. The results of the vote will be the recommendation
that the Planning Commission submits to the City Council, who will make the official
appointment on May 13, 2013.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Application from Keith Cramblit
2. Application from Julianne Love
3. App!ica. ion from W.IcTic, Amw;(! :en
City of Mounds View
24m1 county Highway '10
Mounds View, Nllq 551'12
763-7'17-4000
G7�5iBX89 o@r1f�s-,Ia'd-amrilLi:C':��a
A plio�� gn Jor-AOVLIS rtL of _ —
Group(s) applied for:
�r
5S/
Full Name (Please Print):
Worl< Phone: Work/Cell Phone: _76
Address: _(-
Years
Years at this address: i =, Years you have liver,) in Mounds View: 1 `
t
E-mail Address:
-Experience nc1_
a0 alifica£iotm-
Skiillyls and Interests:
Employment, Occupation or Other Relevant Experience:
cJ A C
Memberships, Accomplishments or Other Qualifications:
Please state your reason for wanting to serve with this group:
l
_-
'>
Date:
(Your response to airy of the, nbovo inquiries play bo continued ort ll1a back of this form and you
ms�'y attach other information thatt you would lilt" (lto City Council to consider.)
The City of Mm.uids NOW is eonvnitted to the policy that all poisons shall have access to its programs,
facilities and employment withoutrega/ti fenace, ethnicity, sex, age orphysicol abilities.
Microsoft Word -Advisory Commission Application.doc - Boards_... 11ttp://A,\VW.Ci.mounds-view.nut.tishIellicl[/sites/f 9DACB450-96B3...
City of Mounds View
2401 County Highway 10
MOUnds View, MN 55112
763-717-4000
L
�preldz a ic�ij scju: gvis -Aj grIlMissi ass-atnd �:c�r��¢�nifie ,
Group(s) applied for:
Full Name (Please Print): l ti (_ ig rt 1u �. r,iY
Work Phone_ Work/Cell Phone:
Address,-
Years
ddress:
Years at this address: ___� Years your have lived in Mounds View:
E-mail Address: � l;k _q r_u i- 1"11, (11
Gxperi nee
and Qualifications
SI(ills and Interests
! i 1
lllrc�iri rte IL\ its nv+�it �dt[� SIS°,i r�iiir. ��rll�r� 1`;S�C -I rnei {1�n�o�, �J1f�lUr�ifl�Jp�
(��u117�i011U� ��)bl,r i(iiiV -, !Clivi iilU.lb G%�-�.)i [11,I �i ��(.l�ll l��r G�'tCU-iiVli ����tr llJf�Gti�b�,
)
IILt�n i�[:. i' lr}GJ1-f1
Employment, Occupation or Other Relevant Experience:
i
>'I) 1,'Xula r Ir('�11
Memberships Accomplishments or Other Qualifications:
,tn. Ul'PVVPxii���(� (�t�rut.it1l l
rlir ira/�ii,lhin��µ ��)r'i-i•ucth-i �iibt
yIL� (hGl'11�11i( Titter ri.`/i�iIlV1C�71a�1�) 9 i�ri 4!Ic,�iL� (IIfUf or Ill' (I`�t�i�.� hCt��(:il'�t17}�
(�(Ar(t°ti i�, iioSi it Ali, I�U`(n C. Z.I GhCj 4J:
Please state your reason for wanting to serve with this group' l
LleII„ I(( -a�:< p ..1 �.=nr,� dl<., ic-�ca)t imc C� r11f vrl,5� -�0,/ tut
Sigm title
r
(YaUI rosponse t any of the above inquiries inay be continued on it,(, bacl< of this forms JICI You
may attach other inform:aiion that you would like the City (-,,ocmcil to cumsider.)
The City of Moands View is convnlHed to the policy that all porsons shall have access to its progr'arns,
facilities and employmenf Wirhoul regard for race, eihnicity, sox, aye or physical abilities.
4/19/2013 10:39 AM
IofI
` -a
city oi'Mo' hcis view
2401 County Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
763-717-4000
�[�I®9icafl n for /Advl!sor�Lg®rrrarru's��Uwrrnuf Ges
Group(s) applied for: it OUnds View Planning Cotrnfn IsSIon
Full Name (Please Print):
Valerie Amundsen
€PE t FIVER APR :LII 7.011
Work Phone: 763-786-5699 Work/Cell Phone: 6'12-987-5616
Address: 3048 Woodale Drive, Mounds View, MN 55112
Years at this address: Thirty Four (34) Years lived in Mounds View: 34
F -mall Address:yammul5en¢lyahoo.coau
Experience and Qualifical:i®rrs
Sicills avid Interests.
My husband and I have lived in this city since 1979, and raised our family here.
We have always believed in giving back to the community through service and
volunteering. You will see from my list of volunteer positions that I have
extensive and varied service experience, both at the City and elsewhere.
This Commission is one I have always had a special interest in serving on. Most
likely it is because we built our own home (literally), and so have always delved
into building codes and regulations more than most. But it is also because I have
an interest in being a pall, of the community I love to call home. I enjoy working
with others who also care about our city, as together we strive to make our
"bedroom" community a great place to live, raise a family and grow a business. I
feel that I would bring a great skill set to the group. I am thorough in my thought
processes, open to input from others, and a detailed worker. But I also enjoy
hearing the stories of our citizens and their needs, and would be interested in
reviewing whether (or not) a code/regulation variance should be granted.
�]C[�t �i F«eo
1 have a sl.lsinrss rr, Deg! citool 1,_sinc�s,
niveruiiy of IVlm,tesotz�,. I um sets rni�loyed, workir ur the i ,,nu., Markets incl,
U
as all I_.bay Power Seller I am art occasional writer for Yahoo Voices, arrd hav<.
23 publi>hed articles. M(y writing is for irt.ir,l !wing, i�,_Iiii� II� family.
Memberships, AccomplishrroGiVa or Other QW11itical:iolls:
My Cornnxunity and Civic Volunteer Service over past years:
City of Mounds View
Comprehensive Plan Committee member
Streets Task Force member
Streets and Utilities Committee member
Church
Coordinator of New Member Ministry (currently serving)
Bible Study group leader
Youth Advisory Committee/Mission Trip Coordinator
Pre -marriage minister/retreat organizer
Mounds View independent- School District #621
Communications Committee member
Mounds View School District PTA Coordinating Council (Founder & President)
Irondale High School Dance Team Booster Club President
Sunnyside Elementary PTA President & VP
Community
Big Brothers & Sisters Mentor
Volunteer at Sharing & Caring Hands (currently serving)
Minnesota State PTA
Board of Director - B years
North Metro Regional Director
Convention Workshop Presenter
other skills:
Competent and comfortable with: mathematics, writing, researching, computers,
looking at building plans and speaking before a group.
I hope that you will consider me for this appointment. I will promise to bring my
energy and passion to this position, should I be fortunate enough to be appointed
to serve the city and it's citizens in this capacity. Please feel free to contact me if
you have any questions about anything stated in this application.
Signature:_ r_L,„
Date: April 17, 2013
City of Mounds MOW
240.1 County I-Iighway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
763-717-4000
MOUNDS VIEW
City of Mounds View Staff Report
Item No: 7B
Meeting Date: May 1, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Proposed Code Amendment for Accessory Buildings - Cargo
Containers
Discussion:
At the January 2, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission agreed with staff that
shipping containers are not appropriate as a permanent use in residential districts, but felt that
there are situations where these, or other types of portable storage containers (such as PODS),
could be allowed temporarily. The Commission supported allowing the containers for short
periods of time, but not for permanent use, and also recommends not allowing the existing cargo
containers in the City to remain as non -conforming. Staff reviewed this code amendment with the
City Council at the March 4, 2013 Worksession, and the Council is supportive of moving forward
with this amendment.
1 The Planning Commission has continued to review the proposed language, and Staff has now put
together the final language in a resolution for the Planning Commission to take action on. Once
the resolution is approved by the Planning Commission, Staff will then put the amendments into
ordinance format and take it to the City Council for a public hearing and two readings.
Recommendation:
Review Resolution 978-13, and recommend changes, or take action to approve the resolution
which would then be forwarded to the City Council in ordinance format.
Respectfully submitted.
/r
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Resolution 978-13
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 978-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE
TITLE 1100 REGULATING THE USE OF CARGO CONTAINERS IN THE CITY;
SPECIAL PLANNING CASE 186-13
WHEREAS, the use of cargo containers for accessory buildings, sheds, storage, and other
purposes has increased within the City causing in some instances a blight; and,
WHEREAS, cargo containers due to their size and industrial appearance, are not
appropriate for use as permanent accessory buildings or storage sheds in residential districts;
and,
WHEREAS, in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of its residents, the City
proposes to regulate and provide for the use of such cargo containers; and,
WHEREAS, City Staff has recommended that definitions and regulations for cargo
containers be added to the City Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission agrees with the City Staff recommendation to add
definitions and regulations for cargo containers; and,
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1102 of the Mounds View Zoning Code by
deleting the strisken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
1102.02: DEFINITIONS: The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this Code, shall
be defined as follows:
Subd. 14. CARGO CONTAINER: An article of transport equipment which falls into anv of the
following categories:
a. Originally, specifically or formerly designed for or used in the parking shipping
movement, transportation or storage of freight, articles goods or commodities; and/or,
b. Designed for or capable of being (1) mounted or moved on a rail car, or (2) mounted on
a chassis or bogie for movement by a truck trailer, or (3) loaded on to a ship; and/or,
c. A prefabricated metal structure designed for use as an individual shipping container or
a metal structure designed and built for use as an enclosed truck trailer.
Subd. 97. PERMANENT: Means a period of time that exceeds six (6) months.
Subd.121.TEMPORARY: Means a period of time that does not exceed six (6) months
Resolution 978-13
Page 2
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1103 of the Mounds View Zoning Code by
deleting the st; ken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
CHAPTER 1103
GENERAL BUILDING REQUIREMENTS
SECTION:
1103.01:
Purpose
1103.02:
Dwelling Unit Restrictions
1103.03:
Platted and Unplatted Property
1103.04:
Solar Energy Systems and Structures
1103.05:
Wind Generator Systems
1103.06:
Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment
1103.07:
Drainage
1103.08:
Fencing, Screening and Landscaping
1103.09:
Glare
1103.10:
Smoke, Dust and Odors
1103.11:
Noise
1103.12:
Refuse
1103.13:
Storage of Equipment and Materials
1103.14:
Liquid or Solid Wastes
1103.15:
Toxic or Noxious Matter
1103.16:
Explosives
1103.17:
Underground Storage Tanks
1103.18:
Satellite Dish Antennas
1103.19:
Cargo Containers
1103.19 CARGO CONTAINERS
Subd. 1. Permitted Locations and Prohibitions:
a. Cargo containers may not be placed, stored or used permanently on any property
zoned for residential use. Cargo containers with alterations, such as cosmetic or
structural changes done in order for the container to appear more like a typical
accessory building are not allowed permanently on residential property.
b. Cargo containers may be placed stored or used for temporary storage on property
zoned for residential use. Each residential property may use only one cargo container
at a time.
Subd. 2. The following standards shall apply to all cargo containers:
a. Cargo Containers shall not be stacked on one another.
b. Cargo containers shall not be used for human habitation or commercial purposes, and
shall not be provided with refrigeration heating, electricity or plumbing
c. Refuse and debris shall not be stored in, against on or under the cargo container.
Resolution 978-13
Page 3
d. The cargo container may not occupy any required off-street parking spaces or
loading/unloading areas or fire lanes in any district.
e. The carpo container shall not block, obstruct, or reduce in any manner any required
exits, windows, vent shafts, parking spaces and/or access driveways.
f. The carpo container shall be placed on an asphalt or concrete surface and be located a
minimum of fifteen (15) feet from the edge of the street.
g. The cargo container shall be structurally sound, stable and in good repair. Any carpo
container that becomes unsound, unstable or otherwise dangerous shall be
immediately repaired or removed from the property. The City shall provide notice to the
owner of the property where the carpo container is located of any condition in violation
of this section. After notice to the property owner, any cargo container stored or kept in
such a manner deemed a dangerous condition and a public nuisance as determined by
the City may be immediately removed by the City. Any cost or expense associated with
the removal shall be the responsibility of the property ownerwhere the cargo container
is located.
Subd. 3. Current Violations — Time to Comply: Cargo containers located on residential property
prior to the effective date of this ordinance are considered illegal. All property owners within the
City shall have 6 months from the effective date of this ordinance to bring the properties which
currently contain carpo containers that are in violation of the terms of this Chapter, into full
compliance with the provisions of this Chapter.
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1106 of the Mounds View Zoning Code by
deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
1106.03: ACCESSORY USES: The following are permitted accessory uses in an R-1 District:
Subd. 1. Accessory Buildings: A buildina oriainallv constructed for use as an accessory buildina for
the storage of materials and equipment accessory to a primary use located on the property.
Accessory buildings, which for these purposes shall include garages, tool houses, carports,
sheds and similar buildings for storage of domestic supply and noncommercial recreational
equipment, whether attached or detached.
WHEREAS, amending the City Code to add definitions and regulations for cargo containers
would better serve the public and would clarify the zoning requirements; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment to the
City Code is warranted and justified.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
recommends approval of amendments to Chapters 1102, 1103 and 1106 of the Mounds View City
Code to add regulations as defined herein.
Resolution 978-13
Page 4
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to
forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 1't day of May, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
April 17, 2013
Mounds View City hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for April 17, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen, and
Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Smith (excused).
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes
City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
Review City Code to Promote Development &s Sustainability
3. Approval of Minutes
February 6, 2013.
LiwI1C1 V ?COA ll7: Coin, __ �z'�ner :''-_itgen/Comma . , _s �ai,r f_ - lu. To appro . _ N.�;
of me February 6, /v113 r gu1,� I-launing Com- ;cion p; as slightly
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion tarn,
Mounds View Planning Commission April 17, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that Commissioner Carvelli-Yu provided
language suggestions, and she suggested additional language be added to the City Code
Amendment per the discussion received at the last Planning Commission meeting. She stated
Code now read that cargo containers were not allowed permanently within the City, no matter
what changes, structural or cosmetic, had been done to the container to make it appear more like
a typical accessory building. These language amendments were discussed with the Commission
in detail. She questioned how this addition should be added to the Code. The Commission
recommended the language be added as an extension to part A of the Code Amendment for
Cargo Containers.
Associate Heller commented she would make the revisions and bring this back to the
Commission on May I" for approval.
B. Review City Code to Promote Development & Sustainability
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that the Council has requested the Planning
Commission review the City Code in order to discuss ways the City can promote development
and sustainability, particularly along the County Road 10 corridor. She stated the City Council
has been working for over a year on various ways to improve the corridor, and wants to make
changes to the City Code that would promote development.
Associate Heller asked if the Commission had any comments on the April 1, 2013 Council
work' -"""Sion.
Chair Stevenson was pleased that to ;al developers and real estate agents were able fo aften i tie
Worksession.
Commissioner Carvelli--Yu requested further information on the PUD process and how this
would affect redevelopment.
Mounds View Planning Commission April 17, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 3
Chair Stevenson indicated PUD's were a great tool for larger parcel developments.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu then presented the Commission with a handout on the definition of a
PUD and questioned if the City had any PUD's currently in place.
Associate Heller reviewed the location of several PUDs within the City, noting the Walgreens,
Realife and movie theater developments were each within a PUD. She commented the PUD
process allows for some give and take between the developer and the City, and noted that the
PUD process typically streamlined the development process. She then discussed PUD
agreements noting each PUD had a document on file with the City describing what is and is not
allowed on site.
Discussion ensued regarding past PUD developments in the City of Mounds View.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned why the parcels along County Road 10 had not been
rezoned to PUD to spur development.
Chairperson Stevenson stated that there were not many parcels large enough available along the
corridor to rezone to PUD, and most are privately owned.
Associate Heller indicated the rezoning of property was typically completed in conjunction with
a development project, and not prior to. Developers know that rezoning is typically part of the
development process. She reviewed different ways that cities can help guide development in
certain areas without changing the zoning code. The City of North St. Paul has created a Master
Plan for one of their commercial corridors, and designated various district areas to assist with the
redevelopment process. She noted the City of Arden Hills has written "guiding plans" for certain
zoning districts.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned the minimum size a parcel had to be for a PUD zoning
designation.
Associate Heller stated a residential PUD was three acres, a senior housing PUD was two acres,
and a commercial PUD was five areas. She commented there were very few single parcels along
the County Road 10 corridor that fit these requirements. However, there is potential for
development along the corridor since there are some willing sellers.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu was in favor of reducing these restrictions to spur redevelopment
along the -o- 4dov;:r�
Chair [c iw.ioasensc of [%. -"� l i �r ',2th a large
number u ". smaller developments, this n�r.ay be diF':icalt.
Commissioner Carvelli_-Yu discussed the potential of combining the Robert's and sandwich shop
parcels for a future redevelopment. She commented that this would make the properties more
attractive for potential developers.
Mounds View Planning Commission April 17, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 4
Associate Heller stated those two parcels combined along with the Premium Stop parcel, would
be about a 3 -acre site, however; someone would need to purchase two of the properties. She
noted the City owns the Premium Stop parcel, and tore down the buildings in order to make the
site more attractive for redevelopment.
Commissioner Schiltgen recommended the City continue pursuing opportunities to encourage
redevelopment of beautification of the corridor.
Commissioner Elofson anticipated that the economy would boom in the next several years and
he predicted the blighted areas along the corridor would take care of themselves.
Chair Stevenson stated the downturn in the economy has partially created the current situation
along the corridor. He was in favor of the Commission reconsidering the PUD acreage
requirements along with the right-of-way setbacks.
Associate Heller commented Staff does speak with potential developers and explained all vacant
properties that Staff is aware of are listed on the City's website. She suggested that the City
could begin encouraging property owners along the corridor to improve their buildings and
property, and signage as this may help draw future development to the area.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu was in favor of allowing only monument signs along the County
Road 10 corridor for future developments.
The Commission agreed.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu suggested that the amount of electronic signs along the corridor be
limited.
Associate Heller indicated the amount per business is already restricted within the City's current
sign code.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned how the Commission should proceed.
Associate Heller noted she would forward to the Commissioners a PUD agreement for each
member to review. She encouraged the Commissioners to review this information along with the
updated Zoning Code.
Chair 5tevcniscm reconrmenderx the Commr_ion revicva the>FUD size rc(l firemen s a: a fu`,t;r
maenng In addition, he wantrd to see monument -style srgnri required 1 il„ the corridor i - all
fixLure signs. He noted building setbacks a -id parking lots requirements should also be !ssc:d.
The Corruniss on was in agreeincnt with these recomm(midatioils.
Mounds View Planning Commission April 17, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 5
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their discussion and input this evening. She
explained the Commission would be meeting quite regularly in the coming months to continue
discussions on this topic.
Associate Heller indicated the second item up for discussion from the Council was sustainability.
She reviewed the current language within the City Code regarding this topic, noting it was
extremely brief and hindered property owners who wanted to install solar energy systems. She
commented many cities were encouraging the installations of wind, solar or geothermal systems.
It was noted that free assistance was available through the end of May to assist the City with
rewriting the Zoning Code. She explained that by amending the Code, the City would encourage
residents and business owners to be more "green."
Associate Heller encouraged the Commissioners to review the City of Maplewood's
sustainability code as it has been recently updated and would be a good starting point for
Mounds View. Staff will bring this portion of the code back to review at a future meeting.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. May 1, 2013
B. May 15, 2013
R. Adjournment to Agenda Session
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 8:41 p.m.
(The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session)
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Traa cribcd by:
Reid+ Guenther
Tina; ".ver Ofj` >'i e Secretci ial, Fru:.
1
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
May 15, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
April 17, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-00 Variance for Reduced Side and Rear Yard Setbacks
Address: 8385 Groveland Court
Applicant: Richard & Laurol Boik, property owners
B. CU2013-002 Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage
Address: 8478 Long Lake Road
Applicant: Allen Hambleton, property owner
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss City Code Updates for Renewable Energy Systems
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. June 5, 2013
B. June 19, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. May 1, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
MOUNDS VIEW Item 3
Meeting Date: May 15,, 2 20113
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Variance Request to allow for Reduced Side
and Rear Yard Setbacks at 8385 Groveland Court;
Planning Case VR2013-002
Introduction:
The property owners, Richard and Laurol Boik, are requesting a variance to permit an
addition to their house at 8385 Groveland Court to encroach two feet into the required 10 -
foot side yard setback and 4 -inches into the existing 25 -foot rear yard setback. The Boiks
want to build a 16'x 26' addition with a covered porch, bedroom and bathroom on the side of
their house for Laurol's mother who has recently moved in.
Discussion:
The Boik's house is a multi-level style built in 1978 in the Groveland Court cul-de-sac. The
applicant's lot is a cul-de-sac pie shape that is narrow at the street, but it is an odd six -sided
lot that is only about 100 feet deep. When the house was under construction in 1978, the
builder misunderstood the City Code and thought a minimum 35 foot front setback was
required (30 feet is the minimum). This normally wouldn't be a problem except that because
it is a shallower lot, the house then had only a 25 foot rear setback (30 feet is the required
minimum rear setback). Since the City did not require surveys for new homes at the time,
this mistake wasn't discovered until the footing inspection. Since the foundation was already
in and the other homes in the cul-de-sac had 35 foot setbacks, the Planning Commission
approved a variance for this property to have a 25 -foot rear setback.
The Boiks bought their house in 1997 and like the home and neighborhood, but Laurol's
mother can no longer live on her own now and recently moved in with the Boiks. The house
has multi-levels and the bedrooms are on the upper -most level, so they want to add a
bedroom, handicap accessible bathroom and a covered porch to the north end of the house
for Mom. This would allow her access to the main areas of the house without having to deal
with stairs. Based on the interior layout of the house, the north side is where the addition
makes the most sense, and there is no room to expand the house to the rear.
The house faces west and is centered on the lot. The garage is on the south end and the
proposed addition would be on the north side, 16 -feet wide and 26 -feet deep (the same
depth as the house). The adjacent north neighbor's house is setback about 35 feet from the
shared property line, so even with the Boik's 16 foot wide addition, there would still be a lot of
space between the houses. Because the side property lines angle outward, the addition
would have an 8 -foot setback at the front corner, but 3 -feet back from the corner, the
addition would meet the 10 -foot setback.
This variance request is also for a reduced rear setback. The existing house has a variance
for the 25 -foot rear setback, but the addition would be expanding on that setback, and would
also extend slightly into where one of the rear property lines angles in giving the addition
even less than a 25 -foot setback.
Planning Case VR2013-002
May 15, 2013 Staff Report
Page 2
Variance Criteria Review:
As with any variance application, for the Planning Commission to act favorably, there must
be a demonstrated practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal
interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State
statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application
and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in
Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship
exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria, with responses, are as follows:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these
regulations.
The zoning code requires minimum building setbacks for aesthetics and to provide
separation and some sense of privacy between neighbors. The required setbacks
typically can be met, but this lot is oddly shaped and has a very shallow backyard
which is causing the difficulty.
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties, and certainly
encourages home improvements, especially ones that allow families to take care of
each other and age in place.
C. The applicant proposes to use the propertyin a reasonable manner not permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The applicants want to add a bedroom and full bathroom to the main floor of the
house in order for an elderly family member to be able to comfortably live with them
and not need to use stairs. This improvement will also allow the homeowners to be
able to stay in the home longer and age in place since there would be a main floor
bedroom and full bath to use if stairs become difficult for them in the future.
Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title
has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The unique circumstances which apply to this property are that a 25 -foot rear
setback is much less than normal and less than the City Code requires, and the six -
sided lot with five of the property lines being angled makes it difficult to meet
setbacks. Most other property owners could build additions on the rear of their
homes and meet the 30 foot rear setback requirement.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The 2 -foot side setback and 5 -foot 6 -inch rear setback variances requested are the
minimum that would be necessary in order to add the desired interior square
footage and keep the exterior house style and roof lines aesthetically pleasing.
Planning Case VR2013-002
May 15, 2013 Staff Report
Page 3
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
In order to have enough square footage for the intent of the addition, the 2 -foot side
yard setback variance is the minimum variance needed. The 5 -foot 6 -inch rear yard
setback variance is the minimum needed to match the existing house setback and
deal with the angles of the property lines.
The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises
benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards
established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon
other properties in the neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the
variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough
proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Staff does not have any suggested conditions for this variance request
Public Hearing:
As with any variance application, a public hearing is required. Notices were mailed to all
property owners within 350 feet of the applicant's properties. As of May 10, 2013, Staff
has not received any comments.
Recommendation:
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and affected
neighbors, the Commission may take one of the following actions related to the request:
Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 979-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variance. The Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution
of denial with findings appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be
rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table
the request until such information has been provided.
Respectfully Submitted By,
cmj,t�-�
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Proposed Site Plans
4. Narrative from Builder
5. Photographic Documentation
6. Resolution 979-13
ZONING MAP
a
J
Q
Z
Y
J
0410
8401
8365
8355
8345
R
8315
8305
8285
8275
8265
8255
8419 8420
8415 8414
8409 8408
8401 8398
8,391 8388
8381 8378
8371 8368
8351
8346
8344
8341
8334
8339
8333
8330
8321
831
Ar
8301
8285
N
8261
fn 00366
r-
dr
8369
°°
8241
N
N
0410
8401
8365
8355
8345
R
8315
8305
8285
8275
8265
8255
8409
ti
CD
8392
8401
8384
39
CO7
378
�
Ar
37
r`
N
[r1
fn 00366
8369
°°
8360
8365
8354
83518346
8343
8342
8335
8332
8333
8322
8325
8300
GRDVELAND
PARK
u�
00
0
0410
8401
8365
8355
8345
R
8315
8305
8285
8275
8265
8255
ARDAN
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
u
L
ti
CD
to
to
Rt
N
[r1
N
ARDAN
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
u
Site Plan for 8385 Groveland Court Addition
=°b
House
r
Garage
1
Site Plan for 8385
Groveland Court Addition
r(i
Addition ® the
covered porch is
on the front
I ,
,i
,i
I �
r
Addition Plan for
8385 Groveland
Court
Addition area — bedroom,
full bath, walk-in closet and
--�vered porch on front
Narrative from Builder
JAMES C. KRANTZ INC.
1780 I�M CI}, Hwv 10
Spring Lakc Park, M11 6 132
Phone (61 2) lig-i-140
LINt_I tni/ii:why o 11
\.I "�Ib ililfllli )/
April 20, 2013
To add oil a 16' x 26' addition to north end of existing home to care for and house mother of wife of
household. The room is basically a master bedroom on main floor and needs to be this optimum size
because it will have a 6' x 8' bathroom and a 4' x 5' walk in closet and will have an access entry door to
living room, kitchen and dining room which are adjacent to the new addition. Also all entry doors to
room, bath, closet and to porch are 3'0" handicap accessible. Also the best aesthetic design of this
addition has to maintain roolline and Dutch hip style of roof also to keep (lie balance of the house front
wall appearance it is necessary to create the 6' backset in the front wall of house so as not to leave the
appearance of a very long front wall north of center of the house and a sitting porch with hand railings
and steps to grade are proposed for egress and access to yard. Also this feature gives a more open look to
rear of lot from the front of the house. Again by covering the porch maintains the roof line and style of
roof. The suspended cover over the porch is created by reinforcing the roof trusses to bare on the front
wall of the addition.
The sitting porch at [lie front most northern point encroaches approximately 2' into Ilse side backset of the
property creating a backset at that point of 8' and diminishes backset encroachment back to 10' as you
traverse 3' deeper into the lot space. This is the primary reason for this variance application.
Another reason for this application is that in the process of inquiry into getting this variance it was
discovered that the original builder of die house had inadvertently built the house 5 ft closer to the rear
backset of the property line than he was suppose to and he applied for and received a variance at the time
of building the house.
The addition we are proposing follows tike same rear wall line of (lie existing house and except for the last
foot of new addition encroaches about 4" into the 25' original backset where the property line begins to
angle to the west (see plot map).
Again to recap this wall to rear of house needs to be maintained to support the roof line of the house on
the rear of house and that the size of lire additions is best to keep plan as is to provide the space for a
ba(hrooni ctose(s and sufpclent living space in the room for the wife's mother and will be used by
homeowners in the coming yea
Since ely,
anes C. Krantz y— -
Pr sident
r
d
�i
U
or.
MIRa %
fY'MI
Iy
/
I.,
\ �� J �r1r a.I, ref • \ irl� \�
ie�p, € e�iAl ry>, hey
aNra�pAl
fir
CAN
• 1
1- rl ..••
7
7
..'
1
��� ,r 'rr�
.
r
im
IYO
a
r I > aha �dr1 yC
A
li, lill��i _
V
y CView of backyard o
8385 G
Court
J /J
IF,- - -
d
I
Wr
u told
r y 1
i
I
_
��� ,r 'rr�
.
r
im
IYO
a
r I > aha �dr1 yC
A
li, lill��i _
V
y CView of backyard o
8385 G
Court
J /J
IF,- - -
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 979-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A LIVING SPACE ADDITION
TO HAVE AN 8 -FOOT SIDE YARD SETBACK, AND A 24 FOOT -6 INCH REAR YARD
SETBACK AT 8385 GROVELAND COURT;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2013-002
WHEREAS, property owners, Richard and Laurol Boik, have applied for a variance
to allow a house addition to encroach 2 feet into the required 10 foot side yard setback and
5 feet 6 inches into the required 30 foot rear yard setback at 8385 Groveland Court; and,
WHEREAS, 8385 Groveland Court is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and
legally described as follows:
Lot 10, Block 1, Groveland Terrace, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 06-30-23-21-0028
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Proposed Site and Addition Plans
2. Zoning Map
3. Aerial Views
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give
relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements
imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical
difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that
are beyond the property owner's control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on May 15, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which
all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard
to the property located at 8385 Groveland Court, and makes the following findings of fact
related to its decision:
Res. 979-13
Page 2
1. The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding setbacks is to create physical
separation between homes for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property
owners. The requested reduced side yard setback will still give over 30 feet of
building separation and the requested reduced rear setback is almost the same as
on the existing house.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is
improving the property and making it more livable for their family.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because of the shallow lot and angled
property lines.
4. The unique feature of this property is that the backyard is only 25 feet deep and the
property is narrow in the front with angled side property lines. There are very few
properties in the city that have this type of shape or do not have at least a 30 foot
rear yard setback.
The current house has had a 25 foot rear setback since it was built in 1978, and
there is and will continue to be a large side yard separation between the applicant's
house and the adjacent neighbor even with the addition, so there will be no change
to the existing character of the neighborhood.
6. The 2 -foot side yard variance and 5 -foot 6 -inch rear yard variance is the minimum
variance required to alleviate the applicant's practical difficulty since that is what the
zoning code requires for living space setbacks.
7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Richard
and Laurol Boik, to allow a living space addition to have an 8 -foot north side setback and a
24 -foot 6 -inch rear yard setback at 8385 Groveland Court subject to the following:
If within one year after granting the variance, the work as permitted by the variance
has not been completed, then such variance shall be come null and void unless an
extension of time has been requested by the applicant and granted by the Planning
Commission. Such extension shall be requested by the applicant in writing, and
submitted to the City at least 30 days before the expiration of the original variance.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 5B
Meeting Date: MaV 15, 2013
Type of Business: Planning Case
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized
Garage at 8478 Long Lake Road; Planning Case CU2013-
003
Introduction:
The applicant, Allen Hambleton, is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to
construct an oversize detached garage on his property at 8478 Long Lake Road. The
applicant wants to build a new 22'x56' detached garage (1,232 square feet) behind the
existing detached garage.
The applicant has submitted plans for a garage largerthan what the City Code allows without
a planning action. The City limits the size of accessory buildings, whether attached or
detached from the house, to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any building larger than 952
square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The garage the applicant is
proposing would be 1,232 square feet. The applicant indicates that he wants the extra
space to store trailers, snowmobiles, ATV's and a boat, among other things, and then be
able to use the existing garage to park his vehicles. He plans to add a driveway leading to
the new garage that connects to his current driveway.
Requirements:
Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building,
the number of accessory buildings, the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings and
specifies roof style and pitch. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for garages
exceeding 952 square feet.
Section 1106.04, Subd. 6: This part of the Code enumerates the conditions for garages
exceeding 952 square feet. The garage must be permanent, be uniform in appearance with
the home, not exceed 35 feet in width, and not exceed 1,800 square feet of total accessory
building area on the lot.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1: The Planning Commission is required to review the possible
adverse effects of the requested conditional use.
Discussion:
The request for a Conditional Use Permitto construct the 1,232 square foot garage satisfies
the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds
View Zoning Code. The proposed garage would meet all City setback, height and
accessory building coverage requirements. The City Code limits backyard building coverage
to 20% of the yard area and this garage would use approximately 8% of the backyard area.
The total accessory building square feet with the existing garage and the new garage would
be 1,783 square feet which is below the maximum of 1,800 square feet limit.
Allen Han'ibteton CUP Request
May 15, 2013
Page 2
The City Code also specifies that the roof for all accessory buildings exceeding 250 square
feet, shall match or be similar to the character and style of the roof of the principal structure,
and have a pitch or slope of at least 2-12, but no steeper than 12-12. The proposed garage
has a 4-12 pitch which does not match the very steep pitch of the house, but is similar to the
pitch of the existing detached garage. Over the last several years, one of the conditions for
oversize garages has typically been that the garage have a uniform appearance with the
house. The Planning Commission should discuss if this condition should be included, and if
so, would the proposed garage be acceptable.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and
address any potential adverse effects of a conditional use that include, but are not limited to,
the relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential
depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a
use. Staff has addressed each of these potential adverse effects below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as low-density residential, as well as the surrounding area. The Comp Plan
encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas to improve the quality,
appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. With this
project, the applicant would be creating more garage space to have more indoor storage for
his recreational vehicles. Such additional storage would be a benefit to the property and to
the neighborhood.
The Geographical Area Involved. The applicant's home is located on Long Lake Road along
the north border of the City. There are no homes across the street from the applicant in this
area.
Depreciation. The proposed garage would benefit the subject property both in a practical sense
by providing additional on site, indoor parking and storage, as well as in an economic sense, as
the addition would increase the "value" of the property. Increased property values area benefit
to everyone.
The Character of the Surrounding Area. The applicant's neighborhood is entirely single-family
residential. The hornes in this area are a variety of styles, ages and lot sizes. The new
garage would be in the backyard, behind the existing 2 -car garage. It would not be obvious
from the street but would be visible to the adjacent backyard neighbors. This is a larger
property at 100 feet wide and 260 feet deep (0.59 acres), so the oversize garage will only use
about 8% of the backyard area.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicant is proposing a 1,232 square foot
garage that would allow for parking his recreational vehicles and boat inside plus additional
storage space, and then be able to use the existing garage to park his daily driving vehicles.
Allen Hambleton CUP Request
May 15, 2013
Page 3
Recommendation:
After taking testimony from staff, the applicant and affected neighbors, the Commission
may take one of the following actions below related to the request. Staff recommends
approval of this conditional use permit.
1. Recommend approval of the CUP as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution
980-13 that approves the conditional use permit if the Commission chooses this
action.
2. Choose to deny the conditional use permit. If the Commission chooses this option,
Staff would need direction from the Planning Commission to prepare a resolution of
denial with findings of fact to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before
making a decision or if they decide that there is need for more discussion, the
Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been
provided. Because of 60 -day requirements, the Commission would need to act
upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site Plan
4. Photos
5. Resolution 980-13
Zoning Map
-NORTH— COUNTY
8491 � � 8494
t8485
8471
8441
8431
8425
8415
8401
8389
8379
8365
8355
8345
8335
8325
8315
8305
8285
8275
8285
8255
110 uni d
"" 8475
8460 8465
8456
8455
8444 8443
8435
8434 -
- 8425
8420 8415
8406 8405
8400 8379
8380 8373
8372 8367
8368 a[83598364 O8340 8312 8300 8290 8280 8270
8267
8261
Fk9.r, Fi
8484
8464 8465
8454 8455
8444 CR 8445
8434 8433
8424
8414 8425
8404 8415
8390 8405
8384 8395
8370 8385
8360 8375
8350 8355
8340 8345
8330 8335
8325
8320 8315
8310 ow 8305
8290 } 8291
ZI
8280 Z 8281
F-- 8475
8466
8467
8450 8465
84441Y 8453
8432 8441
8428 8429
8408 8415
[8371
395
8380
8370
8360
8350
8340 8330 8320
8318 83100O
8290;O;
8280 N 8273
8270
N
8271
8270
Lil
8265
8260
8261
8251
80
my-- oa
8250
2-
8255
8241
6231
_
8250
8240
n
N
i0
N
N
N
Vim'
N
.h
N
n
N 6250
a
8464
8454
8444
8424
8400
8390
8380
8376
8372
8340
8320
8300
8290
8280
8260
8250
8305
8330
8295
8310
W
Y
g
8273
8267
8300
8255
8280
8260
A)8388
M
N
n
N 6250
Z
101
N
p
8325
8360
8321
8346
8305
8330
8295
8310
W
Y
g
8273
8267
8300
8255
8280
8260
M
N
n
N 6250
Z
101
N
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-9, Single Fancily Residential
u
I
1. 1' ,
ro
Site Plan
I
0-.1 k
°f1l:a P>kk
i qc).
,dam''
i
r
i <.
STx.I.
b`
s"<4
F 1 l
�rL
STx.I.
b`
s"<4
�3
S
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 980-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW FOR A 1,232 SQUARE -FOOT GARAGE AT 8478 LONG LAKE ROAD;
PLANNING CASE CU2013-003
WHEREAS, property owner Allen Hambleton has applied for a conditional use
permit to construct a 1,232 square foot garage; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 8478 Long Lake Road, is zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1, Balk's Addition
Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 06-30-23-12-0124
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in excess
of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to exceed 1,800
square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed garage would be 1,232 square feet, thus requiring City
approval of a conditional use permit; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
a. Zoning Map
b. Aerial View
C. Site plan
d. Photographic documentation
e. Staff Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit
request:
1. The proposed oversized 1,232 square foot garage satisfies the zoning
requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the
Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential
areas to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and
residential property in general.
Resolution 980-13
Page, 2
3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and
geography of the surrounding area involved.
4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood.
5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the proposed
oversized garage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the 1,232 square foot
garage, with conditions as follows:
1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other
uses not allowed within the R-1 Single -Family Residential district or by the Zoning
Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use
permit shall be considered null and void.
2. The new garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform
appearance with the existing house.
3. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall become null and void if the work for
which the CUP was granted is not completed within one year from the date of
approval unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has
been granted by the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of
the minutes.
Adopted this 15th day of May, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
"v
1
tv of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: May 15, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss City Code Updates for Renewable Energy Systems
At the April 15, 2013 the Planning Commission started the discussion on reviewing the Zoning Code
in regards to development and renewable energy. The City wants to update the City Code to help
promote renewable energy systems and not make it difficult for a property ownerto install a system.
The City is able to get technical assistance through the end of May for free through the Minnesota
Solar Challenge, so we are going to work on this code update first.
Brian Ross, from CR Planning, Inc. will be attending the Planning Commission meeting on May 15`h
to talk about the changes Cities are making to their City Codes and help us move towards code
amendments. He is part of the Minnesota Solar Challenge which provides support for communities
across Minnesota that may be interested in capturing the benefit of their local solar energy
resource. The partners are working with communities to implement local government best practices
in permitting and zoning.
I have attached information about solar energy standards and some ordinance examples from other
cities to review.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Information about the MN Solar Challenge
2. Solar Energy Standards
3. Mounds View's Zoning Code for Solar Energy and Wind Generator Systems
4. Maplewood's Renewable Energy Systems Ordinance
5. Mahtomedi's Renewable Energy Zoning Code
i n n esota
Solar Challeng
What is the Minnesota Solar Challenge?
The Minnesota Solar Challenge provides support for communities across Minnesota that may be interested
in capturing the benefit of their local solar energy resource. Minnesota Solar Challenge partners will work
with communities across Minnesota until February 2013 to implement local government best practices in
permitting and zoning. The project aims to create an economically self-sustaining solar energy industry and
opportunities for homeowners and businesses to more effectively use their solar energy resource.
Non -hardware costs such as permitting, installation, design, and
maintenance currently account for up to 40 percent of the total
cost of installed rooftop solar photovoltaic systems in the United
States. Lowering these costs is an important part of growing the
solar energy industry so that it can create newjobs for American
workers, improve U.S, energy security, and provide clean,
renewable energy for American families and businesses.
What are "best practices" d
Local governments have a number of opportunities for
advancing solar energy resources and promoting the
development of a solar energy industry. Best practices for local
governments include standardizing permitting processes for
addressing solar technologies, updating land use policies and
zoning codes, and increasing access to financing. Incorporating
such best practices into local government operations can enable
property owners to capture their solar resource consistent with
community land use, aesthetic, and safety standards.
What assistance is being offered?
the Minnesota Solar Challenge is offering free technical assistance to communities wlio want to investigate
adopting local government best practices for enabling solar energy development. BesE practices focus on:
■ Removing barriers in local permitting processes (building and electric)
■ Understanding and adopting reasonable permit fees charged to solar installations
■ Ensuring that land use regulation (including comprehensive plan language and zoning) See other side
treats solar energy installations fairly and consistently with other similar land uses for details on
assistance.
Technical assistance can include:
At least 20 communities will receive direct technical
assistance implementing solar energy best practices.
■ Workshops detailing the local government best
practices and how to adapt the best practices
■ Working directly with decision makers and staff
to explain the value of solar
■ Presenting and discussing local best practices directly
with commissions, staff and elected officials
■ Helping individual cities, counties or townships
investigate how the best practices fit into existing
processes and regulations
Writing draft language or guidance documents for
permitting and land use standards to fit the local
conditions and circumstances
How does my community sign up?
Take action today! Workshops are being held throughout the fall and winter in 2012 and 2013 across Minnesota,
and you can fill out a brief questionnaire online if you're interested in receiving direct technical assistance.
Visit mncerts.org/solarchallenge to learn more, register for events, and get assistance before February 2013.
The Minnesota Solar Challenge is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy and the Minnesota Department of Commerce.
Minnesota Solar Challenge local government partners:
gild Planning
Community
Resources
N
T
L
i
N
L
m
c
W
L
I
i
v
0
o
w
y
u
O
O
s
u
a
v
ui
o
o
o
,�
a
q
o
�. o
.p
d
, o
2
a60 .
ov
v
°
0
oggu
'ci
v
a
.Ya
q
5
b
°
v
H
a.�
O
o w
0
yup
bn
p U
'a
a O
•�
u
.0 p
ab
o
p
B.
'
tuo
SO ao
ppg
o
k!
Qr
o a
W
N
a
y O
al'
H
gu
o
N
+�
o
q
o
q
u
u
�❑ q O
a
G
u
a�
Ou
H O
to
o
a
o
U
U
m
Q
qo
o
o
u �y
'A
.w
w
D. O
a U "�y' 0
s
b
v o
3
0
'F7
fi
v
eons
v
V
nv�y
A
u
x
u
q O O
v
o
U)
i4
N
M
LS
R
ro v m
pa v o
°o
u � a N 6n m P, oo
p
uv
B y a v v
o '� o❑ G m '� m y v '�
9 •°�° ° oro a° ° o v
u u v Y y v .n
v y `.-5 roYo
A O ;� '7� vii Y R W W
a
to 0
a' m B O a U tl
w y� a0 O u O
cl
40 a w bA U O U
N U a m O U 0 m w .
.� q� d O N iN'. O u
A '01
o v o p. N v •p o 'q v
y 0 Y '� A. q H al
u
m q Iq ° to �u °.�' •� '.° �ro .a
g H ° q a o P.
p Y °° N v 3 °' u w v °' v
ro N 'oW w -i3a o A
0 qq
o
e4 0
v a a s a °' '° v v$ u
o
a C Y V Y Y G W
rocl
yp „ b aero
H .a y .a .Q` L K O U N U B
W U s�
I'd
3 ' u Y,Q u
❑❑ 1�.y� I"f �Y. ,�,
H p U ° ° Gi
O O u a'� O qty' '� 0 0 u V q p
v�� v m u v b o 0 w
p m u0° ° .n o o •� 'b ro o10 0 p'
10v a° °° p� u w a
�7 ro W a p b o o �q
a q a ro� u o a G a ? a
�t7 F o m m u F Cr F X q. y
Nq
Y
eIQ-
C)
o � v
C
10(ti
UO
a37 0
v a a o u v 307 'V v itl
', O L4 O u W di
«ao' a o
B 04 10
a0i o o G y 44 'tq% N a O yy ti
q G w a b a Pn. ,~ a U o 0 .�
m U� P u'
v o a ° gu a v a
'tl v q ,o P bA .17 y sdL-s' v 0
u �A '� �� ro g U
N P4 0pap. p. o v o o u v v o
Q� N o ro a v' 0 0 p 7y u
U N q 'pup',� p�p ski b w q u '�*3 . W w
0 O 00 a bA A q ro "' 'p o a0 0U
w 0
O a+ ro v ro ii O al " pp,� tlqtl
u v N '`�u�p 'b 'O�' a :° 7y
C1 O y ti0 d a+ .-� 'o}+ N 0 0.' 0 (6 A In L
_rail ?p� ❑ W y
Fy 0 o
pp n N 'a a bD O A M O
N CG O O al 'G y a� N y cl
O
L'",
bun m q .� '04
,u. `d u
o
v .� n„ u a q aqi
v B a bn w N Gro 6 W O m , o o H
tb U v o q ,uuu bD wo
v a v
0
Ra m u p O O `a 0 p 0 p ro 0 sr a O N P+ a p
OW U C7 w0 C7 d C7 u U `� o oq 0 cNs �' v' o
: u U '10
b act
cri U C] ui
« To ro o >
,y „ o roq •n
o a" o o°
y � o a
u .�❑❑ O q U 5 N .� U A O
o A A v N rog
o « rov u v o v.B > 00
° a °d
v 0 u
04 0
00 cl
A
y❑a m
° tOyA m eQ
a U 'P bA O +U� v 'A F 'o -,g N N O n' w
y ro W A amid `^� u y v 9 y U «O '° 0 N a w
m �! q O❑❑ N{ m y tE m . g o O o
N U ^° y Q y W O N M M
a u. guy u ° 'o
10 a u o $ d ao w j ro v
o o ayi a o w
5 v v o v« o a v w°
« u w
mo
v
m
ao ro v ,• ° W .ti y o �A ° W a, a y u v qp
0 U° a o
Who °Aon°qoa
41 aui b •g° v :: v W p g• -vq W
0
"'^ 0 b u va�
m .`�'� Y 'U [
IA�7�a ti 5 �a o c�a'� op
w v w ww°py O RO�i q Ri ? V°1 ro c��'
O w
v
Q
o -i
N
H
m
':9
v
O v O b v b
O N •� O O O A p Q y ° p�y N b. id ro 0
•� w P .p w a o A ro 0 tj bn u °q
ml G
u g
a 0 b❑❑ u «ro 8 ro y v a an
b p u O '4 w0
0 m u a u ro. 0 v 0 ° a w
A ao u
b S o
u
W o a q� w 5 « ° ro bb o v N o B
w .0U ro v o O N`�'� R 5 0. 71 m 0
y b Ji u b A o u Q o ao m a u 0 A g
ro B g a a u 0 o 04-0
0 UO
uy . O
G v .� t� ro W >+ °q app a « a• .� spa O u
u h O u .D 0
a�w ,•�, « m.°o, pew uApD o
b. avi A 60
ro
bb ;01 0
U W❑ O 17 1
Cv ❑❑ N qGqO �+ u
u A Yi u a 0 A N o W N tl
++��-- 'd
CJ N
0 0 u maa
u u 6n .N m
w ^j u ''� �. b '� yy v A m� P' v ,db' w m
o p o 1, q ca v w q m q M H o �`.d o
U c3 U$ 'Pq A y O W b. W nB « o
w w u
V� ..", v) u y 1 0 O nu^
u o Vu H
0 W .5 .0 w m C tj w 0. v m o W m« v
m
0
m
nil
'd H
.q q 'd ro awal� y -;A p 3 ,yj' tQqw
ro y N bA td q bn OW� L. U 'P
v a o o v 8« o °n ° ° n
.Cb,p � O
v vro�ro U & w 0 .Aro
eu p, a H o o a o o, ° 1.,.o ° o
ON
epn ° 0 v ro w°
v dao
o o ✓ v 0 o b a y°� o ;a d y
❑ ^- n Y
J, a U m N A b N y W N 0 U �A V q
g °
v °'
ro q Q 'ice+ y1 W N 5 y v a p Y p o H o V1
o N,� O � .� O H 0.l L
'a7 ni U
qv p o b0 pO vbn .' o'moao U m ,
is v >❑❑. p 0
�rrt1 ��y a❑Hi "" bU O . v'p p, y� p .� �7y�
W ( [d a Ci 4i y O� ro m i• !'7 ;� N Vii q Ll v
O .� .a y�g 'I d3 '� ayi O O ° a ro❑❑
y v° 0 04
N.�q O mii NO bA K k A v u y w qO
O q id
a v O '�a7' v. w O m O a O
%ol
wW 'do w�v{ y 'ynqvd royv roice+v.o�uva p�° vH v .Ad WNv �.N0 u jiQou
,� Mmu ro
u0 0 v '.% ^AV°
'°
I 0n
° ° °
bnbB UaV3 0t -49
a °
'� oenroao
bnHv mWmT!
o
l
:r � ,aep a.� rn°
U �❑ b U� O
VI v q (n .-+ cV ly O °U
a q
P. $
h 4 4 c o o b i"
C ^ o
1
Q
y q v
40 m a p,
v 0 Y a
M
0
'o by ° d
w v .g o
Q u N
O
p o
U a v
wb
�m q D
a' o
oH
��
U
co 0
u d
a.a�l o
A�'�
uo
F y y .�
r
Ww
i€
e
v O
o
w ° ro
O
w
tiU �v o�
m
s
Y
I'
tl �
`Q
tl Z
ai
C r v
� •' �
yq
u .u�'. p ro
al
tl 0 o 09 �
�
mo
o
w
N
U
c� e o& n om ti
Q
y q v
40 m a p,
v 0 Y a
M
0
'o by ° d
w v .g o
Q u N
O
p o
U a v
wb
�m q D
a' o
oH
��
U
co 0
u d
a.a�l o
A�'�
uo
F y y .�
r
Ww
i€
v O
o
w ° ro
O
w
C014
o°v v
m
s
Y
I'
`Q
WWW O
0
ai
.
0
O
yq
u .u�'. p ro
al
(Ta
mo
0 n
v
w
N
d
y p
tto
O p o
°OC4
N
o °
{
Y•.
ro
q °
c
x
0 0
3
ci
I
P
m
t
Ll
�e
Q
y q v
40 m a p,
v 0 Y a
M
0
'o by ° d
w v .g o
Q u N
O
p o
U a v
wb
�m q D
a' o
oH
��
U
co 0
u d
a.a�l o
A�'�
uo
F y y .�
r
Ww
v O
o
w ° ro
O
w
C014
o°v v
m
s
`Q
WWW O
0
ai
.
0
O
yq
u .u�'. p ro
al
(Ta
mo
0 n
v
w
N
d
y p
x'0'1
O p o
°OC4
o °
ro
q °
c
x
Ao��
ci
I
^e° m
`� :oq q ` °w y+�rq ° wQo wu
0q7 q bbO
° mo 0u
v
n
v �, •r7 v q .9 p ,,, `a3 o .d v]
Odd }°v ° '•�'v Ri u q 9 !7 A u tl O
a
v v 7
q O ti p ro
O O O O p GL N O .d P
S q O do a 'i� a°i a y v a� N p O N
al
on o }� a aai p7 w °« y a .� a �d�
�o "off y H °�q�p g� q
71 tl
y
Aw ° o '8 Oro
A +°� nn a ° °
w b y O 00
•a Y
bo
U 1OpU M° U U O
a n U
u v
v
,
ro
v U'7 U O v ani ::O
.o
td. N.� I] N ^
ti A v Q+'A P, W q q W P. 0 bAA° N M04
O1 v O O N
'd ro m bA O ^ w q w .0 N
o p rn o a1 , in in a � ^° o
P. °" U W M x b x A 'yy°
a v A o N O .g •c' O •*' v •}' U w t3 •U a id N « .UO a ice+ 'L�"
N q ^d 6 u a a Wuy o p a v �y o v u A
o a C4 u ro u° u v 'F o 'b o Cr ai' ro °?
w
W avi 6 CL9aw W a „�, L�'. v .� v ww q w rn 0..
0` 0 o Q v ro m° �y �q
ni U A o. U
�hh rip{! {ro ON �y
N A �C
r
o
JI
v � `V � LLl C ti m o LJ �' � l .^-• v •C v
C0)
-a o o ,a
y ^
� Q �' � •Ci =' 'a � tl � �• 5 ° y �'c`x « ` .� y C �-c„ ° � d �Y 4 d � ° � a -c
n
2
A
ci «i
a
p
O
0 p° u
A Ow
p O O
.0
0
y
q 0
q d q O
°vma
bUbb
01
v 0
ro q
v�
U
O yy
roAF'�
du
`~4J � O
q
° m
u N u
W .d
� u p
o a m
0 In
In y U
v 0 o a
o,� 00 o
U ° w
a
t
0
.t
0 u
g
ti04
0 U
3 O
o 1
m
bq
u
Q
•v p
.q
Y�v
°
a cH
w
O
Ci
u 0 N
0 t �R
0A
�
,
F! 0
«
T
'aB
C.3 w u
v
b Y
0
quq
3
g
ro q
0
U qa u
�v
x u
O
b b❑❑
'� mn
'-}off
v
m ro
m m
J -0 ai
y o° a
a
ai
2
A
ci «i
a
p
O
0 p° u
A Ow
p O O
.0
0
y
q 0
q d q O
°vma
bUbb
01
v 0
ro q
v�
U
O yy
roAF'�
du
`~4J � O
q
° m
u N u
W .d
� u p
o a m
0 In
In y U
v 0 o a
o,� 00 o
U ° w
a
t
V U'` 0 >a O a° ;; « O V U O
w Q
p v u o v v S.7 u❑❑ q
W y+ O a s v s7 N aroa
p H .nv �. ' o B q aq uu .q v 0 3 q o en
U u o 10 e 3. N N -3� a u 0
& d O ..
v o 0 o p u' b a. o q. �, a .� �3 a� u
cl 00p v 0 �, �
a .0 u m v b '� b �,•� m v
a u v v vv g =A
a s a o cn
m A bOA m Q b .d 0�
O q ..3 v
U O I .� O v Y av
w °, P' O .4pp fibro❑y 7�
w v y v w roaJ
GaOro «O'd 0bio o
0T 0U O
v o u0 q
bb
0U
o vn vn a qv v ti o
u ro u « S7 `'. o 'V o ° ro o ty v a N
°N a a au ° o v v v o$ 0 0 ° o
ow o o m v o
0.w v mw v w,a °
uN Q 0 v oa o a ? � ° 00
aO bA
C, q q a O N u O u w O. 04 v ° v g4y o O y N -,q..� O .� a w N w /-� i'+' "+ N U N y+
;q Q m w p V .0 a3i v v v c! '� p Nor,
a uu
"
0 o w
° a q�' '° o v o a .q bA •A v 'd
wa, a, v, ° ,C '" w p %
,� v q .a�t y A ro❑ F Cl a ° D m w o b v a b Tl U av,
'a O
° y .v N y o ,°: •u« ro u y q o v o "" Fq v „°
o v q u' a n° v x vJ w o .� o bA a v w
N �• v a" 0 0
0 q� .-� �i U .-: cli m
LL
W cn
i-1
Sao goo �v 12 o
U r-+ Mr " P•.? m
� e � Ems. `�-` � � '� , � tl � � n � r •`�...i+ � ..
v .G o N tl v v C ti y ti o
C v
C y `V � ti e0 6 ., b q � a o � a�� n H �� a ti ��^• M .� " ^�
a
5 o
V
1TV
w d ° ,� •�
In 0
v o
10, ro b°n
Q. 0 .� 40 v o '1�y o�1o
U •=°� N ,=i 0 v
Go ` v o 0 0 .qq ,� 'a� m dl °
u o v v 0 w u qQ luui -00 0.�
v 'P4 0 p vm w 0 w° °. o '- O
u a+ 0 u v Cl, °
° ° o o w,u
v as
ro o o o N u
0 U� vN vo Ra�oa 0
N N
'q ,v. �" O " ° ° o
o 0 0 0 b >. '� �' P' a
n o o o A« w ° a a v
ILI
u v ° a �'0 wNa go
a goo fol —0 ow «v ;
u b u o
w 0 U0
m
pp m 81 dN Uu '+� H O
w 'i7
ti' mp m O vPA
O
.V .. ¢' +A- a .i .� ,p o ,°� .� .� \ aAo a u .M ,rob v o a W'v
° O O? C4 b 0 •� R O q. v v v v O Q w O u
an° o v N F oIn I F a. u
m u �i 16 w¢ 9 q ° �i U a H P
al w
6
Current Mounds View City Code for Solar Energy and Wind Generator Systems
1103.04: SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES:
Subd. 1. Qualification: To qualify as a solar energy system, the system must be permanently located for not
less than ninety (90) days in any calendar year beginning with the first calendaryear after completion of
construction. Passive solar energy systems are included but not to the extent that they fulfill only
recreational uses.
Subd. 2. Conditional Use: Solar energy systems and solar structures shall be permitted by conditional use in
all districts; provided, that the system and/or structure is in compliance with minimum lot requirements
and setbacks and meets the requirements of subdivision 1125.01(3) of this Title, but in no event shall a
conditional use permit be granted for a solar energy system or structure which, when installed, would
prevent abutting properties from being developed in conformance with all applicable codes or
regulations.
Subd. 3. Casting of Shadows: No owner, occupier or person in control of property shall allow vegetation or
structures to be placed so as to cast a shadow on a solar energy system which is greater than the shadow
cast by a hypothetical wall ten feet (10) high located along the boundary of said property between the
hours of nine thirty o'clock (9:30) A.M. and two thirty o'clock (2:30) P.M. Central Standard Time on
December 21; provided, however, this standard shall not apply to vegetation or structures which cast a
shadow upon the solar energy system at the time of installation of said solar energy system or to
vegetation existing at the time of installation of said solar energy system.
Subd. 4. Violation Declared Nuisance: Violation of this standard shall constitute a private nuisance, and any
owner or occupant whose solar energy system is shaded because of such violation so that performance
of the system is impaired may have in tort for the damages sustained thereby and may have such
nuisance abated. (1988 Code §40.04)
1103.05: WIND GENERATOR SYSTEMS:
Subd. 1. Height: The height of wind generator system shall not exceed thirty feet (30) above the height of
the principal structure.
Subd. 2. Anchorage: Anchorage of the system's tower shall not be located within ten feet (10) of the
property line.
Subd. 3. Protection from Climbing: The tower or support for the system shall be of climbproof design or
protected by fencing.
Subd. 4. Compliance with Other Laws: Location and height must be in accordance with all other governing
jurisdictions and laws as they exist and are amended.
Subd. 5. Noise: The system shall have a silent operation and be subject to the requirements of Chapter 604,
Nuisances, of this Code.
Subd. 6. Plans and Specifications: All systems will require plans, specifications and a site plan approved by a
registered engineer or architect if deemed necessary by the City. (1988 Code §40.04)
ORDINANCE NO. 914
AN ORDINANCE TO THE MAPLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS (Wind, Solar, Geothermal)
The Maplewood City Council approves the following addition to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances. This ordinance creates a new renewable energy ordinance which will be placed in
the Environment Chapter (Chapter 18) of the city code.
Section 1. Scope
This ordinance applies to the regulations of on-site renewable energy systems within the City of
Maplewood, Ramsey County, MN. The ordinance focuses on wind turbines, solar systems, and
geothermal ground -source heat pumps which are located on the site for which the generation of
energy will be used, with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Section 2. Purpose and Intent.
It is the goal of the city to provide a sustainable quality of life for the city's residents, making
careful and effective use of available natural resources to maintain and enhance this quality of
life. Cities are enabled to regulate land use under Minnesota Statutes 394 and 462 for the
purpose of "promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community."
As pail of this regulatory power, Maplewood believes it is in the public interest to encourage
renewable energy systems that have a positive impact in energy conservation, with limited
adverse impact on the community. While Maplewood strongly encourages increased energy
conservation and improved energy efficiency, the city also finds that increased use of
appropriate renewable energy systems will be an important part of improving urban
sustainability.
The renewable energy regulations are intended to supplement existing zoning ordinances and
land use practices, and ensure these systems are appropriately designed, sited and installed.
These regulations are in place to balance the need to improve energy sustainability through
increased use of renewable energy systems with concerns for preservation of public health,
welfare, and safety, as well as environmental quality, visual and aesthetic values, and existing
neighborhood social and ecological stability. With these regulations, Maplewood is concerned
that renewable energy systems, particularly wind energy systems, be designed to minimize the
negative impacts on bird and bat species which are vulnerable to mortality from these energy
gathering machines.
Section 3. Wind Energy Sources and Systems
a. Definitions, Wind Energy Sources and Systems
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Feeder Line. Any power line that carries electrical power from one or more wind
turbines or individual transformers associated with an individual wind turbine to the point
of interconnection with the electric power grid. In the case of interconnection with the
high voltage transmission systems the point of interconnection shall be the substation
serving the WECS.
Ground mounted WECS. f=reestanding WECS mounted to the ground with footings or
other apparatus.
Large WECS. A WECS of equal to or greater than 100 I<W in total nameplate generating
capacity. The energy must be used on-site with excess energy distributed into the
electrical grid. Large WECS are limited to one -hundred twenty five (125) feet in height.
Property Line. The boundary line of the area over which the entity applying for WECS
permit has legal control for the purposes of installation of a WECS. This control may be
attained through fee title ownership, easement, or other appropriate contractual
relationship between the project developer and landowner.
Roof Mounted WECS. A WECS utilizing a turbine mounted to the roof of a structure
Significant Tree. Any tree defined as a Significant Tree in the city's tree preservation
ordinance.
Small WECS. A WECS of less than 100kW in total nameplate generating capacity. The
energy must be used on-site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Small WECS are limited to sixty (60) feet in height.
Tower. Vertical structures that support the electrical generator, rotor, and blades, or the
meteorological equipment.
Tower Height. The total height of the WECS, including tower, rotor, and blade to its
highest point of travel.
Turbine Cut -In Speed. The lowest wind speed at which turbines generate power to the
utility system.
Wind Energy. Kinetic energy present in wind motion that can be converted into electrical
energy.
WECS. A Wind Energy Conversion System which is an electrical generating facility
comprised of one or more wind turbines and accessory facilities, including but not limited
to, power lines, transformers, substations and metrological towers that operate by
converting the kinetic energy of wind into electrical energy. The energy must be used on-
site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Wind Energy System. An electrical generating facility that consists of a wind turbine
associated controls and may include a tower.
Wind Turbine. A wind turbine is any piece of electrical generating equipment that
converts the kinetic energy of blowing wind into electrical energy through the use of
airfoils or similar devices to capture the wind.
b. WECS Districts
Large WECS Districts.
(a) Ground and Roof Mounted Large WECS shall be allowed with approval of
a conditional use permit as outlined in section d (conditional use permit
procedure) in the following zoning districts and land use designations:
(1) In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (Heavy
Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing, Business Commercial,
Business Commercial Modified, Limited Business Commercial,
Commercial Office, Neighborhood Commercial, Shopping Center).
(2) In all properties located in multiple dwelling residential zoning
districts (Multiple Dwelling Residential and Multiple Dwelling
Residential Townhouse) for purposes of shared WECS energy
production among the residential dwelling units.
(3) In all properties approved as a planned unit development for
purposes of shared WECS energy production among the
businesses/organizations, residential dwelling units, or adjoining
businesses/organizations/residential dwelling units.
(4) In all properties guided as Government or Institutional in the city's
Land Use Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(b) Ground and Roof Mounted Large WECS shall be prohibited in all
properties guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Small WECS Districts.
(a) Roof Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed permissible in all zoning
districts.
(b) Ground Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in the following zoning districts and land use designations:
(1) In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (Heavy
Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing, Business Commercial,
Business Commercial Modified, Limited Business Commercial,
Commercial Office, Neighborhood Commercial, Shopping Center).
(2) in all properties located in multiple dwelling residential zoning
districts (Multiple Dwelling Residential and Multiple Dwelling
Residential Townhouse) for purposes of shared WECS energy
production among the residential dwelling units.
(3) In all properties approved as a planned unit development for
purposes of shared WECS energy production among the
businesses/organizations, residential dwelling units, or adjoining
businesses/organizations/residential dwelling units.
(4) In all properties guided as Government or Institutional in the city's
Land Use Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(5) In all properties guided as park in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(c) Ground Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in double or single dwelling residential zoning districts if the
following neighborhood consent requirements are met:
Written consent of one hundred (100) percent of the owners or occupants
of privately or publicly owned real estate that are located adjacent (i.e.,
sharing property lines) on the outer boundaries of the premises for which
the permit is being requested, or in the alternative, proof that the
applicant's property lines are one -hundred fifty (150) feet or more from
any house.
Where an adjacent property consists of a multiple dwelling or multi -tenant
property, the applicant need obtain only the written consent of the owner
or manager, or other person in charge of the building. Such written
consent shall be required on the initial application and as often thereafter
as the officer deems necessary.
C. Placement and Design
1. Ground Mounted WECS.
(a) Height
(1) Large WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade
to its highest point of travel, of no more than one -hundred twenty-
five (125) feet.
(2) Small WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade
to its highest point of travel, of no more than sixty (60) feet.
(b) Placement
(1) Large WECS shall be located as follows:
a) Shall not be located between a principal structure and a
public street, unless the city determines that such a
location would lessen the visibility of the Large WECS or
would lessen the negative impacts of such a WECS on
nearby properties,
b) I -lave a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one (1) times the height from any property
line, electric substation, transmission line, or other WECS.
4
In addition, the setback distance must be increased by
twenty-five (25) feet from any property that is zoned or
planned for residential.
G) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one and one-half (1-112) times the height from
any public right of way, occupied structure, or public use
area.
d) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of six hundred (600) feet from any property
guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
e) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one-fourth (Y<) mile or one thousand three
hundred and twenty (1,320) feet from any bluff.
(2) Small WECS shall be located
a) Shall not be located between a principal structure and a
public street, unless the city determines that such a
location would lessen the visibility of the Small WECS or
would lessen the negative impacts of such a WECS on
nearby properties.
b) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one (1) times the height from any property
line, public right-of-way, electric substation, transmission
line, or other WECS.
(c) Number
(1) Large WECS. One (1) large WECS shall be allowed on a single
lot of one (1) to five (5) acre(s). All other larger parcels will be
limited to one (1) large WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
(2) Small WECS. One (1) small WECS shall be allowed on a single
lot up to one (1) acre in size. All other larger parcels will be
allowed one (1) small WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
(d) Design
(1) Tower Configuration. All ground mounted WECS shall:
a) Be installed with a tubular, monopole type tower.
b) Have no guyed wires attached to the tower or other
components.
C) Have no ladder, step bolts, rungs, or other features used
for tower access to extend within eight (8) feet of the
ground. Lattice -style towers shall have a protective barrier
to prevent unauthorized access to the lower eight (8) feet
of the tower.
(2) Signs. A WECS operator is required to provide a single posting,
not to exceed four (4) square feet, at the base of a WECS
prohibiting trespassing, warning of high voltage, and providing the
emergency contact information for the operator.
2. Roof Mounted WECS.
(a) Height
(1) Large Roof Mounted WECS:
a) Total height of not more than twenty-five (25) feet,
measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
(2) Small Roof Mounted WECS
a) Total height of not more than twenty-five (25) feet,
measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
b) Residential Installation: In addition to the twenty-five (25)
foot height restriction for the Small Roof Mounted WECS,
the height of the WECS and the structure on which it is
attached must not exceed the maximum height allowed in
the residential zoning district for which it is installed.
(b) Placement
Roof mounted WECS must be erected above the roof of a building or
structure. The mounts associated with the WECS may extend onto the
side of the building or structure.
(c) Number
(1) Large Roof Mounted WECS. The maximum number of Large
Roof Mounted WECS shall be approved through the conditional
use permit process.
(2) Small Roof Mounted WECS. No more than three (3) roof
mounted Small WECS shall be installed on any rooftop.
d. Conditional Use Permit Procedure. Procedures for granting conditional use permits
from this ordinance are as follows:
I . The city council may approve conditional use permit requirements in this
ordinance.
6
2. Before the city council acts on a conditional use permit the environmental and
natural resources commission and the planning commission will make a
recommendation to the city council.
3. In reviewing the conditional use permit the environmental and natural resources
commission, planning commission, and city council will follow the requirements
for conditional use permit approvals as outlined in Article V (conditional use
permits).
e. General Standards
The following provisions will apply to all WECS erected under the provisions of
this ordinance:
(a) Noise: Have a maximum noise production rating of fifty-five (55) dB fifty
(50) dBA and shall conform to this standard under normal operating
conditions as measured at any property line.
(b) Over Speed Controls: Shall be equipped with manual and automatic over
speed controls to limit the blade rotation within design specifications.
(c) Lighting: Have no installed or accessory lighting, unless required by
federal or state regulations.
(d) Intent to Install: Prior to the installation or erection of a WECS, the
operator must provide evidence showing their regular electrical service
provider has been informed of the customer's intent to install an
interconnected, customer -owned generator. Off -grid systems shall be
exempt from this requirement.
(e) Signs: The placement of all other signs, postings, or advertisements shall
be prohibited on the units. This restriction shall not apply to manufacturer
identification, unit model numbers, and similar production labels.
(f) Commercial Installations: All WECS shall be limited to the purpose of on-
site energy production, except that any additional energy produced above
the total on-site demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical
service provider in accordance with any agreement provided by the same
or applicable legislation.
(g) Feeder Lines: Any lines accompanying a WECS, other than those
contained within the WECS' tower or those attached to on-site structures
by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel, unless
there are existing lines in the area which the lines accompanying a WECS
can be attached.
(h) Clearance: Rotor blades or airfoils must maintain at least 20 feet of
clearance between their lowest point and the ground.
(i) Blade Design: The blade design and materials must be engineered to
insure safe operation in an urban area.
(j) Energy Storage: Batteries or other energy storage devices shall be
designed consistent with the Minnesota Electric Code and Minnesota l=ire
Code.
In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 3, item e(1) above, the following
provisions will apply to large WECS erected under the provisions of this
ordinance:
(a) Color: Turbine paint color and high levels of ultraviolet and infrared
components of paint could have an impact on the attraction of insect
species to the structure, which may attract birds and bats and cause bird
and bat mortality. As such, turbine paint color may be approved as part
of the conditional use permit process and must be shown to reduce the
negative impacts to birds and bats and be a non -obtrusive color so not to
cause negative visual impacts to surrounding properties.
(b) Warnings: A sign or signs shall be posted on the tower, transformer and
substation warning of high voltage. Signs with emergency contact
information shall also be posted on the turbine or at another suitable
point.
(c) Environmental Standards: The applicant shall provide the following
information in the conditional use permit application. The information will
be evaluated in meeting the criteria of a conditional use permit for
purposes of minimizing impacts on the environment:
(a) Natural Heritage Review by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
(b) Lands guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designation of the Comprehensive Plan that are located within
one (1) mile of the project.
(c) Conservation easements and other officially protected natural
areas within a quarter mile of the project.
(d) Shoreland, Mississippi Critical Area, Greenways, wetland buffers,
wildlife corridors and habitat complexes.
(e) All significant trees impacted by the project.
(f) A plan for turbine -cut in speed strategies where feasible in order
to reduce bird and bat deaths. Studies have shown that bird and
bat fatalities would be significantly reduced by changing turbine
cut -in speed and reducing operational hours during low -wind
periods, evening hours (one-half hour before sunset to one-half
hour after sunrise -only in spring, summer, and early fall), and
migration times in spring and fall.
3. In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 3, item e(1) above, the following
provisions will apply to small WECS erected under the provisions of this
ordinance:
(a) Color: Turbine paint color must be a non -obtrusive color so not to cause
negative visual impacts to surrounding properties.
Abandonment
A WECS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city after notification to the owner or operator of the WECS, shall be
presumed abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
Section 4. Solar Energy Sources and Systems
a. Definitions, Solar Energy Sources and Systems
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Building -Integrated Solar System. An active solar system that is an integral part of a
principal or accessory building, rather than a separate mechanical device, replacing or
substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building. Building -
integrated systems include, but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water solar
systems that are contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights, and awnings.
Ground Mounted Panels. Freestanding solar panels mounted to the ground by use
of stabilizers or similar apparatus.
Photovoltaic System. An active solar energy system that converts solar energy directly
into electricity.
Roof or Building Mounted SES. Solar energy system (panels) that are mounted to the
roof or building using brackets, stands or other apparatus.
Roof Pitch. The final exterior slope of a building roof calculated by the rise over the run,
typically, but not exclusively, expressed in twelfths such as 3/12, 9/12, 12/12.
Solar Access. A view of the sun, from any point on the collector surface that is not
obscured by any vegetation, building, or object located on parcels of land other than the
parcel upon which the solar collector is located, between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00
PM Standard time on any day of the year.
Solar Collector. A device, structure or a part of a device or structure for which the
primary purpose is to transform solar radiant energy into thermal, mechanical, chemical,
or electrical energy.
Solar Energy. Radiant energy received from the sun that can be collected in the form of
heat or light by a solar collector.
Solar Energy System (SES). An active solar energy system that collects or stores solar
energy and transforms solar energy into another form of energy or transfers heat from a
collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or chemical means.
Solar Hot Water System. A system that includes a solar collector and a heat exchanger
that heats or preheats water for building heating systems or other hot water needs,
including residential domestic hot water and hot water for commercial processes.
b. Districts
Solar energy systems (SES) shall be allowed as an accessory use in all zoning districts.
C. Placement and Design
1. Height
(a) Roof or building mounted SES shall not exceed the maximum allowed
height in any zoning district. For purposes for height measurement, solar
systems other than building -integrated solar systems shall be considered
to be mechanical devices and are restricted consistent with other
building -mounted mechanical devices.
(b) Ground mounted SES shall not exceed the height of an allowed
accessory structure within the zoning district when oriented at maximum
tilt.
2. Placement
(a) Ground mounted SES must meet the accessory structure setback for the
zoning district in which it is installed.
(b) Roof or Building Mounted SES. The collector surface and mounting
devices for roof or building mounted SES shall not extend beyond the
required setbacks of the building on which the system is mounted.
3. Coverage
Ground mounted SES may not exceed the area restrictions placed on accessory
structures within the subject zoning district.
4. Visibility
(a) SES shall be designed to blend into the architecture of the building or be
screened from routine view from public right-of-ways other than alleys.
The color of the solar collector is not required to be consistent with other
roofing materials.
(b) Building Integrated Solar Systems - Building integrated solar systems
shall be allowed regardless of visibility, provided the building component
in which the system is integrated meets all required setback, land use or
10
performance standards for the zoning district in which the building is
located.
(c) Ground mounted SES shall be screened from view to the extent possible
without reducing their efficiency. Screening may include walls, fences, or
landscaping.
d. General Standards
1. Notification. Prior to the installation or erection of a SES, the operator must
provide evidence showing their regular electrical service provider has been
informed of the customer's intent to install an interconnected, customer -owned
SES. Off -grid systems shall be exempt from this requirement.
2. Feeder lines. Any lines accompanying a SES, other than those attached to on-
site structures by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel,
unless there are existing lines in the area which the lines accompanying an SES
can be attached.
3. Commercial. All SES shall be limited to the purpose of on-site energy
production, except that any additional energy produced above the total onsite
demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical service provider in
accordance with any agreement provided by the same or applicable legislation.
4. Restrictions on SES Limited. No homeowners' agreement, covenant, common
interest community, or other contract between multiple property owners within a
subdivision of Maplewood shall restrict or limit solar systems to a greater extent
than Maplewood's renewable energy ordinance.
5. Maplewood encourages solar access to be protected in all new subdivisions and
allows for existing solar to be protected consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Any
solar easements filed, must be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 500,
Section 30.
e. Abandonment
A SES that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city, shall be presumed abandoned and may be declared a public
nuisance subject to removal at the expense of the operator.
Section 5. Geothermal Energy Sources and Systems
a. Definitions, Geothermal Energy Sources and Systems
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Closed Loop Ground Source Heat Pump System. A system that circulates a heat
transfer fluid, typically food -grade antifreeze, through pipes or coils buried beneath the
land surface or anchored to the bottom in a body of water.
11
Geothermal Energy. Renewable energy generated from the interior of the earth and
used to produce energy for heating buildings or serving building commercial or industrial
processes.
Ground Source Heat Pump System (GSHPS). A system that uses the relatively
constant temperature of the earth or a body of water to provide heating in the winter and
cooling in the summer. System components include closed loops of pipe, coils or plates;
a fluid that absorbs and transfers heat; and a heat pump unit that processes heat for use
or disperses heat for cooling; and an air distribution system. The energy must be used
on-site.
Heat Transfer Fluid. A non-toxic and food grade fluid such as potable water, aqueous
solutions of propylene glycol not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight or aqueous
solutions of potassium acetate not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight.
Stormwater Pond. These are ponds created for stormwater treatment. A stormwater
pond shall not include wetlands created to mitigate the loss of other wetlands.
b. Districts
Ground source heat pump systems (GSHPS) shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in all zoning districts.
C. Placement and Design
1. Placement
(a) All components of GSHPS including pumps, borings and loops shall be
set back at least five (5) feet from interior and rear lot lines.
(b) Easements. All components of GSHPS shall not encroach on
easements.
(c) GSHPS are prohibited in surface waters, except for stormwater ponds
where they are permitted.
2. Design
(a) Only closed loop GSHPS utilizing Minnesota Department of Health
approved heat transfer fluids are permitted.
(b) Screening. Ground source heat pumps are considered mechanical
equipment and subject to the requirements of the city's zoning ordinance.
d. General Standards
1. Noise. GSHPS shall comply with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency standards
outlined in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7030.
12
e. Abandonment
A GSHPS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city after notification to the owner or operator of the GSHPS, shall be
presumed abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
Section 6. General Ordinance Provisions
a. Interpretation
In interpreting this ordinance and its application, the provisions of these regulations shall
be held to be the minimum requirements for the protection of public health, safety and
general welfare. This ordinance shall be construed broadly to promote the purposes for
which it was adopted.
b. Conflict
This ordinance is not intended to interfere with, abrogate or annul any other ordinance,
rule or regulation, statute or other provision of law except as provided herein. If any
provision of this ordinance imposes restrictions different from any other ordinance, rule
or regulation, statute or provision of law, the provision that is more restrictive or imposes
high standards shall control.
c. Severability
If any part or provision of this ordinance or its application to any developer or
circumstance is judged invalid by any competent jurisdiction, the judgment shall be
confined in its operation to the part, provision or application directly involved in the
controversy in which the judgment shall be rendered and shall not affect or impair the
validity of the remainder of these regulations or the application of them to other
developers or circumstances.
Section 7. Ordinance Placement
The ordinance places all environmental ordinances under the Environment Chapter (Chapter
18) by adding Article V (Environmental Protection and Critical Areas) and including the following
ordinances under the new Article: wetlands and streams, tree protection, slopes, Mississippi
Critical Area, Flood Plain Overlay District, Shoreland Overlay District, and Renewable Energy.
Following is the revised Chapter 18 Article headings (additions are underlined):
13
1) -Yd TJ-Cmcd i
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4: Utilityand Communication Uses
9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
A. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS)
1. intent. The intent of this Subdivision is to promote safe,
effective and efficient rise of alternative energy sources and
systems as the technology becomes available. Tile intent is
also to establish standards and procedures by which the
installation and operation of wind energy conversion
systems (WECS) shall be governed within the City.
2. Procedure.
Sustainab111tvTip
A wind energy lacilily, when
propedy designed, located, and
operated, can provide a
renewable source of energy that
con help reduce our dependence
on fossil fuels.
a. The erection of wind energy conversion system shall require a Conditional Use
Permit, subject to the requirements of this Subdivision 8.21: Conditional Use Permit.
b. Wind energy conversion systems (WECS) governed by this Subdivision shall be
allowed within the PB —Public Building zoning districts.
3. Submittal Requirements.
a. Site Plan Drawing. All applications for a WECS Conditional Use Permit shall be
accompanied by a detailed certified survey / site plan drawn to scale and
dimensioned, displaying the following information:
(1) Lot lines and dimensions;
(2) Location and height of all buildings, structures, aboveground utilities and trees
on the lot, including both existing and proposed structures and guy wire anchors.
(3) Location and height of all adjacent buildings, structures, aboveground utilities
and trees located within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the exterior boundaries
of the property in question;
(4) An elevation drawing of the premises accurately depicting the proposed WECS
and its relationship to structures on the subject site and adjacent lots.
(5) Existing and proposed setbacks of all structures located on the property in
question.
b. Additional Submittal Requirements. In addition to the information required
elsewhere in this Ordinance, development applications for WECS, and temporary
towers for meteorological equipment shall include the following supplemental
information:
(1) A significant tree inventory in conformance with Subdivision 10.5: Slopes /
hlloodland Protection, Preservation and Replacement showing the loss of
significant trees within the construction area for the WECS and / or temporary
meteorological tower;
(2) A letter or copy of the review response from the Federal Aviation Administration
concerning the development application and their requirements for warning
devices, height restrictions, etc;
(3) The technical specifications for the WECS including, but not limited to, the type,
height, blade length, operating parameters, the anticipated sound level at the
property line, and lightning protection; and
(4) Clearance distance between the farthest extensions of the WECS blades to the
property lines.
96 Chapter 11: Planning and Development
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
4. Criteria for Approval.
a. Declaration of Conditions. The Planning Commission may recommend and the City
Council may impose such conditions on the granting of a WECS conditional use
permit as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and provisions of this
Subdivision. The Council most consider the following criteria in determining whether
to grant or deny a conditional use permit for a Wind Energy Conversion System
(WECS):
(1) The proposed WECS compliance with the performance standards described in
this Subpart;
(2) The potential for the WECS to cause a condition that may pose an unreasonable
threat or cause unreasonable damage to any other property or person; and
(3) The proposed WECS impact on the environment and on (lie visual image of the
surrounding area.
5. Performance Standards.
a. Number of System . No more than one (1) wind energy conversion system (WECS)
shall be permitted per lot.
b. Capacity. A wind energy conversion system
shall have a nameplate capacity of forty (40)
kilowatts or less.
c. Height. The permitted maximum height of a
wu
WECS shall be determined in one of the ------
following
-- --following two ways. In determining the height
of the WECS, the total height of the system shall
be measured from the base of the tower to the
center of the systems hub (also known as the hub
height).
(1) A ratio of one foot to one foot (1':1')
between the distance of the closest property
line to the base of the WECS to the height of
the system.
(2) A maximum system height of one hundred
twenty —five (125) feet. The City Council,
at its discretion, may waive the maximum
system height requirements provided the
City Council finds that the overall height is
not feasible for the WECS to function
properly in the proposed location based on
meteorological data that was taken. M°'
The shortest height of the two above mentioned methods shall be used in determining
the maximum allowable height of a WECS system. The height of a WECS must also
comply with FAA regulations part 77 'Objects Affecling Navigable Air Space' and /
or MNDOT Rule 14, MCAR 1.3015 (Minnesota Administrative Rule 8800.1200
'Criteria for Determining Obstruction to Air Navigation ).
d. Setbacks. WECS shall beset back a distance equal to its height from the following:
Chapter 11: Planning and Development 9t
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4: Utility and Communication Uses
(1) Any public road right— of— way, unless written permission is granted by the
governmental entity withjurisdiction over the road;
(2) Any overhead utility lines, unless written permission is granted from the affected
utility; and
(3) All property lines, unless written permission is granted from the affected property
owner or neighbor.
e. Rotor Size. All WECS rotors shall not have rotor diameters greater than forty — five
(45) feet.
f Rotor Clearance. Blade arcs created by the WECS shall have a minimum of thirty
(30) feet of clearance over any structure or tree within a two hundred (200) foot
radius.
g. Rotor Safety. Each WECS shall be equipped with both a manual and automatic
braking device capable of stopping the WECS operation in high winds (40mph or
greater).
h. Color and Finish. All wind turbines and towers shall be white, gray, or another non —
obtrusive color. Finishes shall be matte or non — reflective.
i. Tower Access. To prevent unauthorized climbing, WECS towers must comply with
one of the following provisions:
(1) Tower climbing apparatus shall not be located within twelve (12) feet of the
ground.
(2) A locked anti — climb device shall be installed on the tower.
(3) Towers capable of being climbed shall be enclosed by a locked, protective fence
at least six (6) feet high.
k. Signa. WECS shall have one (1) sign, not to exceed two (2) square feet posted at the
base of the tower and said shall contain the following information:
(1) Warning high voltage.
(2) Manufacturer's name.
(3) Emergency phone number.
(4) Emergency shutdown procedures.
1, Li (g ttin . WECS shall not have affixed or attached lights, reflectors, flashers, or any
other illumination except for illumination devices required by PAA regulations parr
77 'Objects Affecting Navigable Ah- Space' and FAA Advisory circular 7017460 —
iK ' Objects Marking and Lighting'.
in. Electromagnetic Interference. WECS shall be designed and constructed so as not to
cause radio and television interference.
n. Noise Emission. Audible noise from wind energy facilities shall not exceed fifty (50)
dB(A) when measured from the outside of the nearest residence, business, school,
hospital, religious institution, or other inhabited structure. In the event the noise
emitted from the wind energy facility contains a steady pure tone such as a whine,
screech, or hum the wind energy facility shall not exceed forty — five (45) dB(A)
when measured outside the nearest inhabitable shvcture. The audible noise from
98 Chapter 11: Planning and Development
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
wind energy facilities may periodically exceed allowable noise levels during extreme
wind events (winds above 30 mph or greater).
o. Utility Company Interconnection. No WECS shall be interconnected with a local
electrical utility company until the utility company has reviewed and comments upon
it. All connections shall be underground.
p. Compliance with State Building Code. A standard drawing of the structural
components of the wind energy conversion system and support structures, including
base and footings shall be provided along with engineering date and calculations to
demonstrate compliance with the structural design provisions of the State Building
Code. Drawings and engineering calculations shall be certified by a registered
engineer.
q. Compliance with National Electrical Code. WECS electrical equipment and
connection shall be designed and installed in adherence to the National Electricat
Code.
r. Manufacturer Warranty. The applicant shall provide documentation or other evidence
from the dealer or manufacturer that the WECS has been successfully operated in
atmospheric conditions similar to the conditions within the City of Mahtomedi. The
WECS shall be warranted against any system failures reasonable expected in severe
weather operation conditions.
6. Inspection. The City herby reserves the right upon issuing any WECS conditional use
permit to inspect the premises on which the WECS is located. If a WECS is not
maintained in operational conditions and poses a potential safety hazard, the owner shall
take expeditious action to correct the situation.
7. Abandonment. A wind energy conversion system that is out of service for a continuous
twelve (12) month period shall be deemed to have been abandoned. The Zoning
Administrator or other Authorized Agent may issue a notice of abandonment to the
owner of the wind energy facility that is deemed to have been abandoned. The owner
shall have the right to respond to the notice of abandonment within thirty (30) days of
notice receipt date. The Zoning Administrator or other Authorized Agent shall withdraw
the notice of abandonment and notify the owner that the notice has been withdrawn if the
owner provided information that demonstrates the Wind Energy Conversion System has
not been abandoned.
If the wind energy conversion system is determined to be abandoned, the owner of the
WECS shall remove the WECS and return the property in which the WECS was located
on to its original condition prior to the placement of a WECS, at the owner's sole expense
within three (3) months of receipt of notice of abandonment. If the owner fails to remove
the WECS, the Zoning Administrator or other Authorized Agent may pursue a legal
action to have the wind generator removed at the owners expense.
8. Temporary Meteorological Equipment. Temporary meteorological equipment located
upon a temporary tower used on an interim basis to gather wind and meteorological data
to determine feasibility of the WECS shall require written approval by the Zoning
Administrator or other Authorized Agent, and shall comply with the following standards:
a. No more than one (I) such temporary tower shall be permitted on a lot at one time.
b. The tower shall be placed on property for no longer than eighteen (18) months from
the date of the Administrative Review issuance. Any abandoned or obsolete
Chapter 11: Planning and Development 99
I
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4: Utility and Communication Uses
temporary tower shall be removed within thirty (30) days from the cessation of
operation at the site.
c. The tower shall be temporary by nature and shall not have permanent foundations.
Guy wires may be used as long as the connections to the ground are temporary and
the wires are designed to support the wind and ice load of the tower,
d. The tower shall meet the minimum wind and ice load design required by the City
Code and the Uniform Building code.
e. The tower and any related guy wires shall be protected against unauthorized
climbing.
f. The tower shall be set back a distance at least equal to its height from any lot line,
recreational field, dwelling, school, business or other habitable structure.
g. The tower shall be grounded and shielded to protect against natural lightning strikes;
in conformance with the National Electrical Code.
h. No tower shall have affixed or attached lights, reflectors, flashers or any other
illumination, except for those devices required by the Federal Aviation
Administration.
B. Solar Equipment and Solar Rights
1. Solar equipment shall be consistent with the setback and height requirements of the
principal or accessory building, whichever is applicable. Solar equipment that is not
consistent with the setback and height requirements may be considered pursuant to the
conditional use permit procedures as specified in Subdivision 8.21: Conditional Use
Pennil.
2. No person in control of property shall allow a tree or shrub to be placed or grow as to cast
a shadow between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. upon a solar collector energy
system capable of generating more than one million (1,000,000) British thermal units
(BTUs) per year, and that supplies a part of energy requirements for improvements on the
property where the solar energy system is permanently located.
100 Chapter 11: Planning and Development
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for May 1, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen,
Stevenson and Smith.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
3. Special Order of Business
A. Recognition of Jean Miller for Her Years of Service on the Planning
Commission.
Planning Associate Heller explained Commissioner Jean Miller has resigned her position from
the Planning Commission.
Chair Stevenson thanked Commissioner Miller for her 33 years of service to the City of Mounds
View. He presented her with a certificate of appreciation and flowers. A round of applause was
offered to Commissioner Miller.
Index to Minutes Page
Special Order of Business
Approval of Minutes 2
CU2013-001. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor 2
Sales and Display
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Page 2
CU2013-002. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an 3
Auto Repair Business
Review Applications for the Planning Commission Vacancy 4
City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers 5
4. Approval of Minutes
March 20, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the
Minutes of the March 20, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
5. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
6. Planning Cases
Motion carried.
A. CU2013-001 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Sales
and Display
Applicant: Northwood Industries, Hayward, WI
Address: 2701 County Road 10
Planning Associate Heller indicated Northwood Industries was requesting approval of a
conditional use permit for outdoor sales and displays for the property located at 2701 County
Road 10. She explained that Northwood Industries is based in Hayward, Wisconsin and
manufactures and sells lawn furniture, gazebos, accessory buildings, and small cabins.
Associate Heller commented the applicant is looking to open a store in the Twin Cities metro
area and are proposing to use an asphalt area on the southeast side of the parking lot for outdoor
sales to display gazebos and sheds. It was noted the property is zoned B-3, Highway Business,
and City Code allows outdoor sales as a conditional use in the B-3 district. Staff further
reviewed the site and recommended the Planning Commission approve the conditional use
permit with six conditions.
Chair Stevenson questioned the parking lot setback from Highway 10.
Associate Heller estimated there was a 10-15 foot green space setback.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Page 3
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu supported additional outdoor sales and display area for the applicant.
Associate Heller explained that allowing more outdoor sales area would require a variance, and
could be requested by the applicant in the future if they feel they do need more space.
Chair Stevenson asked if the parking lot would be striped.
Clair Martin, 10463 Highway 27 in Hayward, Wisconsin, indicated this was discussed with the
property owner and he would complete this work.
Commissioner Smith requested further information on the proposed building improvements.
Mr. Martin discussed how the red and blue windows on the building would be repainted.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve
Resolution 976-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit;
Planning Case No. CU2013-001.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
Motion carried.
B. CU2013-002 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Auto Repair
Business
Applicant: North Metro Motors, Ham Lake, Minnesota
Address: 2975 County Road 10
Planning Associate Heller commented that Jacob Marrs with North Metro Motors was requesting
a conditional use permit to operate an auto repair business at 2975 County Road 10. It was noted
the property was zoned B-3, Highway Business. She indicated the applicant has a purchase
agreement for the property, and this would be a second location for his auto repair business.
Associate Heller reviewed the site further noting the building was constructed for auto related
uses and has always been used as auto repair or car rental businesses. Staff recommended the
Planning Commission approve the conditional use permit with conditions.
Chair Stevenson recommended an additional condition be added noting that no more than five
vehicles may be parked on the property overnight.
Associate Heller thanked Chair Stevenson for making this suggestion.
Associate Heller noted the parking lot would hold approximately 23-25 vehicles. She requested
continent from the applicant on this issue.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Page 4
Jake Mans, 456 105t" Lane in Coon Rapids, requested he be allowed to have up to 10 cars
parked onsite overnight. He stated this would allow for customer pickup and drop off in the
evening hours. He explained that a limit of five cars would be difficult for his business to
comply with.
The Commission was in favor of allowing 10 cars to be parked on the lot.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu inquired if car sales or towing would take place at the Mounds View
location.
Mr. Marrs indicated that the car sales would only be done at the Ham Lake location due to the
size of the parking lot there. He added that the tow trucks would also only be stored at the Ham
Lake location as well.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned how lighting on the site would be addressed.
Associate Heller commented the existing lighting is minimal and down lit so as not affect the
adjacent homeowners. She stated the City Code addresses lighting requirements.
Commissioner Schiltgen asked what the hours of operation would be.
Mr. Marrs stated this location would be open Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. and on Fridays from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The business would be closed on Sundays and
only open every other Saturday when necessary.
Commissioner Smith inquired how many employees would be working out of this location.
Mr. Marrs stated there would be two mechanics working at the Mounds View location.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve
Resolution 977-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit adding
conditions that would limit the number of parked vehicles overnight to 10 and that there be no
auto sales at this site; Planning Case No. CU2013-002.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Other Planning Activity
A. Review Applications for the Planning Commission Vacancy
Planning Associate Heller stated since longtime Commissioner Jean Miller has resigned from the
Planning Commission, there was now a vacant seat to fill the remainder of Ms. Miller's term.
The City advertised the vacancy and Staff received three applications. She requested the
Planning Commission review each of the applications and make a recommendation to Council.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Page 5
She noted one applicant Julianne Love was not able to attend this evening, but the other two
candidates were present this evening.
Keith Cramblit introduced himself to the Planning Commission stating it would be his privilege
and honor to serve on the Commission again. He commented he served for six years previously
and missed working with this group.
Valerie Amundsen introduced herself to the Planning Commission stating she has lived in the
City of Mounds View since 1979. She discussed her previous involvement in the streets
committee and wanted to remain involved in the community. She cared a great deal about
Mounds View and enjoyed doing volunteer work. She was excited to see the Highway 10
corridor being revitalized.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu asked if Staff has any knowledge of Julianne Love and her interests
in the community.
Associate Heller noted Ms. Love had applied a couple of years ago. She was extremely
interested in sustainability issues.
Chair Stevenson commented he was extremely pleased with each of the three applicants and their
interest in serving the City.
Commissioner Schiltgen thanked each candidate for being willing to volunteer their time.
Chair Stevenson questioned how the voting would be conducted.
Associate Heller requested that each Commissioner mark their ballot and then she would collect
them. Staff counted the ballots and announced there was a tie between two candidates, Keith
Cramblit and Julianne Love. The Commission recommended both candidates be passed along to
the Council for a final decision.
B. City Code Amendment for Cargo Containers
Planning Associate Heller stated she had the final revisions made to the Code amendment
regarding Cargo Containers. She requested the Commission review the recommended changes
and approve the Resolution, which would be forwarded to the City Council in Ordinance format.
Chair Stevenson thanked Associate Heller for making all the previously requested revisions. He
was pleased with the final document. The Commission agreed.
Chair Stevenson asked if the Council had any comments on the code amendment.
Associate Heller stated that when she presented this to the Council at a work session meeting,
there were only minor changes.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 1, 2013
Page 6
MOTION/SECOND: Chair Stevenson/Commissioner Miller. To approve Resolution 978-13, a
Resolution Recommending Approval of a City Code Amendment.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
8. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. May 15, 2013
B. June 5, 2013
9. Review Minutes:
A. April 17, 2013
Motion carried.
The Commission discussed the April 17, 2013 meeting minutes and noted several changes.
10. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She noted the Spring Cleanup
would be held on Saturday, May 4`h at the Public Works Building from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Additional information regarding this event was posted on the City's website.
11. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Commissioner Miller thanked the Planning Commission and Staff for working with her over the
past 30 years.
Chair Stevenson indicated Commissioner Miller would be dearly missed by the City of Mounds
View.
Council Member Gary Meehlhause personally thanked Commissioner Miller for her 33 years on
the Planning Commission and 30 years on the Charter Conunission. He wished her all the best.
12. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Conunission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
May 1, 2013
Page 7
MoIJNDS VIE- W
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
June 5, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
May 1, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2011-002, VR2011-004 & VR2011-005 Variance Extensions for Reduced
Driveway Setbacks
Addresses: 5338-5340, 5372-5374 & 5380-5382 Raymond Avenue
Applicant: Mike Kinyon, property owner
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment Discussion
B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. June 19, 2013
B. Tuesday, July 9, 2013 (Note date change)
8. Review Minutes:
A. May 15, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 5A
MOT ,—tSvt
EWMeeting Date: June 5.2013
UNL1.:.�Y Type of Business: Action
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Variance Extension Requests for reduced driveway setbacks
at 5338-5340, 5372-5374 and 5380-5382 Raymond Avenue;
Planning Cases VR2011-002, VR2011-004, VR2011-005
Introduction:
In June 2011, property owner, Michael Kinyon, was granted variances to permit the new
driveways at five of his side-by-side duplexes to have one and three foot setbacks from the north
and south property lines. Mr. Kinyon will be adding attached garages to the rest of his duplexes,
one on each end of the building, along with new driveways to replace the existing gravel. The lots
are all 100 feet wide so only a single car garage will fit, but the owner is installing new driveways
that are wide enough for two cars to park next to each other. Many of the tenants have more than
one vehicle, and with the current narrow driveways, they either park or drive off the driveway, or
they have to move cars around when someone is leaving. Since there is no overnight parking on
the streets in Mounds View, all vehicles must be in the driveways.
The east side of Raymond Avenue has 14 side-by-side duplexes on identical 100 foot wide lots
which causes issues when owners want to add additional space or more than a one car wide
driveway to these properties. Mr. Kinyon owns ten of the duplexes on Raymond Avenue and
received variances in 1995 and 2008 for reduced driveway setbacks when he added garages to
those duplexes on the same block.
Discussion:
Mr. Kinyon applied for all five property's driveway variances in 2011 because the City was
reconstructing Raymond Avenue that year, which included installing new curbs and driveway
aprons. Mr. Kinyon knew he would not have all five garages and remodels completed for
approximately five years, but wanted to have the wider driveway aprons installed during the street
project rather than tearing up the new curbs later to widen the curb cut. The City Code states that
a variance approval becomes void if the work is not complete within one year, but the applicant
may request an extension from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Kinyon was granted a 1 -year extension in 2012 and is now asking for the variances to be
extended for another year. The Planning Commission was supportive of granting the extensions
as long as Mr. Kinyon continues to make progress on installing the driveways. He fully remodeled
one of the buildings (including new driveways) and installed driveways on a second property in
2012. He intends to remodel another one of the duplexes this year and install driveways on
another property in 2013. That would leave only one of the five properties without the new
driveways for 2014.
Planning Cases VR99-002,VR99-004, VR99-005
June 5, 2093 Staff Report
Page 2
Recommendation:
Staff requests that the Planning Commission pass Resolutions approving one-year extensions
for the reduced driveway setback variances at 5338-5340, 5372-5374 and 5380-5382 Raymond
Avenue.
Respectfully Submitted By
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Extension request from applicant
2. Location map
3. Aerial Photo
4. Proposed Site Plans
5. Photographic Documentation
6. Resolutions 981-13 through 983-13
Extension Request from Applicant
May 6, 2013
Heidi Heller
City of Mounds View,
2401 County Road 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
KINYONI PROPERTIES'
2226 Bevans Circle • Red Wing, MN 55066-3901.
Phone & Fax: 651-388.8531
Ref: Request for an extension on Variance Resolutions 964, 966, & 967-12 dated
June 1, 2012
Dear Heidi,
In 20111 applied for five set back variances so I could have double aprons installed at
the time Raymond Avenue was rebuilt. In 2012, we rehabbed 5344-5346 Raymond
Including the installation of two 20' wide concrete driveways. We also installed two 20'
wide concrete driveways at 5330-5332 Raymond.
If I can complete the plans in time, I would like to do the following inf X6)3
• Rehab the building at 5372-5374 Raymond in 2013 Including new concrete
driveways on both sides
• Possibly install driveways on either 5338-5340 or 5380-5382 Raymond without
rehabbing the building this year
Hopefully I can have some more time on these three variances. In an email May of
2011, a time limit of up to 5 years was mentioned.
Whatever time extension the Planning Commission can give me would be appreciated.
Sincerely yours,
A�
Michael Kinyon,
PC; Bob Yentsch
LOCATION MAP
The 5 duplexes that received variances in 2011 are highlighted in red
�,, \
WG � � ^61m1
100
NdS01 LA `\
'- Ib8 �\
swf I snv SAI mn ,}
\ �y
Ids
J,y fi:L! 1]i'l S1J
Idl � b38 '
Mounds View
'i QIkU]1LO 1
il f „I Mobile Home Park b;,
6]IZ
� b1s
my mss %v - wo
Oil W3
.'Als Will
1%]
1%9
- m
m'
s'su I ssvo 'rose] I
ICt] ry
w
s%r em 63v 9'y
6� 5]'}1 W'A nvm N31
J:B
Y:A dla
4619 :U1I IUIH
413) W4'12!
],b bb
i 1415 1416
0iR
N i 2Vi] '
ss1a ssu sl% ml] law � �
nxs
lolz
- mH
Site Plan for 5338-5340 Raymond
I /� M
Jew 5LIIz1"jA1s �o 805cAtCA
1// L-
arage _ �ec" A'v4 J$ S N s
(J
1`
New
Driveway
Site Plan for 5372-5374 Raymond Avenue
q71
New E
New garac e N s
garage J
,
New
Ne /))oun�cJs y eru)
Dri
I --- l/-'
hew
garage
x 1
New
Driveway
New
NeWivewa
Driveway
�- 3 1
1
Site Plan for 5380-5382 Raymond Avenue
p/
New
garage
d6
31
New
Driveway
F
4J
New
garage
3I
New
Driveway
7I1
. M,.. I l.Lq
- . L71 MT I -
(
T� �d'
•Y
I
j
4.
PT -
�IV/
rt -T�
�v r
^
��`1��
{:
i
r-
}�
e Sr
h'
y
�r
—A i
1
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 981-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED
DRIVEWAY SETBACKS AT 5338-5340 RAYMOND AVENUE;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. VR2011-002
WHEREAS, Kinyon Properties, represented by Mike Kinyon, applied for a variance to
allow for driveways with a one -foot setback from the side property lines of a duplex located at
5338 - 5340 Raymond Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, 5338 - 5340 Raymond Avenue is zoned R-2, Single and Two Family
Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Norseman 1st Addition, Lot 7, Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 08-30-23-14-0007
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 939-11, approving the
variance on June 1, 2011, and approved a one-year extension on June 6, 2012, and;
WHEREAS, the resolution of approval states that if within one year after granting the
variance or appeal, the work as permitted by the variance has not been completed, then
such variance shall become null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by
the applicant and granted by the Planning Commission, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has indicated the new driveways will not be completed within
the allowed timeframe and has requested another one-year extension of the variance consistent
with the provisions of Resolution 939-11.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
approves a one-year extension to complete the driveways.
Adopted this 5th day of June, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 982-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED
DRIVEWAY SETBACKS 5372-5374 RAYMOND AVENUE;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. VR2011-004
WHEREAS, Kinyon Properties, represented by Mike Kinyon, applied for a variance to
allow for a three-foot driveway setback at 5372 Raymond Avenue and a one -foot driveway
setback at 5374 Raymond Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, 5372 - 5374 Raymond Avenue is zoned R-2, Single and Two Family
Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Norseman 1St Addition, Lot 2, Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 08-30-23-14-0002
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 941-11, approving the
variance on June 1, 2011, and approved Resolution 966-12 on June 6, 2012, allowing a one-
year extension, and;
WHEREAS, the resolution of approval states that if within one year after granting the
variance or appeal, the work as permitted by the variance has not been completed, then
such variance shall become null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by
the applicant and granted by the Planning Commission, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has indicated the new driveways will not be completed within
the allowed timeframe and has requested another one-year extension of the variance consistent
with the provisions of Resolution 941-11.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
approves a one-year extension to complete the driveways.
Adopted this 5th day of June, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 967-12
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED
DRIVEWAY SETBACKS AT 5380 - 5382 RAYMOND AVENUE;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. VR2011-005
WHEREAS, Kinyon Properties, represented by Mike Kinyon, applied for a variance to
allow for driveways with a three-foot setback from the side property lines of a duplex located at
5380 - 5382 Raymond Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, 5380 - 5382 Raymond Avenue is zoned R-2, Single and Two Family
Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Norseman 1st Addition, Lot 1, Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 08-30-23-11-0024
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 942-11, approving the
variance on June 1, 2011, and approved Resolution 967-12 on June 6, 2012, allowing a one-
year extension, and;
WHEREAS, the resolution of approval states that if within one year after granting the
variance or appeal, the work as permitted by the variance has not been completed, then
such variance shall become null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by
the applicant and granted by the Planning Commission, and;
WHEREAS, the applicant has indicated the new driveways will not be completed within
the allowed timeframe and has requested a one-year extension of the variance consistent with
the provisions of Resolution 942-11.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
approves a one-year extension to complete the driveways.
Adopted this 5th day of June, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
LWI NJ 1110 1 t
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: June 5, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Renewable Energy Code Amendment
The Planning Commission has started discussion on reviewing the Zoning Code in regards to
renewable energy system installations, such as solar energy, wind generators or geothermal
systems. The City should update the City Code to help promote renewable energy systems and
not hinder or make it difficult for a property owner to install a system. There is now a lot of
information available about these systems, and the City can make betterdecisions about howand
where renewable energy system installations are done.
At the May 15, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, Brian Ross with CR Planning, gave a
presentation about renewable energy and how cities are important partners in helping more
systems get installed. Mr. Ross is providing assistance to local governments who are amending
their City Codes for renewable energy systems to adapt the best practices to local conditions and
priorities in permitting and zoning. Minnesota has good solar potential, even with its cold and dark
reputation.
There are good examples of adopted ordinances from other cities for Mounds View to review -
Maplewood, Mahtomedi and St. Paul, along with the Model Sustainable Development Ordinance
that was provided by Mr. Ross. The other part of how local governments can be abetter partner to
encourage renewable energy systems is the permit process and fees. City Staff will develop new
policies, applications and fees specifically for these systems.
The three types of renewable energy systems that Mounds View should consider adopting new
regulations for are solar energy, wind generators and geo-thermal systems. Solar energy and
wind systems will need the most discussion since their components are all outside of the structure
and above ground. Geo -thermal systems are mostly underground except for a heat pump and
don't require much language for the City Code. The main issues to address for geo-thermal
systems would be setback requirements from property lines, not encroaching on easements,
specific requirements that the equipment must meet.
Solar [echnoloc y tions in Minnesota
Photoi E.it, (FV', :>olar electric.NV. fiio&[C produce electiicD1 torn < unliccht using
semi -conductor tecl?iiology (solar panels)
o ["(; (of moui it�,d systems — attached to the- building's roof
1: Flush mounted
icor flush mounted
o Ground rnourited systems— Frce standinc,,, systerns on a pole orF. ra.a.
Stationary (pole or rack)
Tracking (pole rnourrted, rotates to follow the sun)
o Building integrated systems. Solar system is built into a building component, such
as a shingle or roof tile, an awning, or a gazebo.
June 5, 2013 Staff Report
Page 2
• Solar Thermal. Collectors capture sunlight and transfer heat for water or space heating.
This system involves a large black box attached to the side of a house that collects heat
from the direct sunlight, which is then transferred into the house.
• Passive Solar. Uses the basic structural elements of a building, careful site selection, and
various homebuilding strategies to provide daylighting, ventilation or heat.
Discussion topics:
- Visibility and design standards —
o How important is it that the solar systems be hidden, disguised or screened from
view? Which view? From the street only? All sides?
o Allow non -flush -mounted panels that would be angled from or be higher than the
roof?
- Freestanding solar energy systems — consider as accessory buildings? They would then
simply follow the height, setback and square footage requirements that are already in
place.
- Should wind generators be allowed? They are typically not productive in most urban areas
and have noise issues.
o Not allow wind generators unless the turbine can beat least 200 feet away from any
other structure
o And/or only allow on industrial zoned properties (including industrial PUD
properties).
- Home Owner's Associations- should solar development rights be ensured in common
interest communities?
- Address solar energy installations as a primary land use? Example: a vacant parcel is
used as a solar panel "farm"
Recommendation
Begin the discussion about City Code amendments for renewable energy systems.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Mounds Vicky Zoning Code for solar mercy and wind generator.;
2. Maplewood's [renewable Energy Systemic Ordinance
3. Mahtornedi's Zoning Ordinance
4. St. Paul's Design Standards and Guidelines for Solar Energy Systems
5. Model Sustainable Development Ordinance
Current Mounds View City Code for Solar Energy and Wind Generator Systems
1103.04: SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES:
Subd. 1. Qualification: To qualify as a solar energy system, the system must be permanently located for not
less than ninety (90) days in any calendar year beginning with the first calendaryear after completion of
construction. Passive solar energy systems are included but not to the extent that they fulfill only
recreational uses.
Subd. 2. Conditional Use: Solar energy systems and solar structures shall be permitted by conditional use in
all districts; provided, that the system and/or structure is in compliance with minimum lot requirements
and setbacks and meets the requirements of subdivision 1125.01(3) of this Title, but in no event shall a
conditional use permit be granted for a solar energy system or structure which, when installed, would
prevent abutting properties from being developed in conformance with all applicable codes or
regulations.
Subd. 3. Casting of Shadows: No owner, occupier or person in control of property shall allow vegetation or
structures to be placed so as to cast a shadow on a solar energy system which is greater than the shadow
cast by a hypothetical wall ten feet (10) high located along the boundary of said property between the
hours of nine thirty o'clock (9:30) A.M. and two thirty o'clock (2:30) P.M. Central Standard Time on
December 21; provided, however, this standard shall not apply to vegetation or structures which cast a
shadow upon the solar energy system at the time of installation of said solar energy system or to
vegetation existing at the time of installation of said solar energy system.
Subd. 4. Violation Declared Nuisance: Violation of this standard shall constitute a private nuisance, and any
owner or occupant whose solar energy system is shaded because of such violation so that performance
of the system is impaired may have in tort for the damages sustained thereby and may have such
nuisance abated. (1988 Code §40.04)
1103.05: WIND GENERATOR SYSTEMS:
Subd. 1. Height: The height of a wind generator system shall not exceed thirty feet (30) above the height of
the principal structure.
Subd. 2. Anchorage: Anchorage of the system's tower shall not be located within ten feet (10) of the
property line.
Subd. 3. Protection from Climbing: The tower or support for the system shall be of climbproof design or
protected by fencing.
Subct. 4. Compliance with 011ier Lzws: Location and height must be in accords.nce with all other overning
jurisdictions and laws as they exist arc are amended.
Subd. 5. Noise: The system shall have a sitentoperation and be subject to ti,e requirements ofCLaptcr 60<l,
i Ir:isances, of this Codc.
Subd. 6. Plans and Specifications: All systems will require plans, specifications and a site plan approved bya
registered engineer o architect if deemed necessary by the City. (1988 Code §40.04)
ORDINANCE NO. 914
AN ORDINANCE TO THE MAPLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS (Wind, Solar, Geothermal)
The Maplewood City Council approves the following addition to the Maplewood Code of
Ordinances. This ordinance creates a new renewable energy ordinance which will be placed in
the Environment Chapter (Chapter 18) of the city code.
Section 1. Scope.
This ordinance applies to the regulations of on-site renewable energy systems within the City of
Maplewood, Ramsey County, MN. The ordinance focuses on wind turbines, solar systems, and
geothermal ground -source heat pumps which are located on the site for which the generation of
energy will be used, with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Section 2. Purpose and Intent.
It is the goal of the city to provide a sustainable quality of life for the city's residents, making
careful and effective use of available natural resources to maintain and enhance this quality of
life. Cities are enabled to regulate land use under Minnesota Statutes 394 and 462 for the
purpose of "promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community."
As part of this regulatory power, Maplewood believes it is in the public interest to encourage
renewable energy systems that have a positive impact in energy conservation, with limited
adverse impact on the community. While Maplewood strongly encourages increased energy
conservation and improved energy efficiency, the city also finds that increased use of
appropriate renewable energy systems will be an important part of improving urban
sustainability.
The renewable energy regulations are intended to supplement existing zoning ordinances and
land use practices, and ensure these systems are appropriately designed, sited and installed.
These regulations are in place to balance the need to improve energy sustainability through
increased use of renewable energy systems with concerns for preservation of public health,
welfare, and safety, as well as environmental quality, visual and aesthetic values, and existing
neighborhood social and ecological stability. With these regulations, Maplewood is concerned
that renewable energy systems, particularly wind energy systems, be designed to minimize the
negative impacts on bird and bat species which are vulnerable to mortality from these energy
gathering machines.
Section 3. Wind Energy Sources and Systems
Definitions, tNind Energy Sources and Systems
The following words, terms and phrases, when used In This Section, shall Piave the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Feeder Line. Any power line that carries elec rical povier from one or more wind
turbines or individual transformers associated with an individual wind turbine fo the point
of interconnection with the electric power grid, In the case of interconnection with the
high voltage transmission systems the point of interconnection shall be the substation
serving the WECS.
Ground mounted WECS. Freestanding WECS mounted to the ground with footings or
other apparatus.
Large WECS. A WECS of equal to or greater than 100 I(W in total nameplate generating
capacity. The energy must be used on-site with excess energy distributed into the
electrical grid. Large WECS are limited to one-hundred twenty five (125) feet in height.
Property Line. The boundary line of the area over which the entity applying for WECS
permit has legal control for the purposes of installation of a WECS. This control may be
attained through fee title ownership, easement, or other appropriate contractual
relationship between the project developer and landowner.
Roof Mounted WECS. A WECS utilizing a turbine mounted to the roof of a structure.
Significant Tree. Any tree defined as a Significant Tree in the city's tree preservation
ordinance.
Small WECS, A WECS of less than 1001(W in total nameplate generating capacity. The
energy must be used on-site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Small WECS are limited to sixty (60) feet in height.
Tower. Vertical structures that support the electrical generator, rotor, and blades, or the
meteorological equipment.
Tower Height. The total height of the WECS, including tower, rotor, and blade to its
highest point of travel.
Turbine Cut-In Speed. The lowest wind speed at which turbines generate power to the
utility system.
Wind Energy. Kinetic energy present in wind motion that can be converted into electrical
energy.
WECS. A Wind Energy Conversion System which is an electrical generating facility
comprised of one or more wind turbines and accessory facilities, including but not limited
to, power lines, transformers, substations and metrological towers that operate by
converting the kinetic energy of wind into electrical energy. The energy must be used on-
site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
Wind Energy System. An electrical generating facility that consists of a wind turbine;
associated controls and may include a tower.
Wind Turbine. ,A wind turbine is any piece of electrical generating cquipmeni ih ;
converts the kinetic energy of blowing wind into electrical energy through the use of
airfoils or similar devices to capture the wind.
In. WECS Districts
Large WECS Districts.
(a) Ground and Roof Mounted Large WECS shall be allowed with approval of
a conditional use permit as outlined in section d (conditional use permit
procedure) in the following zoning districts and land use designations:
(1) In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (Heavy
Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing, Business Commercial,
Business Commercial Modified, Limited Business Commercial,
Commercial Office, Neighborhood Commercial, Shopping Center).
(2) In all properties located in multiple dwelling residential zoning
districts (Multiple Dwelling Residential and Multiple Dwelling
Residential Townhouse) for purposes of shared WECS energy
production among the residential dwelling units.
(3) In all properties approved as a planned unit development for
purposes of shared WECS energy production among the
businesses/organizations, residential dwelling units, or adjoining
businesses/organizations/residential dwelling units.
(4) In all properties guided as Government or Institutional in the city's
Land Use Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(b) Ground and Roof Mounted Large WECS shall be prohibited in all
properties guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Small WECS Districts.
(a) Roof Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed permissible in all zoning
districts.
(b) Ground Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in the following zoning districts and land use designations:
(1) In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (Heavy
Manufacturing, Light Manufacturing, Business Commercial,
Business Commercial Modified, Limited Business Commercial,
Commercial Office, Neighborhood Commercial, Shopping Center).
(2) In all properties located in multiple dwelling residential zoning
districts (Multiple Dwelling Residential and Multiple Dwelling
Residential Townhouse) for purposes of shared WECS energy
production among the residential dwelling units.
(3) In all properties approved as a planned unit development for
purposes of shared WECS energy production among the
businesses/organizations, residential dwelling units, or adjoining
businesses/organizations/residential dwelling units.
(4) In all properties guided as Government or Institutional in the city's
Land Use Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(5) In all properties guided as park in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
(c) Ground Mounted Small WECS shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in double or single dwelling residential zoning districts if the
following neighborhood consent requirements are met:
Written consent of one hundred (100) percent of the owners or occupants
of privately or publicly owned real estate that are located adjacent (i.e.,
sharing property lines) on the outer boundaries of the premises for which
the permit is being requested, or in the alternative, proof that the
applicant's property lines are one -hundred fifty (150) feet or more from
any house.
Where an adjacent property consists of a multiple dwelling or multi -tenant
property, the applicant need obtain only the written consent of the owner
or manager, or other person in charge of the building. Such written
consent shall be required on the initial application and as often thereafter
as the officer deems necessary.
Placement and Design
Ground Mounted WECS.
(a) Height
(1) Large WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade
to its highest point of travel, of no more than one -hundred twenty-
five (125) feet.
(2) Small WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade
to its highest point of travel, of no more than sixty (60) feet.
(b) Placement
(1) Largo WECS shall be located as follows:
a) Shall not be located between a principal structure and a
public street, unless the city determines that such a
location would lessen the visibility of the Large WECS or
would lessen the negative impacts of such a WECS on
nearby properties.
b) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one (1) tirnes the height from any plop :rty
line, electric substation, transmission line, or other WIGS.
In addition, the setback distance must be increased by
twenty-five (25) feet from any property that is zoned or
planned for residential.
C) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one and one-half (1-1/2) times the height from
any public right of way, occupied structure, or public use
area,
d) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of six hundred (600) feet from any property
guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designations of the Comprehensive Plan.
e) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one-fourth ('/4) mile or one thousand three
hundred and twenty (1,320) feet from any bluff.
(2) Small WECS shall be located
a) Shall not be located between a principal structure and a
public street, unless the city determines that such a
location would lessen the visibility of the Small WECS or
would lessen the negative impacts of such a WECS on
nearby properties.
b) Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the
monopole of one (1) times the height from any property
line, public right-of-way, electric substation, transmission
line, or other WECS.
(c) Number
(1) Large WECS. One (1) large WECS shall be allowed on a single
lot of one (1) to five (5) acre(s). All other larger parcels will be
limited to one (1) large WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
(2) Small WECS. One (1) small WECS shall be allowed on a single
lot up to one (1) acre in size. All other larger parcels will be
allowed one (1) small WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
(d) Design
(1) Tower Configuration. All ground mounted WECS shall:
a) Be installed with a tubular, monopole type tower.
b) Have no guyed wires attached to the tovder or other
components.
C) Have no ladder, step bolts, rungs, or other features used
for tower access to extend within eight (8) feet of the
ground. Lattice -style towers shall have a protective barrier
to prevent unauthorized access to the lower eight (8) feet
of the tower.
(2) Signs. A WECS operator is required to provide a single posting,
not to exceed four (4) square feet, at the base of a WECS
prohibiting trespassing, warning of high voltage, and providing the
emergency contact infori nation for the operator.
2. Roof Mounted WECS.
(a) Height
(1) Large Roof Mounted WECS:
a) Total height of not more than twenty-five (25) feet,
measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
(2) Small Roof Mounted WECS:
a) Total height of not more than twenty-five (25) feet,
measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
b) Residential Installation: In addition to the twenty-five (25)
foot height restriction for the Small Roof Mounted WECS,
the height of the WECS and the structure on which it is
attached must not exceed the maximum height allowed in
the residential zoning district for which it is installed.
(b) Placement
Roof mounted WECS must be erected above the roof of a building or
structure. The mounts associated with the WECS may extend onto the
side of the building or structure.
(c) Number
(1) Large Roof Mounted WECS. The maximum number of Large
Roof Mounted WECS shall be approved through the conditional
use permit process.
(2) Small Roof Mounted WECS. No more than three (3) roof
mounted Small WECS shall be installed on any rooftop.
o;. conditional Use f'esmiC P'rocedute. Procedures forgranting conditional use pennits
from this ordinance are as follows:
The city council nmy approve conditional use permit requirements in this
ordinance.
2. Before the city council acts on a conditional use permit the environmental and
natural resources commission and the planning commission will make a
recommendation to the city council.
3. In reviewing the conditional use permit the environmental and natural resources
commission, planning commission, and city council will follow the requirements
for conditional use permit approvals as outlined in Article V (conditional use
permits).
e. General Standards
The following provisions will apply to all WECS erected under the provisions of
this ordinance:
(a) Noise: Have a maximum noise production rating of fifty-five (55) dB fifty
(50) dBA and shall conform to this standard under normal operating
conditions as measured at any property line.
(b) Over Speed Controls: Shall be equipped with manual and automatic over
speed controls to limit the blade rotation within design specifications.
(c) Lighting: Have no installed or accessory lighting, unless required by
federal or state regulations.
(d) Intent to Install: Prior to the installation or erection of a WECS, the
operator must provide evidence showing their regular electrical service
provider has been informed of the customer's intent to install an
interconnected, customer -owned generator. Off -grid systems shall be
exempt from this requirement.
(e) Signs: The placement of all other signs, postings, or advertisements shall
be prohibited on the units. This restriction shall not apply to manufacturer
identification, unit model numbers, and similar production labels.
(f) Commercial Installations: All WECS shall be limited to the purpose of on-
site energy production, except that any additional energy produced above
the total on-site demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical
service provider in accordance with any agreement provided by the same
or applicable legislation.
(g) Feeder Lines: Any lines accompanying a WECS, other than those
contained within the WECS' tower or those attached to on-site structures
by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel, unless
there are existing lines in the area which the lines accompanying a WECS
can be attached.
(h) Clearance: Rotor blades or all Foils must maintain at least 20 fco of
clearance between their lowest point and the ground.
(i) Blade Design: The blrade clesign and materials must: h: engineered to
insure: safe operation in an urban area.
Q) Energy Storage: Batteries or other energy storage devices shall be
designed consistent with the Minnesota Electric Code and Minnesota Fire
Code.
2. In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 3, item e(1) above, the following
provisions will apply to large WECS erected under the provisions of this
ordinance:
(a) Color: Turbine paint color and high levels of ultraviolet and infrared
components of paint could have an impact on the attraction of insect
species to the structure, which may attract birds and bats and cause bird
and bat mortality. As such, turbine paint color may be approved as part
of the conditional use permit process and must be shown to reduce the
negative impacts to birds and bats and be a non -obtrusive color so not to
cause negative visual impacts to surrounding properties.
(b) Warnings: A sign or signs shall be posted on the tower, transformer and
substation warning of high voltage. Signs with emergency contact
information shall also be posted on the turbine or at another suitable
point.
(c) Environmental Standards: The applicant shall provide the following
information in the conditional use permit application. The information will
be evaluated in meeting the criteria of a conditional use permit for
purposes of minimizing impacts on the environment:
(a) Natural Heritage Review by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources.
(b) Lands guided as park or open space in the city's Land Use
Designation of the Comprehensive Plan that are located within
one (1) mile of the project.
(c) Conservation easements and other officially protected natural
areas within a quarter mile of the project.
(d) Shoreland, Mississippi Critical Area, Greenways, wetland buffers,
wildlife corridors and habitat complexes.
(e) All significant trees impacted by the project.
(f) A plan for turbine -cut in speed strategies where feasible in order
to reduce bird and bat deaths. Studies have shown that bird and
bat fatalities would be significantly reduced by changing turbine
cut -in speed and reducing operational hours during low -wind
periods, evening hours (one-half hour before sunset to one -halt
hour after sunrise -only in spring, summer, and early fall), and
rnigration times in sprig and fall.
3. In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 3, item e(1) above, the following
provisions will apply to small WECS erected under the provisions of this
ordinance:
(a) Color: Turbine paint color must be a non -obtrusive color so not to cause
negative visual impacts to surrounding properties.
Abandonment
A WECS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city after notification to the owner or operator of the WECS, shall be
presumed abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
Section 4. Solar Energy Sources and Systems
a. Definitions, Solar Energy Sources and Systems
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise:
Building -Integrated Solar System. An active solar system that is an integral part of a
principal or accessory building, rather than a separate mechanical device, replacing or
substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building. Building -
integrated systems include, but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water solar
systems that are contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights, and awnings.
Ground Mounted Panels. Freestanding solar panels mounted to the ground by use
of stabilizers or similar apparatus.
Photovoltaic System. An active solar energy system that converts solar energy directly
into electricity.
Roof or Building Mounted SES. Solar energy system (panels) that are mounted to the
roof or building using brackets, stands or other apparatus.
Roof Pitch. The final exterior slope of a building roof calculated by the rise over the run,
typically, but not exclusively, expressed in twelfths such as 3/12, 9/12, 12/12,
Solar Access. A view of the sun, from any point on the collector surface that is not
obscured by any vegetation, building, or object located on parcels of land other than the
parcel upon which the solar collector is located, between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00
PM Standard time on any day of the year.
Solar Collector. A device, structure or a part of a device or simc ul o for vihich the
primary purpose is to transform solar radiani. energy into thermal, mechanical, chemical,
or electrical energy.
Solar Energy. Radiant energy received from the sun that can he collected in the form of
heat or light by a solar collector.
Solar Energy System (SES). An active solar energy system that collects or stores solar
energy and transforms solar energy into another form of energy or transfers heat from a
collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or chemical means.
Solar I -lot Water System. A system that includes a solar collector and a heat exchanger
that heats or preheats water for building heating systems or other hot water needs,
including residential domestic hot water and hot water for commercial processes.
b. Districts
Solar energy systems (SES) shall be allowed as an accessory use in all zoning districts.
C. Placement and Design
1. Height
(a) Roof or building mounted SES shall not exceed the maximum allowed
height in any zoning district. For purposes for height measurement, solar
systems other than building -integrated solar systems shall be considered
to be mechanical devices and are restricted consistent with other
building -mounted mechanical devices.
(b) Ground mounted SES shall not exceed the height of an allowed
accessory structure within the zoning district when oriented at maximum
tilt.
2. Placement
(a) Ground mounted SES must meet the accessory structure setback for the
zoning district in which it is installed.
(b) Roof or Building Mounted SES. The collector surface and mounting
devices for roof or building mounted SES shall not extend beyond the
required setbacks of the building on which the system is mounted.
3. Coverage
Ground mounted SES may not exceed the area restrictions placed on accessory
structures within the subject zoning district.
4. Visibility
(a) SES shall be designed to blend into the architecture of the building or be
screened from routine view from public right-of-ways other than alleys.
The color of the solar collector is not required to be consistent with other
roofing materials.
(b) BLINding Integia1ed Solar Systems - Building integrated Solar systerns
shall be allowed regardless of visibility, provided the building component
in vvhich itie system is integrated meets all required setback, land use or
10
performance standards for the zoning district in which the building is
located.
(c) Ground mounted SES shall be screened from view to the extent possible
without reducing their efficiency. Screening may include walls, fences, or
landscaping.
General Standards
1. Notification. Prior to the installation or erection of a SES, the operator must
provide evidence showing their regular electrical service provider has been
informed of the customer's intent to install an interconnected, customer -owned
SES. Off -grid systems shall be exempt from this requirement.
2. Feeder lines. Any lines accompanying a SES, other than those attached to on-
site structures by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel,
unless there are existing lines in the area which the lines accompanying an SES
can be attached.
3. Commercial. All SES shall be limited to the purpose of on-site energy
production, except that any additional energy produced above the total onsite
demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical service provider in
accordance with any agreement provided by the same or applicable legislation.
4. Restrictions on SES Limited. No homeowners' agreement, covenant, common
interest community, or other contract between multiple property owners within a
subdivision of Maplewood shall restrict or limit solar systems to a greater extent
than Maplewood's renewable energy ordinance.
5. Maplewood encourages solar access to be protected in all new subdivisions and
allows for existing solar to be protected consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Any
solar easements filed, must be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 500,
Section 30.
e. Abandonment
A SES that is allowed to reinain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city, shall be presumed abandoned and may be declared a public
nuisance subject to removal at the expense of the operator.
Section 5. Geothermal Energy Sources and Systems
a. Definitions, Geothermal Energy Sources and Systerns
The following words, terms and phrase., ktvhen used in this Section, shall have the
meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates ofhcnivise:
Closed: Loop Ground SOUrGO Heat Pump System. A system that circrdates a heat
transfer fluid, typically food-grado antifreeze, through pipes or coils buried beneath the
land surface or anchored to the bottom in a body of water.
11
Geothermal Energy. Renewable energy generated from the interior of the earth and
used to produce energy for heating buildings or serving building commercial or industrial
processes.
Ground Source Heat Pump System (GSHPS). A system that uses the relatively
constant temperature of the earth or a body of water to provide heating in the winter and
cooling in the summer. System components include closed loops of pipe, coils or plates;
a fluid that absorbs and transfers heat; and a heat pump unit that processes heat for use
or disperses heat for cooling; and an air distribution system. The energy must be used
on-site.
Heat Transfer Fluid. A non-toxic and food grade fluid such as potable water, aqueous
solutions of propylene glycol not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight or aqueous
solutions of potassium acetate not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight.
Stormwater Pond. These are ponds created for stormwater treatment. A storrnwater
pond shall not include wetlands created to mitigate the loss of other wetlands.
b. Districts
Ground source heat pump systems (GSHPS) shall be deemed an accessory structure,
permissible in all zoning districts.
C. Placement and Design
Placement
(a) All components of GSHPS including pumps, borings and loops shall be
set back at least five (5) feet from interior and rear lot lines.
(b) Easements. All components of GSHPS shall not encroach on
easements.
(c) GSHPS are prohibited in surface waters, except for stormwater ponds
where they are permitted.
2. Design
(a) Only closed loop GSHPS utilizing Minnesota Department of Health
approved heat transfer fluids are permitted.
(b) Screening. Ground source heat pumps are considered mechanical
equipment and subject to the requirements of the city's zoning ordinance.
d. GeneralSf;amdEi'ds
Noise. GSHPS shall comply with Minnesota Pollution Control Agency stc.ndards
outlined in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7030.
12
e. Abandonment
A GSI -IPS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of
twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time
specified by the city after notification to the owner or operator of the GSHPS, shall be
presumed abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
Section 6. General Ordinance Provisions
a. Interpretation
In interpreting this ordinance and its application, the provisions of these regulations shall
be held to be the minimum requirements for the protection of public health, safety and
general welfare. This ordinance shall be construed broadly to promote the purposes for
which it was adopted.
b. Conflict
This ordinance is not intended to interfere with, abrogate or annul any other ordinance,
rule or regulation, statute or other provision of law except as provided herein. If any
provision of this ordinance imposes restrictions different from any other ordinance, rule
or regulation, statute or provision of law, the provision that is more restrictive or imposes
high standards shall control.
G. Severability
If any part or provision of this ordinance or its application to any developer or
circumstance is judged invalid by any competent jurisdiction, the judgment shall be
confined in its operation to the part, provision or application directly involved in the
controversy in which the judgment shall be rendered and shall not affect or impair the
validity of the remainder of these regulations or the application of them to other
developers or circumstances.
Section 7. Ordinance Placement
The ordinance places all environmental ordinances under the Environment Chapter (Chapter
18) by adding Article V (Environmental Protection and Critical Areas) and including the following
ordinances under the new Article: wetlands and streams, tree protection, slopes, Mississippi
Critical Area, Flood Plain Overlay District, Shoreland Overlay District, and Renewable Energy.
Following is the revised Chapter 18 Article headings (additions are underlined):
13
I �) )c Ili (-J-) IC( ( i
Section 1 I.0l: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4: Utility and Communication Uses
9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
A. Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS)
L Intent. The intent of this Subdivision is to promote safe,
effective and efficient use of alternative energy sources and
systems as the technology becomes available. The intent is
also to establish standards and procedures by which the
installation and operation of wind energy conversion
systems (WECS) shall be governed within the City.
2. Procedure.
Sustalnablilly Tln
A wind energy facility, when
properly designed, located, and
operated, can provide a
renewable source of energy that
can help reduce ourdependence
on fossil fuels.
a, The erection of wind energy conversion system shall require a Conditional Use
Permit, subject to the requit'ements of this Subdivision 8.21: Conditional Use Permil.
b. Wind energy conversion systems (WECS) governed by this Subdivision shall be
allowed within the PB — Public Building zoning districts.
3. Submittal Requirements.
a. Site Plan Drawing. All applications for a WECS Conditional Use Permit shall be
accompanied by a detailed certified survey / site plan drawn to scale and
dimensioned, displaying the following information:
(1) Lot lines and dimensions;
(2) Location and height of all buildings, structures, aboveground utilities and trees
on the lot, including both existing and proposed structures and guy wire anchors.
(3) Location and height of all adjacent buildings, structures, aboveground utilities
and trees located within three hundred fifty (350) feet of the exterior boundaries
of the property in question;
(4) An elevation drawing of the premises accurately depicting the proposed WECS
and its relationship to structures on the subject site and adjacent lots,
(5) Existing and proposed setbacks of all structures located on the property in
question.
b. Additional Submittal Requirements. In addition to the information required
elsewhere in this Ordinance, development applications for WECS, and temporary
towers for meteorological equipment shall include the fallowing supplemental
information:
(1) A significant tree inventory in conformance with Subdivision 10.5: Slopes /
i-Poodland Protection, Preservation and Replacement showing the loss of
significant trees within the construction area for the WECS and / or temporary
meteorological tower;
(2) A letter or copy of the review response from the Federal Aviation Administration
concerning the development application and their requirements for warning
devices, height restrictions, etc;
(3) The technical specifications for the WECS including, but not limited to, the type,
height, blade length, operating parameters, the anticipated sound I, -Vel at the
property line, and lightning protection; and
(4) Clearance distance between the fard"est extensions of the WECS blades to the
propel (Y linea.
96 Chapter 11: Planning and Development
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
4. Criteria for Approval.
a. Declaration of Conditions. The Planning Commission may recommend and the City
Council may impose such conditions on the granting of a WECS conditional use
permit as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and provisions of this
Subdivision. The Council must consider the following criteria in determining whether
to grant or deny a conditional use permit for a Wind Energy Conversion System
(WECS):
(1) The proposed WECS compliance with the performance standards described in
this Subpart;
(2) The potential for the WECS to cause a condition that may pose an unreasonable
threat or cause unreasonable damage to any other property or person; and
(3) The proposed WECS impact on the environment and on the visual image of the
surrounding area.
5. Performance Standards.
a. Number of Systems. No more than one (1) wind energy conversion system (WECS)
shall be permitted per lot.
b. Capacity. A wind energy conversion system
shat l have a nameplate capacity of forty (40)
kilowatts or less.
c. Height. The permitted maximum height of a
WECS shall be determined in one of the
following two ways. In determining the height
of the WECS, the total height of the system shall
be measured from the base of the tower to the
center of the systems hub (also known as the hub
height).
(t) A ratio of one foot to one foot (1':1')
between the distance of the closest property
line to the base of the WECS to the height of
the system.
(2) A maximum system height of one hundred
twenty—five (125) feet. The City Council,
at its discretion, may waive the maximum
system height requirements provided the
City Council finds that the overall height is
not feasible for the WECS to function
properly in the proposed location based on
meteorological data that was taken.
awn
IroiLnl
GoM
L.,J
The shortest height of the two above mentioned methods shall be used in determining
the maximum allowable height of a WECS system, The height of a WECS must also
comply with I'Ad regulationspart 77 `Objects A, ffecting Navigable Air Space' and /
or MNDOT Rule 14, MCAR 1.3015 (Mirnneso(a Adininish alive Rule 8800.1200
'Criteria for Deter mhfing Obstruclion to Air Navigcrlion ).
d. Setbacks. WECS shall be set back a distance equal to its height from the following:
Chapter 11: Planning and Development 97
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4: Utility and Communication Uses
(1) Arty public road right—of—way, unless written permission is granted by the
governmental entity with jurisdiction over the road;
(2) Any overhead utility lines, unless written permission is granted from the affected
utility; and
(3) All property lines, unless written permission is granted from the affected property
owner or neighbor.
e. Rotor Size. All WECS rotors shall not have rotor diameters greater than folly — five
(45) feet.
f. Rotor Clearance. Blade arcs created by the WECS shall have a minimum of thirty
(30) feet of clearance over any structure or tree within a two hundred (200) foot
radius.
g. Rotor Safety. Each WECS shall be equipped with both a manual and automatic
braking device capable of stopping the WECS operation in high winds (40mph or
greater).
It. Color and Finish. All wind turbines and towers shall be white, gray, or another non —
obtrusive color. Finishes shall be matte or non — reflective.
L Tower Access. To prevent unauthorized climbing, WECS towers must comply with
one of the following provisions:
(1) Tower climbing apparatus shall not be located within twelve (12) feet of the
ground.
(2) A locked anti — climb device shall be installed on the tower.
(3) Towers capable of being climbed shall be enclosed by a locked, protective fence
at least six (6) feet high.
Ic. &M. WECS shall have one (1) sign, not to exceed two (2) square feet posted at the
base of tine tower and said shall contain the following information:
(I) Warning high voltage.
(2) Manufacturer's name.
(3) Emergency phone number.
(4) Emergency shutdown procedures.
1. Lighting. WECS shall not have affixed or attached lights, reflectors, flashers, or any
other illumination except for illumination devices required by FAA regulatiorns part
77 'Objects Affecting Navigable Air Space' and FAA Advisory circular 70 / 7460 —
1 K ' Objects Marking and Lighting'.
in. Electromagnetic Interference. WECS shall be designed and constructed so as not to
cause radio and television interference.
it. Noisc Emission. Audible noise from wind energy facilities shall not cx.cced filly (50)
dB(A) whcu measured firm the outside of the nearest residence, hminess, school,
hospital, religious institution, ar other inhabited structure. In the event the noiso
emitted font the wind energy facility contains a steady pure tong such as a v✓hine,
screech, or hum the wind energy facility shall not exceed folly — five (45) cIB(A)
vdren measured outside the ncm-cst inhabitable structure. The audibly noise from
98 - Chapter 11: Planning and Development
Section 11.01: Zoning Ordinance
Subdivision 9.4 Utility and Communication Uses
wind energy facilities may periodically exceed allowable noise levels during extreme
wind events (winds above 30 mph or greater).
o. Utility Company Interconnection. No WECS shall be interconnected with a local
electrical utility company until the utility company has reviewed and comments upon
it. All connections shall be underground.
p. Compliance with State Building Code. A standard drawing of the structural
components of the wind energy conversion system and support structures, including
base and footings shall be provided along with engineering date and calculations to
demonstrate compliance with the structural design provisions of the State Building
Code. Drawings and engineering calculations shall be certified by a registered
engineer,
q. Compliance with National Electrical Code. WECS electrical equipment and
connection shall be designed and installed in adherence to the National Electrical
Code,
r. Manufacturer Warranty. The applicant shall provide documentation or other evidence
from the dealer or manufacturer that the WECS has been successfully operated in
atmospheric conditions similar to the conditions within the City of Mahtomedi. The
WECS shall be warranted against any system failures reasonable expected in severe
weather operation conditions.
6. Inspection. The City herby reserves the right upon issuing any WECS conditional use
permit to inspect the premises on which the WECS is located. If a WECS is not
maintained in operational conditions and poses a potential safety hazard, the owner shall
take expeditious action to correct the situation.
7. Abandonment. A wind energy conversion system that is out of service for a continuous
twelve (12) month period shall be deemed to have been abandoned. The Zoning
Administrator or other Authorized Agent may issue a notice of abandotmrentto the
owner of the wind energy facility that is deemed to have been abandoned. The owner
shall have the right to respond to the notice of abandonment within thirty (30) days of
notice receipt date. The Zoning Administrator or other Authorized Agent shall withdraw
the notice of abandonment and notify the owner that the notice has been withdrawn if the
owner provided information that demonstrates the Wind Energy Conversion System has
not been abandoned.
If the wind energy conversion system is determined to be abandoned, the owner of the
WECS shall remove the WECS and return the property in which the WECS was located
on to its original condition prior to the placement of a WECS, at the owner's sole expense
within three (3) months of receipt of notice of abandonment. If the owner fails to remove
the WECS, the Zoning Administrator or other Authorized Agent may pursue a legal
action to have the wind generator removed at the owners expense.
8. Temporary Meteorological Equipment. Temporary meteorological equipment located
upon a temporary tOWBI' used on an interim basis to gather wind and meteorological data
to determine feasibility ofthe WECS shall require written approval by the Zoning
Adminisb-ator or other Authorized Agent, and shall comply with the following standards:
a, No more than one (1) such temporary tower shall he permitted on a lot at ooc time.
b. The tower shall be placed on property for no longer than eighteen (18) months from
the date of the Administrative Review issuance, Any abandoned or obsolete
Chaplet- 11: Planning and Development 99
Section 1 1.0 L Zoning Ordinance
9A: Utility and Communication Uses
temporary tower shall be removed within thirty (30) days from the cessation of
operation at the site.
c. The tower shall be temporary by nature and shall not have permanent foundations.
Guy wires may be used as long as the connections to the ground are temporary and
the wires are designed to support the wind and ice load of the tower.
d. The tower shall meet the minimum wind and ice load design required by the City
Code and the Uniform Building code.
e. The tower and any related guy wires shall be protected against unauthorized
climbing.
f. The tower shall be set back a distance at least equal to its height front any lot line,
recreational field, dwelling, school, business or other habitable structure.
g. The tower shall be grounded and shielded to protect against natural lightning strikes,
in conformance with the National Electrical Code,
h. No tower shall have affixed or attached lights, reflectors, flashers or any other
illumination, except for those devices required by the Federal Aviation
Administration.
B. Solar Equipment and Solar Rights
1. Solar equipment shall be consistent with the setback and height requirements of the
principal or accessory building, whichever is applicable. Solar equipment that is not
consistent with the setback and height requirements may be considered pursuant to the
conditional use permit procedures as specified in Subdivision 8.21: Conditional Use
Permit,
2. No person in control of property shall allow a tree or shrub to be placed or grow as to cast
a shadow between the hours of 9:00 a.m, and 3:00 p.m. upon a solar collector energy
system capable of generating more than one million (1,000,000) British thermal units
(BTUs) per year, and that supplies a part of energy requirements for improvements on the
property where the solar energy system is permanently located.
100 Chapter 11: Planning and Development
DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS
CITY OF SAINT PAUL 375dackson Street, Suite 220 Telephone: 651-266-9090
Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor Saint Paid, MN 55101-1806 Pacsinnle: 651-266-9124
Web: umm.stpauLgovIdsi
Design Standards and Guidelines for Solar Energy Systems
Design of solar energy systems is subject to the following Saint Paul standards and guidelines:
❑ Specific dimensional standards under Legislative Code § 65.921, Solar energy system.
❑ General city-wide design standards for rooftop equipment under Leg. Code § 63.110(e).
❑ Design review by the Heritage Preservation Commission under Legislative Code § 73.06 for
locations within designated historic sites and districts.
These standards are detailed below. The most restrictive standard governs. Solar energy systems
are also subject to building code requirements, and a building permit is required.
❑ Specific Dimensional Standards for Solar Energy Systems
Legislative Code § 65.921, Solar energy system, includes the following standards and conditions:
(a) Building mounted systems shall be subject to the dimensional standards that apply to the
building, provided that the height standards for building mounted systems in residential districts
shall be as follows:
(1) The system shall extend no more than three (3).feet above the srnface of a roofat its exterior
perimeter, and shall be set back at least one (1) foot from the exterior perimeter for every
additional foot that the systene extends above the height of the roof at its exterior perimeter.
(2) The systein may not extend more than three (3) feet above the ridge ofa gable, gambrel, hip
or mansard roof.
For syste is mounted on a commercial or industrial building ivithin five (5) feet ofa commercial
or industrial building on an adjoining lot, a system that does not conform to the height standards
that apply to the building may extend up to fifteen (15) feet above the surface of a flat roof along
the conunon property line.
(b) Freestanding systems shall be treated as accessory huildings for the purpose ofnoximunr height,
maxinnun lot area coverage, and location requirements; provided that freestanding systenes in
residential districts shall not exceedfifteen (15) feet in height within ten (10) feet ofa parkway or
an interior property line, exceptfor a property line along an alley, with additional height equal to
additioiial setbackfrom prope,ty lines pe initted to a maxi n an height oftiventy-five (25) feet.
height standard for residential building mounted solar energy systems
n
fclt
abovendge \
(3 feet 1
above roof..: 1
perimet r
6/20/2012 Page t of 4
❑ General City-wide Design Standards for Rooftop Equipment
Legislative Code § 63.110(e) provides that all rooftop equipment, including rooftop solar
equipment, is subject to the following design standards:
The visual impact of rooftop equipment shall be reduced through such means as location,
screening, or integration into the roofdesign. Screening shall be ofdurable, permanent
materials that are compatible with the primary building materials. Exterior mechanical
equipment such as ductwork shall not be located on primary building facades.
The following guidelines illustrate how the visual impact of rooftop solar energy systems can be
reduced while providing access to solar energy. These guidelines support the official design
standards adopted under Legislative Code 63.110(e).
1. Permit solar enerev access while minimizin¢ visual impact. The City encourages
development of solar energy. The Zoning Code's dimensional and design standards applicable to
rooftop solar energy systems provide for reasonable capture of solar energy while minimizing the
visual impact of the equipment.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — _ _
allowed height above ridge )
13feet (visual impacts increase when
installation extends above ridge) i
unshaded area with solar resource
south -facing side of house
2. Visual impact mitigation that considers the function of the solar installation. Visual
impact mitigation should allow rooftop equipment to function within acceptable parameters for
the particular type of equipment. Solar energy system visual impact mitigation through changes
to its elevation or pitch, integration into the roof design, location on the building, reducing the
size of the system, screening or other measures can provide for capture of solar energy within
industry standards.
Solar insiatlaiion integrated directly into
roof design
Limiiect solar resource due to shading, hip roof,
and low slope. High visual impacis can be limited
by limiting size of system (single panel)
6/20/2012 Page 2 of 4
3. Visual impact assessed primarily from public streets. Visual impacts are primarily evalu-
ated from adjacent public streets. Installing a solar energy system so that it is less visible from
public streets reduces its visual impact.
4. Reduce visual impact by integration into the roof design. Mounting the solar collector
surface as flush as possible with the surface of a pitched roof using standard mounting hardware
sufficiently reduces visual impact. Reduce the visual impact of racking and other mechanical
components through design and location that minimizes its visibility from public streets.
Reduced visual impact - only
collector surface is visible
Reduce visual impact of support rack through
design and location to minimize its visibility
S. Limited allowance for solar energy systems above the roof peak. Visual impact is greater
when rooftop equipment extends above the peak of the roof. Within the limits allowed by the
dimensional standards for solar energy systems, a system may be allowed to extend above the
ridge of a roof if necessary to reasonably caprine solar energy within industry standards.
6/20/2012 Page 3 of 4
U 0
U O W N
U
o
w o
p
y
c°n °
u a
v C
L o
° 0
o Aa�
R. p u f .
Y N b N v O
p > O
O O .�
bA bn A V. 00
C u O
o
b
u p O y O
v U
bfi �
v v ., C
q > a v m 0°
o .a
a
p
b 0 w a'7 v
p R. u .p
N •j �� (� U U A U L]
q C o
�o• 1 0 0� 3 .o U 'r
u
�, ,'y w y N p .� .� •� tr
o
s u N y t
r �1 c1
m
� �
•(5
�
o '� .n
uy
nt
u a
A
v
F
N
q
SO
u
v�j .� s
cn
'a o
m
a
u
U
u
p U
o au
,0
a
b
U
C]
O
t{
N
nn
y
a
�ogbd
v
a'o
bro
p
h
u
u°
>
C
C v
° v
P.
N N
u
10
o
u
o
u.
0
ro
o
q
o
p
v
v
qp
w
O
A
.p
u
ooo
u
u
U
G
'u
v C
�
U
�
w
°
Nn
�° ••°
q � o
�
�
i>ii
41
u
.�
7 O
q a
..�
Ei
cn
U 0
U O W N
U
o
w o
p
y
c°n °
u a
v C
L o
° 0
o Aa�
R. p u f .
Y N b N v O
p > O
O O .�
bA bn A V. 00
C u O
o
b
u p O y O
v U
bfi �
v v ., C
q > a v m 0°
o .a
a
p
b 0 w a'7 v
p R. u .p
N •j �� (� U U A U L]
q C o
�o• 1 0 0� 3 .o U 'r
u
�, ,'y w y N p .� .� •� tr
o
s u N y t
r �1 c1
0
u
a v o o
w 'ivu u
u 0 U aui bn L ro
° oro .0 °
v
q n O
O 'JUjR 0 N W 'O
pUp 3] v O O v
0
id OO U U q
a�>v 0 a g o
v o 0 0
43 U' �
o
ro y
p g N 0 U U O
Q q R a
« y.p ��
R rg2 « .�
u o o a a
0 w
v
,q O 0 Oto
pp u O
v
u ro v O
O« Cf U 0 LU O
p N 0
0 Y
u � O �q+ �y � O
u o 0
0.n � N y B —0b aq°
v .� ❑�❑ .04 u ° u Om °"
q O v
y � 'd y' o
�
Hm �y ,?, ❑ � 0
v m v b
u"
v q
a o
0 v q v ❑ pp n m
o
0 o
° u
� o
7 F N o° m u
ro
0
R
0
v
O
C4J
y
q
O
M
MAN
Rr
'a
aqi
W
R
oho
v
faf
u
F
Ou
0
O
O
�
a
Pa
ro
0
w
F
-11c
o
y
u
H
�n
.ti
O
b =
H
ti
'tl�tl
� 4
v
ro
id
7
O
p
C
N
N
°
R
U
a
c«a
by 0
:5
R
0 a
R
v
y
R i
' q
u
n
R
uC
N
a1
� c i
w c
-0
0 0
u
w E
ryO
O i
vvn P
=5
a
0
�
op
x
m
f
pg
o C
a v o o
w 'ivu u
u 0 U aui bn L ro
° oro .0 °
v
q n O
O 'JUjR 0 N W 'O
pUp 3] v O O v
0
id OO U U q
a�>v 0 a g o
v o 0 0
43 U' �
o
ro y
p g N 0 U U O
Q q R a
« y.p ��
R rg2 « .�
u o o a a
0 w
v
,q O 0 Oto
pp u O
v
u ro v O
O« Cf U 0 LU O
p N 0
0 Y
u � O �q+ �y � O
u o 0
0.n � N y B —0b aq°
v .� ❑�❑ .04 u ° u Om °"
q O v
y � 'd y' o
�
Hm �y ,?, ❑ � 0
v m v b
u"
v q
a o
0 v q v ❑ pp n m
o
0 o
° u
� o
7 F N o° m u
�l
9,
.� o pP, ,'I
u v q u P v p o O
00 o 73
v v y
-0
pvp Lam' ) ro ou v P,
v A sv, OU a4
�
BB" °
aw ° a o v ro 5 5 .&,.v 0
v O N ro ° O +, u
ro, a (24
q m N
b U 14'7 ro u bA
P, '� o
u qzj
Cl a4
OaU ro N U O
j O O ,y,w00
,
U y q u N ttl H }J U p v P, W OA
v O U0 v >' rro,y, q •tl is O q ,�'j r,yf w q ,Oyy m
W 0
C. p ro w :� U v u y p —O
° v N P.
4S U�j
V v q ro en B ro u °a E g o
es 0
._, o
°u b
° �j "1 n m
v p� o by a� v
fl
gs
� Ci U43o
[� q v w a .51r-1 ° rs m
P� V
Q.
I
N
o �, v
b«'no a.� m nN o�py.' b
Cql g
-00 O o
° G v O
v vn b N m x
Act'
A u ro
bp 5 a � N q ✓ v ° w
PI
,v„ 73
O a u w O
qqC w 5 v u
qvq A
a, tj LU
y N y v N s� bn u v o a s u o
0 0 ar o bb
b'p W u F' 'A A b❑ G'" o N q w
R C N 'i+ .p tion O o
a
o
a U oP v° a a ro - a v
a ro a a r o'
o,N N
Dv%�o ya a 0 °a o o>O �" o
a wo
o
q « w ro q mat p P ay�i b '41 O caa
m vM tNi �` 7 O
v y n o Q> a A 6'n o a W a
u v o o W a « y u ao o a y 3
v u q p, y
�,
p « u a w C M S q o w b«p O
q q « O 3 o N W N
v uW 0 o q pm
W A° ,w�^
0 y❑ v ;o ii77a ❑ o '� .0 C v v 40u B o o B F-� p v z
of Q o u u zi
u I y q ,0 FO
Cl w O v m « N w o ct .a v v O p v 0 O O p o
C A ro 0.l o w �� C7 er OAA F ,� F e, C4 p o R$ C F' A m ro m
v
Q
o--i
rr
h
oo bn v a °� o bqqn .p v o
u o ° n ro u W v B o v y , y
a..5, v v u w O y
v •p b O W A p U
O ro a M
Y O O `a7 -�C' O O
° o> as w
m y
o
o .vi tin vvi N al � w
w° —e v m v «' v o ,� o b m. C m bn v
Im
7 v p ro v -0 m m m q« v p C bn s,
U
b
rob v v °n Ap Nv
u `� ca r'+1 Hiy ,`J 4i ur.:vY� A o ro a� a,
u o U o 71 q bn v ro v w° bb Nn v p a a 3
° •a°i � u 'b bn y v O G M N u
o ro a o' O ro v cn o o u o 3
� o w y N y u'� ro
°° o u "u . S a"a°
.� bn
0 UM
a a a.
� o v ;: •d o .va
v y u 'f] A +ban b' O u O ° JB1 m •U°
5 U v A 0 0 � v A t
u]^ m 5 TO w b bi) a fn v C q° o 0
u v
en e];-� •,j fn ,
l w v c
Lt 4
CJ V a ;1 (�1 a fSl a bb o o i
u cl F
0
] °U %? (0 O .a U] -v U) to) 'p �' :? ti V] P, 0 fn 0
bD
O
M Y w bA N y o y o A vbnp ca
A A
O
0 ' 0 0 v
a0 0 0 0 0
°u >. u id ° v ° 0
0 80
y b ai"7 ro v u °
U 42 A v A y '.� v �" u
0 o
0 N7 °a �, F1 ro u W ri
v
04
v v u ti' .x7 U C m N -41
°0 w °o x &'v ° a B
o'" o N 42 .9
v v
a h o v v A
v w
° „
bAw ZZv M p '� y b 6au 114 in.^U ° w u o
avi w B ,.
O B +'7- ,'o
o q
y FL v b v d w u 00b qvq °u u
ro 7 q u A A �c u O a .p 0 b .3 to N
O
0 .n o
M'tl b❑ "r' ,Q4
q x O P ro o p Q L
O o
a �'a a y� c� v a v' w a�
,figg
P7 U
N
Ww
A
v
y -0
,tet-+
cri
0
y O
"
O ro
oYi
O
w
.�, o v v
0
Gy
y0
a m' s`di
v
row
v
a
w
o
O
o
�
u
y
ti v
.�.
o 0
fn O
o
a
t
q 'u
C E'
?
aai O
�
N
o op
Mq
w
o —u
a
w
g
0
y
v
0
&
? °
v v
p
�}
a f
O
.y
m _
Q
W
w°
cri
0
y O
"
O ro
O
w
.�, o v v
0
m
0.y ro W
w
y
ti v
Y
w
o 0
fn O
o
v
d v 1
V
o ro
y o
u
N Y u
O
oo
? °
v v
p
W
Y
q ro p 0 w
C bA ro °
Q ° .O by O a .� y y, w `p 1d ja` y0
vu' o o v a o y 01
au+ 'a�
v? o o a Y p o 3 o v a o
3 ai U+�
p O w N a a q u ro v P p p a J]
'd
oro ° 0 "d o .o u v
y 0 .s7 w C+ 0 V o u C -du
a
IN
-0 tjo
C] m v p
o
-�v
° o o uu U
a 5Yvo. o
v
b o u
v
.c v q
5 y b a ,5 ° v ro a ❑�
2; m b U v v w C a �j v ro aa.A
�O o o' u�jV �a u° � o g a in q
'8° -84'p W a W c.
ao,.°0
.q T° o ^� o
uv V U
.4 0 m 0 -« v '4 ° �,y Lm
, uaa
.
ro�
o a v" v R. «� ro v 'ti v u vv p o
° as b' h ro o t' ro z° v� ;: o
Q4
v o v
a w.c p
14
ro a
w C7 ¢ m y ° 3
a
N
op
G'
N co
Ml
vv
o
�
p
.0
d
0
�
o
0
p
v q
b b❑
0
b
o0 �
d
v
m
en
v
u
p a y
'ClC
v
O
q
N U
q O
M
v
w
a
a
o
0
C
v
a
^
0
O
V N
U
N O al
Q
U
�
cbp+A
.q
�
b
w
U
a
Y
O
r
u0'
tCl
J
�
V �
m
fj
�c�yyi
41as
at -ii
O
it uci
V O
co
nl
G'
N co
Ml
N
W
-+ <V M
µ
a H
0 Q
04
« o
0
g a
3
u
Y �
b
Q a
v
H
�
N
H
N
N
DO
y
P
H
0
ro p
O w
Ow o
g� �
q
'•�
A y
m
A
v
'av
v O
O O
«
p
U
v
g o
o
; o
'd o
y
o a
U
q
u
v
F o
w°
q U
N �
y
Ua
U
v
u N
y
o
a
q
«rogg u
v B 0
• a3
pq
0
Q u
b�A
O y�i u '
A ti0
4
-+ <V M
o
g a
3
m
u
m
N
H
0
a,
N
DO
y
H
v
g� �
q
'•�
w v
5
v
N
o°
u
v
F o
w°
y
u
N
ro
p,
bgqlJ Nmo
U
Q u
b�A
0
A ti0
°
b❑A
51.4N
N
y
O
v
41
O -u
«
ro A
v o
OQI,
0
5
q
m
A q
u
v
0 � 0
bA
q�q A
'p Y
w
s�j
q
q
b
oro o
- 1
v
a
«
o
,=�
o
O
u
.v o a.
.0
u A0
0
v
w
u Q
u
o
YO u
w
,0
«
H
O
.Q
m O b0
u
H
o o .�
w v
o o
Y
A
«
B
q.
Uqo"
v
o
�a
oa
0
Y
:� u
`� '
f
a v
°
d N
w
q
O
o
a o
0
v
a
c
Q.
Q
O
u
D
v
v
0
do O
v
q 0
« o
F
r!
iro7
'q
-r' U
m o
.0
0
o
v
0
'q
v
O
Hy
1'"
b
o
H
wQ u o
m
Fa
o
O
fa
b
ro o
w
v
av
0
`•� q
bA
p
p
U
w
A v °
0
v
H
w°
w
v
v
P,
n°
a
H
v
q � o
w a� ° al G vii as ❑O❑ s'�d a� •cy ++ •-q
Ir o q a' U w v
Ir 04 v N
a o v U d o 04 w
" u ro mA O m L'' m
-0 p 9 W
u O O v q' ,. O
q
a.�
b b m w
'° -41v o o
.UmVy
u .c .� 'a ,a w y b .� .q
v m u m w C q O" O
a+ y Q U ti
bp
Ij
pc1 O u
d O
CI .� hi 6 kJ u
5
.p t P m O o cu71
i
Ci a <E u a u� 7, v
m °U N ai 6 q �- N Ci p m ncl
g n n
U IN.
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6B
Meeting Date: June 5, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been asked to
review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate development along County
Road 10. The Planning Commission has begun discussing ideas that could work here and how the
City Code should be amended to accommodate these ideas.
Some of the ideas that have been talked about include:
— Reduce the minimum required acreage amounts for PUD developments
— Reduce parking space requirements
— Require parking lots be placed behind building
— Reduce setbacks for parking lots and buildings
— Allow higher density (more housing units per acre)
— Increase building height limits
— Create a Corridor Overlay Zoning District
— Signage changes:
o Reduce sign setback requirements, particularly along County Road 10
o Prohibit pole signs going forward — only monument signs allowed
o Require all pole signs be replaced with monument signs within X years
o Reduce the allowed height of signs
Since this is an extensive list, the Commission should start by focusing on a couple of the ideas.
Reducing the acreage size requirements of Planned Unit Developments seemed to be one of the
ideas that is most important, especially now since the City is in the process of purchasing some
key properties along the Corridor to redevelop. The Commission has also talked about reducing
the setback requirements for buildings and parking lots. The current zoning codes for building and
parking setbacks, building height limitations and PUD's is attached for the Commission to review.
Recommendation
Continue the discussion about City Code amendments that would promote and support
development on the County Road 10 corridor.
Sincerely,
Heidi Hello, t'i2nni x associate
Attachments:
1. Mounds View Zoning Cod. Sections:
a. 1104.01 - setbacks
b. 1104.02 - building height
c. 1119 & 1120 - Planned Unit Developments
1104.01: YARD REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 3. Setbacks for Principal Buildings: The setback distances listed in the table below apply to principal
buildings, except as otherwise provided for conditional uses in specific zoning districts. All setback
distances shown shall be measured from the appropriate lot line. The lettered footnotes correspond to
Section 1104.01 subdivisions 3a, b, c and d. (Ord. 590,11-25-96)
District
Front Yard
Side Yard
Rear Yard
Minimum
Minimum
When Abuts
Residential
Minimum
When Abuts
Residential
R-1
30 a.d.
10 b.
30d.
R-2
30 a.d.
10 b.
30d.
R-3
30
10 c.
20 c.
30
40
R-4
30
20 c.
20 c.
30
50
R-5
-- As required under Chapter 1110.05 of this Title --
B-1
30
10 c.
20 c.
20
30
B-2
30
10 c.
20 c.
20
30
B-3
30
10 c.
20 c.
20
40
B-4
30
10 c.
30
30
40
I-1
40
20 c.
1 40
40
40
PUD
-- As required under Chapter 1120 of this Title --
c. Not less than thirty feet (30') from lot line if lot is on coiner and lot line abuts a street. (Ord. 590,
11-25-96)
Subd. 4. Minimum Setbacks for Accessory Buildings, Driveways and Parking Areas:
C. Parking Areas:
(1) R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5: (Amended, Ord. 829,9-3-09)
Residential uses: PacI<.i:tlg lets and driveways shah be ce+ back five feet (5').
Where a parking ai �a %.•o ud encroach into an easemt 1-', the property owner
shall obtain apl •o : <:1 fo. ;.:. encroachment pc r t regi t: ,cd by the appropriate
authority prior' ie constjucuonofthe driveway. (Crcl. 524,2-22-93; Ord. 590,
11-25-96; Ord. 620,'i -27-98; Ord. 642,1-10-.00; Amended, Ord. 752, 9-13-0AJ
(b) Non-residential uses: Parking lots and driveways shall beset back five feet (5')
except where non-residential uses abut property in a residential district, the
setback for parking areas from the connnon property line shall be as follows:
(Ord. 590,11-25-96; Ord. 642, 1-10-00)
[i]. for sites having two and one-half (2.5) acres or less:
twenty feet (20') (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
[ii]. for sites having more than two and one-half (2.5) acres:
thirty feet (30') (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(2) B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4 (parking areas and loading docks):
(a) front: thirty feet (30') (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(b) side and rear: five feet (5'), except where a non-residential use abuts a property
in a residential district, the setback for parking areas from the common property
line shall be as stated in Section 1104.0 1, subdivision 4c(1)(b). (Ord. 590, 11-
25-96)
(3) I-1 (parking areas and loading docks):
(a) front: forty feet (40') (Ord. 590, 11-25-96)
(b) side and rear: five feet (5'), except where a non-residential use abuts a property
in a residential district, the setback for parking areas from the common property
line shall be as stated in Section 1104.01, subdivision 4c(1)(b). (Ord. 524, 2-
22-93; Ord. 590,11-25-96)
(4) Parking areas which do not conform to the provisions of this Chapter, may continue
subject to the provisions of Chapter 1123. (Ord. 620,7-27-98; Amended, Ord. 756,1-
24-05)
1104.02: AREA AND BUILDING SIZE REGULATIONS:
Subd. 3. Height Limitations:
a. R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-5 Districts: No building or structure shall have a height greater than two and
one-half (2-1/2) stories or forty five feet (45').
b. R-4 District: No building or structure shall have a height greater than three (3) stories. (Amended,
Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
c. 13-1, B.-2, B-3, B-4, 1-1 Districts: No building or structure shalt have a height greater than tluree (3)
stories.
c. ..__(,cp ions: The buildiru hci�h` !il-�=its established he rc_r Scor os -,icts shall not ahp, e
(1) Belfries.
(2) Chimneys or flues.
(3) Church spires.
(4) Cooling towers.
(5) Cupolas and domes which do not contain usable space.
(6) Elevator penthouses.
(7) Flagpoles.
(8) Monuments.
(9) Parapet walls extending not more than three feet (3') above the limiting height of the
building.
(10) Watertowers.
(11) Poles, towers and other structures for essential services.
(12) Necessary mechanical and electrical appurtenances.
(13) Television and radio antennas not exceeding twenty feet (20) above roof.
e. No excluded roof equipment or structural element extending beyond the limited height of abuilding
may occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) of the area of such roof nor exceed ten feet (10)
unless otherwise noted.
f. The height of any accessory building or structure shall not exceed eighteen feet (18') or that of the
principal structure, whichever is less. (Added, Ord. 828, 10-8-09)
CHAPTER 1119
PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
SECTION:
1119.01: Purpose
1119.02: Permitted Uses
1119.03: Special Procedures
1119.01: PURPOSE. The purpose of the PUD, Planned Unit Development District is to provide for the
nre-catron and coordination of rare parcels as well as the combulaion of varying types of residential,
coalu�e_cialand industrial uses. (i988 erode §40.23)
1119.02: PERMITTRTBUSHSr All permitted accessory orcoaditionaluses contaiucdinChapters 1106
through 1118 of this Title shall be treated as permitted. uses to eliminate the overlapping procedural
requirements of individual conditional use provisions. (1988 Code §40.23)
1119.03: SPECIAL PROCEDURES: TheestablisIunentofaPUD,PlamiedUnitDevelopmentDistrict
shall be subject to the amendment requirements as outlined in Section 1125.01 of this Title plus the procedures
and conditions imposed by Chapter 1120 of this Chapter. (1988 Code §40.23)
1120.01
CIIAPTER 1120
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
SECTION:
1120.01:
Purpose and Intent
1120.02:
General Requirements and Standards
1120.03:
Special Requirements and Standards
1120.04:
Procedure
1120.05:
Submittals
1120.01
1120.01: PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of this Chapter of the Zoning Code is to provide for
the grouping of land parcels for development as an integrated, coordinated unit as opposed to traditional parcel
by parcel, piecemeal, sporadic and unplanned approach to development. This Section is intended to introduce
flexibility of site design and architecture for the conservation of land and open space through clustering of
buildings and activities through conditional use provisions. It is further intended that planned unit
developments are to be characterized by central management, integrated planning and architecture, joint or
common use of parking, maintenance of open space and other similar facilities and a harmonious selection and
efficient distribution of uses. Specifically, it is intended to encourage:
Subd. 1. Innovations in residential development to the end that the growing demands for housing of all
economic levels may be met by greater variety in tenure, type, design and siting of dwellings and by the
conservation and more efficient use of land in such developments.
Subd. 2. Higher standards of site and building design through the use of trained and experienced land
planners, architects and landscape architects.
Subd. 3. More convenience in location of accessory commercial and service area.
Subd. 4. The preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, such as natural topography and
geologic features and the prevention of soil erosion.
Subd. 5. /,- creative use of laud ani,ted physical developrnen. wIr__lr allows a phases a,� o trgly
of land from rural to uses.
Subd. G. An efficient use of Ian6 resnIihrg in smaller net«eorlcs of nt Iities and streets, thereby
ho using costs and public cnts.
Subd. 7. A development pattern in harmony with the objectives of the Mounds View Courprehensive Plan.
1120.01
1120.02
Subd. 8. A more desirable environment than would be possible through the strict application of zoning and
subdivision regulations of the City.
Subd. 9. To give the landowner and developer reasonable assurance of ultimate approval before expending
complete design monies while providing City officials with assurances that the project will retain the
character envisioned at the time of concurrence.
Subd. 10. To allow variation from the provisions of this Title, including setbacks, height, lot area, width and
depth, yards, etc. (1988 Code §40.24)
1120.02: GENERAL. REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS:
Subd. 1. Ownership: An application for PUD approval must be filed by the landowner or jointly by all
landowners of the property included in aproject. The application and all submissions must be directed
to the development of the property as a unified whole. la the case of multiple ownership, the approval
of the final plat shall be binding on all owners.
Subd. 2. Comprehensive Plan Consistency: The proposed PUD shall be consistent with the adopted City
Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 3. Common Open Space: Common open space at least sufficient to meet the minimum requirements
established in this Chapter and such complementary structures and improvements as are necessary and
appropriate for the benefit and enjoyment of the residents of the PUD shall be provided within the area
of the PUD.
Subd. 4. Operating and Maintenance Requirements for PUD Common Open Space/Facilities: Whenever
common open space or service facilities are provided within the PUD, the PUD plan shall contain
provisions to assure the continued operation and maintenance of such open space and service facilities
to a predetermined reasonable standard. Cormnon open space and service facilities within a PUD may
be placed under the ownership of one (1) or more of the following as approved by the Council:
a. Landlord control, where only use by tenants is anticipated.
b. Property Owners' Association; provided, all of the following conditions are met:
(1) Prior to the use, occupancy, sale or the execution of contracts for sale of an individual
building unit, parcel, tract, townhouse, apartment or common area, a declaration of covenants,
conditions and resUictions or an equivalent document ,,ncl z. cet of floor plans, such an specified by
Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 515 and 515A, shallbell-le(' sir the City Administrato soidimingtobe
made prior to the filings of said declaration of docnme;:ds c i floor plans with thc. rccordirg officers of
Ramsey County,1viinncsota. (Amended, Ord. 204<l, 5-2.0 -10)
(2.) The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions or equivalent document shall.
specify that deeds, leases or documents of conveyance affecting buildings, units, parcels, tracts,
townhouses or apartments shall subject said properties to the tenus of said declaration.
1120.02
1120.02
(3) The declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall provide that an owners'
association or corporation shall be formed and that all owners shall be members of said association or
corporation which shall maintain all properties and common areas in good repair and which shall assess
individual property owners proportionate shares of joint or common costs. This declaration shall be
subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney. The intent of this requirement is to protect the
property values of the individual owner through establishing effective private control.
(4) The declaration shall, additionally, amongst other things, provide that in the event the
association or corporation fails to maintain properties in accordance with the applicable rules and
regulations of the City or fails to pay taxes or assessments on properties as they become due and in the
event the said City incurs any expenses not immediately reimbursed by the association or corporation,
then the City shall have the right to assess each property its pro rata share of said expenses. Such
assessments, together with interest thereon and costs of collection, shall be a lien on each property
against which such assessment is made.
(5) Membership must be mandatory for each owner and any successive buyer.
(6) The open space restrictions must be permanent and not for a given period of years.
(7) The association must be responsible for liability insurance, local taxes and the maintenance
of the open space facilities to be deeded to it.
(8) Properly owners must pay their pro rata share of the cost of the association by means of an
assessment to be levied by the association which meets the requirements for becoming a lien on the
property in accordance with Minnesota Statutes.
(9) The association must be able to adjust the assessment to meet changed needs.
(10) The bylaws and rules of the association and all covenants and restrictions to be recorded
must be approved by the Council prior to the approval of the final PUD plan.
Subd. 5. Staging of Common Open Space: When a PUD provides for common open space, the total area of
common open space or land escrow security in any stage of development shall, at a minimum, bear the
same relationship to the total open space to be provided in the entire PUD as the stages or units
completed or under development bear to the entire PUD.
Subd. 6. Density: The exact density allowable shall be determined by standards agreed upon between the
a0,;licant and the City.
Mi.bd. .. Utilities: hi any FUD, ali r.Glities, including teleol.o �r, ciectricity, gas auc ecai.>l ,wall be
installed underground.
Subd. 8. Utility Cormections:
a. Water Connections: Where more than one (1) property is served from tho same service line, a
shut-off valve must be located in such a way that each unit's service may be shut off by the City, in
addition to the normally supplied shut off at the street.
1120.02
1120.03 (Rev. 5/10)
b. Sewer Connections: Where more than one (1) unit is served by a sanitary sewer lateral, the
requirements of the Building Code shall apply for lengths between ninety feet (90) and three hundred
feet (300'). If the length exceeds three hundred feet (300'), provision must be made for a manhole to
allow adequate cleaning and maintenance of the lateral. All maintenance and cleaning shall be the
responsibility of the property owners' association or owner.
Subd. 9. Roadways:
a. Private roadways within the project shall have an improved surface of twenty five feet (25) or more
in width and shall be so designed as to permit fire trucks to provide protection to each building. Parking
shall be prohibited within this twenty five foot (25') roadway.
b. No portion of the required private road system may be used in calculating required off-street parking
space.
Subd. 10. Landscaping: In any PUD, landscaping shall be provided according to a plan approved by the City
Council, which shall include a detailed planting list with sizes and species indicated as part of the final
plat. In assessing the landscaping plan, the City Council shall consider the natural features of the
particular site, the architectural characteristics of the proposed structures and the overall scheme of the
PUD plan.
Subd. 11. Public Services: The proposed project shall be served by the City water and sewer system, and fire
hydrants shall be installed at such locations as required by the Fire Chief to provide fire protection.
Subd. 12. Building Height: Height limitations shall be the same as imposed in the respective districts, unless
the City Council determines additional height or stories would serve a better purpose consistent with
the stated intent of this Chapter. (Amended, Ord. 755, 2-14-05)
Subd. 13. Refuse: Provision for trash pick-up shall be made according to a plan approved by the Planning
Commission and City Council.
Subd. 14. Site Improvement Agreement: Prior to the issuance of a building permit as part ofthe planned unit
development, the permit applicant, builder or developer shall execute and deliver to the City Council a
site improvement agreement providing for the installation within one (1) year of all of the off-site and
on-site improvements as approved by the City Council, secured by a cash escrow or surety bond in an
amount and with surety acrd conditions satisfactory to the City, to insure the City that such
improvements will be actually constructed and installed according to specifications and plans approved
by the City as sxpressedin such agreement. The ainomit ofthe bond shall be one arid. ons; -half (1.1/2)
times the est dated cosi of the improvements as eick.. -pined by the Director of Pnu'Ic Works/City
Engineer. (1928 Code ".=1.0.24)
1120.03 1120.03 (Rev. 5/10)
1120.03: SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS:
Subd. 1. Residential Planned Unit Development:
a. Purpose: It is the intent of this subdivision to establish special requirements for the granting of a
conditional use permit for residential PUD projects which are in compliance with the permitted and
conditional uses allowed in a specific district, including dwellings, offices and institutional uses of one
(1) or more buildings in relation to an overall design and integrated physical plan and in accordance
with the provisions and procedures as prescribed in this Title.
b. Minimum Project Size: The tract of land for which a planned unit development, general residential
project is proposed and permit requested shall contain not less than three (3) acres of land.
c. Required Frontage: The tract of land for which a project is proposed and permit requested shall have
a width of not less than two hundred feet (200) perpendicular to the side lot line or have two hundred
feet (200) of frontage on the public right of way, whichever is most restrictive.
d. Yards:
(1) The front, side and rear yard restrictions at the periphery of the planned unit development
site, at a minimum, shall be the same as imposed in the respective districts.
(2) No building shall be nearer than its building height to the rear or side property line when
such line abuts an R-1 or R-2 use district.
(3) No building shall be located less than twenty feet (20) from the back of the curb line along
those roadways which are part of the internal street pattern.
(4) No building within the project shall be nearer to another building than one-half (1/2) the
sum of the building heights of the two (2) buildings.
e. Density Bonus: As a consequence of a planned unit development's planned and integrated character,
the number of dwelling units allowed within the respective zoning district may be increased by ten
percent (10%). The building, parking and similar requirements for these extra units shall be observedni
compliance with this Title.
f Tovgihouses and Condominiums:
(1) tv(ininmm unit lot fronfage for 1c.v Arouses shall be imt less than twenty feet (20').
(2) Dwelling unit and accessoicy use rc.quirements are in compfianrc with the district provi,,,iom,
in which the development is planned.
(3) A townhouse shall have not more than two (2) stories.
(4) No single townhouse shall contain more than eight (8) dwelling units.
1120.03 1120.03 (Rev. 5110)
(5) No townhouse shall have a single exterior wall longer than eighty feet (80') nor an offset
between walls of more than ten feet (10').
(6) Townhouse projects shall have a usable open space area equal to four hundred (400) square
feet per dwelling.
(7) Condominium buildings containing eight (8) units or less and not more than two (2) stories
may entail zero (0) lot line construction; provided, that the association covenant provides for it
accordingly.
g. Senior Housing: (Added, Ord. 814, 10-1-08)
(1) The building must have at least sixty percent (60%) of its units designated for assisted
living or memory or Alzheimer's care for the City to consider the preject or building as a planned unit
development. (Added, Ord. 814,10-1-08)
(2) The tract of land for which a planned unit development, senior housing project is proposed
and permit requested shall contain not less than two (2) acres of land. (Added, Ord. 814, 10-1-08)
(3) The front, side and rear yard building setbacks of the planned unit development site, at a
minimum, shall be:
(a) Front= 30 feet
(b) Side= 20 feet
(c) Rear = 30 feet, or 50 feet if abutting residential
(Added, Ord. 814,10-1-08)
(4) The parking recommendations are as follows, unless the City Council determines more or
less parking stalls would serve a better purpose: Parking spaces recommended are:
(a) Independent living = 1 space per unit with half of the spaces enclosed
(b) Assisted living = 0.5 spaces per unit
(c) Nursing homes and memory care = 1 space for every 4 beds
(d) Facility staff = 1 space for every employee on the largest shift
(Added, Ord. 814, 10-1-08)
(5) The permanent residents residing in independent living units shall be limited to persons
who are fifty five ('i) ;years of age or over c_ccepi that one (1) other family m(,c jbr:r or designated
caregiver may reside Frith the permanei-t senior r%sident in accordance voifl_r -ny pertinent lease
provision. (A(Idcd, Clsd. 814, 10-1-08)
(6) The City may require the developer or builder of senior lhousnzg to install screening and
buffering, such as landscaping, berming or fencing (or a conihination. of these methods), to help
protect neighboring properties. (Added, Ord. 814, 10-1-08)
1120.03 1120.03 (Rev. 5/10)
Subd. 2. Commercial or Industrial Planned Unit Development:
a. Purpose: The intent of this subdivision is to establish special requirements for the granting of a
conditional use permit to allow commercial or industrial PUD projects which are in compliance with
the permitted and conditional uses allowed in a specific district in one or more buildings in relation to
an overall design and an integrated physical plan.
b. Minimum Project Size: The tract of land for which a planned unit development, commercial or
industrial project is proposed and permit is requested shall contain not less than five (5) acres for
commercial and industrial projects.
c. Frontage: The tract of land for which a project is proposed and a permit requested shall have a width
of not less than two hundred feet (200') perpendicular to the side lot line or have two hundred feet
(200') of frontage on the public right of way, whichever is most restrictive.
d. Yard: No building shall be nearer than fifty feet (50) to the side or rear property line when such line
abuts an R-1, R-2 or R-3 use district.
e. Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing:
(1) The entire site, other than that taken up by structures or landscaping, shall be surfaced with
a material to control dust, drainage and erosion.
(2) A drainage system conforming to the comprehensive storm drainage plan and subject to
approval of the Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall be installed.
(3) Development abutting an R-1, R-2 or R-3 District shall be screened and landscaped in
compliance with subdivisions 1103.08(1) through (5) of this Title.
Subd. 3. Mixed Use Planned Unit Development:
a. Purpose: The intent of this subdivision is to establish special requirements for the granting of a
zoning district amendment to allow mixed use PUD projects which are in compliance with the
permitted and conditional uses allowed within the PUD District and in accordance with the provisions
and procedures as prescribed in this subdivision.
b. Minimum Project Size: The tract of land for whicha, mixed use PUD is proposed shall not contain
to � thal, i iv (5) acres.
c.1_o�.ia :Thetractoflandto_vi—,i1i6 project is proposed sh,'.iih<.vcawidth ofnot les,L.i�_._'c;�ro
li.i,.ndred °c et (200') perpendicular to the side lot line or have two hutndred feet (200) of frontage ori the
public rinht of way, whichever is most restricfrve.
d. Yards: Minimum setbacks shall be the same as imposed in the respective PUD use districts.
e. Landscaping, Screening and Surfacing: All site treatment shall be consistent with the requirements
of subdivisions 1103.08(1) through (5) of this Title.
1120.03
1120.04 (Rev. 5/10)
f. Staging of Residential Development: Whenever any mixed PUD is to be developed in stages, the
proportion of residential development completed at any stage, when averaged with all previously
completed stages, shall not exceed the proportion of residential development planned for the entire
mixed PUD. (1988 Code §40.24)
1120.04: PROCEDURE:
Subd. 1. Application Conference: Upon filing of an application for PUD, the applicant of the proposed PUD
shall arrange for and attend a conference with the City staff. At such conference, the applicant shall be
prepared to generally describe applicant's proposal for a PUD. The primary purpose of the conference
shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the
general suitability of and conformity to the provisions of this Title before incurring substantial expense
in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data.
Subd. 2. General Concept Plan:
a. Purpose: The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the
City showing applicant's basic intent and the general nature ofthe entire development without incurring
substantial cost. This concept plan serves as the basis for the public hearing so that the proposal may be
publicly considered at an early stage. The following elements of the proposed general concept plan
represent the immediately significant elements which the City shall review and for which a decision
shall be rendered:
(1) Overall maximum PUD density range.
(2) General location of major streets and pedestrianways.
(3) General location and extent of public and common open space.
(4) General location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and
intensities of development.
(5) Staging and time schedule of development.
(6) Other special criteria for development.
b. Process:
(1) Developer attends applicatioilconference.
(2) File application for a conditional use permit or rezoning concurrently with the submission
of the general concept plan (at least twenty one (21) days prior to PIarming Cormnission meeting)
consisting of the information and submissions required under subdivision 1120.05(1) of this Chapter,
General Concept Stage.
(3) City staff reviews application, prepares report and recommendations.
1120.04 1120.04 (Rev. 5/10)
plan.
(4) Planning Commission receives application and report of City staff.
(5) Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council on the general concept
(6) City Council holds a public hearing.
(7) City Council reviews all recommendations and approves/denies application(s).
c. Optional Submission of Development Stage Plan: In cases of single stage PUDs or where the
applicant wishes to begin the first stage of a multiple stage PUD immediately, applicant may, at
applicant's option, submit development stage plans for the proposed PUD simultaneously with the
submission of the general concept plan. In such case, the applicant shall comply with all the provisions
of this Chapter applicable to submission of the development stage plan.
d. Limitation of General Concept Plan Approval: Unless a development stage plan has been filed
within nine (9) months from the date City Council grants general concept plan approval, or in any case
where applicant fails to file development stage and final plans and to proceed with development in
accordance with the provisions of this Title and of an approved general concept plan, the approval may
be revoked by City Council action. The City Council, at its discretion, may extend the filing deadline
for a development stage plan when, for good cause shown, such extension is necessary.
Subd. 3. Development Stage:
a. Purpose: The purpose of the development stage plan is to provide a specific and particular plan
upon which the Planning Commission will base its recommendation to the City Council and with
which substantial compliance is necessary for the preparation of the final plan.
b. Submission of Development Stage: Upon approval of the general concept plan, the applicant shall
file with the City Administrator a development stage plan consisting of the information and
submissions required under subdivision 1120.05(2) of this Chapter for the entire PUD or for one (1) or
more stages thereof in accordance with a staging plan approved as part ofthe general concept plan. The
development stage plan shall refine, implement and be in substantial conformity with the approved
general concept plan. (Amended, Ord. 844,5-20-10)
c. Review and Action by City Staff and Planning Conunission: Upon a receipt of a completed
development stage plan, the City Administrator shall refer such plan to the appropriate City staff,
PIanninS, ommission and other (Amended, Ord. 2z!!., 5-20-10)
6. Process:
(1) Developer makes application for subdivision (first phasa of PUD) at least tweai;yy one (2 J-)
days prior to Placing Commission meeting.
1120.04
1120.04 (Rev. 5/10)
(2) Within sixty (60) days of the submission, or such further time as may be agreed to by the
applicant, the Planning Commission shall review the development stage and submit a written report and
recommendations to the City Council. Such report shall contain the findings and recommendations of
the Planning Commission with respect to the conformity of the development stage plan to the approved
general concept plan, with respect to the merit or lack of merit of any departure of the development
stage plan fiom substantial conformity with the concept plan, and with respect to the compliance of the
development stage plan with the provisions of this Title and all other applicable Federal, State and local
codes and ordinances.
(3) Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the report and recommendations of the Planning
Commission, the City Council shall conduct apublic hearing on the plans. Thereafter, the City Council
may grant approval, resubmit the plan to the Planning Commission for further consideration or deny
approval of the plan.
(4) Upon City Council approval, the City Attorney shall draw up a PUD agreement which
stipulates the specific terms and conditions established and approved by the City Council and accepted
by the applicant. This agreement shall be signed by the Mayor, the City Administrator and the
applicant. (Amended, Ord. 844,5-20-10)
(5) Where the development stage plan is denied approval, City Council action shall be by
resolution setting forth the reasons for its action. A certified copy of the document evidencing City
Council action shall be delivered to the applicant.
e. Limitation on Detailed Plan Approval: Unless a final plan covering the area designated in the fust
stage of the development stage plan has been filed within six (6) months fiom the date City Council
grants development stage plan approval or in any case where the applicant fails to file final plans and to
proceed with development in accordance with the provisions of this Title and/or an approved
development stage plan, the approval shall expire. The City Council may, at its discretion, extend for
not more than one additional period of six (6) months the filing deadline for any final plan when, for
good cause shown, such extension is necessary. In any case, where development plan approval expires,
the City Council shall forthwith adopt a resolution repealing the general concept plan approval and the
development stage plan approval for that portion of the PUD that has not received final plan approval
and re-establishing the zoning and other ordinance provisions that would otherwise be applicable.
f Review and Evaluation Criteria: The evaluation of the proposed development stage plan shall
include, but not be limited to, the following criteria:
(1) Adc.quatepropertycontrolisprovidcdtoprotecttheindividualo-;,_:cr'srightsandproperty
values and the public responsibility for owe i! _aintenance and upkeep.
(2) The interior circulation plan phis access from and onto puLlic rid-.iits of way does not create
congestion or dangers and is adequate for die safety of the project residents and the general public.
(3) A sufficient amount of usable open space is provided.
(4) The arrangement of buildings, structures and accessory uses does not unreasonably disturb
the privacy or property values of the surrounding residential uses.
1120.04 1120.04 (Rev. 5/10)
(5) The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding area.
(6) The drainage and utility system plans are submitted to and subject to the approval of the
Director of Public Works/City Engineer.
(7) The development schedule insures a logical development of the site which will protect the
public interest and conserve land.
(8) The development is in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 1010 and Titles 1200
and 1300 of this Code.
(9) Dwelling unit and accessory use requirements are in compliance with the district provisions
in which the development is planned.
Subd. 4. Final Plan:
a. Purpose: The final plan is to serve as a complete, thorough and permanent public record of the PUD
and the manner in which it is to be developed. It shall incorporate all prior approved plans and all
approved modifications thereof resulting from the PUD process. It shall serve in conjunction with
other City ordinances as the land use regulation applicable to the PUD.
b. Submission of the Final Plan: Upon approval of the development stage plan, the applicant shall file
with the City Administrator a final plan consisting of the information and submissions required by
subdivision 1120.05(3), Final Plan Stage, of this Chapter for the entire PUD or for one (1) or more
stages. The final plan is intended only to add detail to and to put in final form the information
contained in the general concept plan and the development stage plan and shall conform to the
development stage plan in all respects. (Amended, Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
c. Review of Final Plan: The Director of Public Works/City Engineer shall review the final plans to
assure their compliance with the general concept and development stage plans and shall require
appropriate revisions by the applicant wherever they do not so comply. The Director of Public
Works/City Engineer shall report the findings to the City Administrator who shall notify the applicant,
in writing, of approval of the final plan. (Amended, Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
d. Recording of Final Plan: Within ten (10) days of the City Administrator's notice of approval, the
applicant shall cause the final plan, or such portions thereof as are appropriate, to be recorded with the
County Register of Deeds or Register of Tifles. (Amended, Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
c. Ern'If ding and Other Permits: Upc o receiving notice from the Cii�r Administrator that the apprn
i plan has been rerordect i, m:an appropriate appl:ca ,, � he applicant, bmId:n:g o ter
peri-_ts may be issued to the api,licant for developrncnt, cons4n>ction and other work in the area
encompassed by the approved finalplan; provided, hot ;ever, fl_<iro such permit shalt b- issued ui, less
the requirements of all applicable codes and ordinances have been satisfied. (Amended, Ord. 84,4, 5-
20-10)
1120.04
1120.05 (Rev. 5/10)
f Limitation of Final Plan Approval: Within one year after the approval of a final plan for PUD, or
such shorter time as may be established by the approved development schedule, construction shall
commence in accordance with such approved plan. Failure to commence construction within such
period shall, unless an extension shall have been granted as hereinafter provided, automatically render
void the PUD permit and all approvals of the PUD plan. The area encompassed within the PUD shall
thereafter be subj ect to those provisions of the zoning ordinances and other ordinances applicable in the
district in which it is located. In such case, the City Council shall forthwith adopt a resolution repealing
the PUD permit and PUD approvals and re-establishing the zoning and other ordinance provisions that
would otherwise be applicable.
g. Annual Review: The Zoning Administrator shall review each planned unit development at least
once each year and shall make a report through the Commission to the City Council on the status of the
development in each PUD district. If development is not progressing reasonably well, according to
schedule, the owner shall be required to submit a statement to the Zoning Administrator setting forth
the reasons for the lack of progress. If the City Council finds that the development has not occurred
according to the established development schedule or is not otherwise reasonable in the view of the
City Council, the City Council may initiate rezoning(s) to remove the planned unit development
district. In any event, it shall not be necessary for the City Council to find the rezoning to a PUD
district was in error. (1988 Code §40.24)
1120.05: SUBMITTALS: The applicant shall submit a sufficient number of copies, as required by the
City Administrator, of the following exhibits, analyses and plans during the PUD review process: (Amended,
Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
Solid. 1. General Concept Stage:
a. General Information:
(1) The landowner's name and address and landowner's interest in the subject property.
(2) The applicant's name and address if different from the landowner.
(3) The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the
development of the PUD plan being submitted, including attorney, land plainer, engineer and surveyor.
(4) Evidence that the applicant has sufCreientcontrol over the subject property toeffectuate the
proposed PUD, including a statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy and contractual interest held in or
affce Eng tlie subj ect property and inchtdi.ng an up-to-date certified abstract offitle or registered prop-rty
report a.nd each other evidenco as tho CiL>> 2�`_ttoiney may require to sho; -(-status of title or control_ of
the subjectproperty.
b. Present Status:
(1) The address and 1c. -al description of the subject property.
(2) The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and all lands
within five hundred feet (500) of the subject property.
1120.05
1120.05 (Rev. 5110)
(3) A map depicting the existing development of the subject properly and all lands within five
hundred feet (500) thereof and showing the precise location of existing streets, property lines,
easements, water mains and storm and sanitary sewers, with invert elevations on and within one
hundred feet (100') of the subject property.
c. Statement: A written statement generally describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is
intended to serve, showing its relationship to the City's Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed
PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of
neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of the City.
d. Site Conditions:
(1) Where deemed necessary by the City, graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions
at a scale of one hundred feet (100) shall be submitted and shall contain the following:
(a) Contours, minimum two foot (2) intervals.
(b) Location, type and extent of tree cover.
(c) Slope analysis.
(d) Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands and streams and flood plains within three hundred
feet (300) of the subject properly.
(e) Significant rock outcropping.
(f) Existing drainage patterns.
(g) Vistas and significant views.
(h) Soil conditions as they affect development.
(2) All of the graphics should be the same scale as the final plan to allow easy cross-reference.
The use of overlays is recommended for clear reference.
e. Schematic Drawing: Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept, including but not
limited to the general location of major circulation elements, public and cormnon open space,
rr:.�d.ential and other laird uses.
. A statement of the es6 _,tai number of dv.Tclri_ruri"r, i�roposed for the PU_U and a -'solation
of the proposed appro�J a,ai(e allocations of land use; in acres and as a percent of the total
project area which shall includc at least the following:
(1) Arca devoted to residential uses.
(2) Area devoted to residential use by building type.
(3) Area devoted to common open space.
1120.05
1120.05 (Rev. 5/10)
(4) Area devoted to public open space.
(5) Approximate area devoted to streets.
(6) Approximate area, and potential floor area, devoted to commercial uses.
(7) Approximate area, and potential floor area, devoted to industrial or office uses.
g. Stages: When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond a
single construction season, a schedule for the development of such stages or units shall be submitted
stating the approximate beginning and completion date for each such stage or unit and the proportion of
the total PUD public or common open space and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during
each such stage and the overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage.
h. Open Space: When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common open space or
service facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the care and maintenance of
such open space or service facilities shall be submitted. If it is proposed that such open space be owned
and/or maintained by any entity other than a governmental authority, copies of the proposed articles of
incorporation and bylaws of such entity shall be submitted during the development stage.
L Restrictive Covenants: General intents of any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded with
respect to property included in the proposed PUD.
J. Feasibility Study: Where deemed necessary, a market feasibility study, including an analysis of the
proposal's economic impact on the City shall be submitted.
Subd. 2. Development Stage: Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed
implementation of the general concept stage for the PUD. Information from the general concept stage
may be included for background and to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development stage
submissions shall include, but not be limited to:
a. Zoning classification required for development stage submission and any other public decision
necessary for implementation of the proposed plan.
b. Preliminary plans, drawn to a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred feet (1" =100') (or
scale requested by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer) containing at least the following
information:
(1} Proposed naive of tic 6:evelopinent (which shall nc duplicate nor be simihi-
proscaniationtothenanieofr�nyrleraheretoforerecordectiritfieCot.2 wherein the subje(-.t:propeay
si(naacrl).
(2) Proper�y boundary lines and dimensions oftheproperly and any si.-iiij'i,,-atittopo-,raptlicaI or
physical features of the property.
(3) The location, size, use and arrangement including height in stones and feet and total square
feet of ground area coverage and floor area, or proposed building, and existing buildings which will
remain, if any.
1120.05
1120.05 (Rev. 5110)
(4) The location, dimensions and number of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls,
loading spaces and access aisles and all other circulation elements, including bike and pedestrian and
the total site coverage of all circulation elements.
(5) Location, designation and total area of all common open space.
(6) Proposed lots and blocks, if any, and numbering system.
(7) The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties.
(8) Preliminary sketches of proposed landscaping.
(9) General grading and drainage plans for the developed PUD.
(10) Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission or City
Council in conjunction with the approval of the general concept plan.
c. An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final development plan
approval is sought.
d. A tabulation indicating the approximate gross square footage, if any, of commercial and industrial
floor space by type of activity (e.g., drugstore, dry cleaning, supermarket).
e. Preliminary architectural plans indicating use, floor plan, elevations and exterior wall finishes of
proposed buildings, including mobile homes.
f A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and purpose of all
streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lots, block, public and common open space,
general landscaping plan, structures, including mobile homes, and uses.
g. Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural
site vegetation. The plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the
approved concept plan.
h. A preliminary and final plat prepared by a land surveyor, duly registered in the State in accordance
with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 505, which shall contain a notarized certification by such surveyor
that the plat represents a survey made by the surveyor and that the monuments shown herein exist as
located and that all dimensions are correct, as required by rection 505.03, subdivision ",'i: innesota
Statutes Annotated, and C tarizedceitificatiollbymvn<<crownersoftheadoAor „latandthe
dedication of mr ,-r public areas as regvr by Section 505.03, subd� lsiotr L Aimresota
Statutes Annotates.
i. A soil_ erosion control plan approved by the appropriate watershed districts, Department of Natural
Resources or any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion measures to be used
during construction and as permanent measures.
1120.05
1120.05 (Rev. 5/10)
j. A statement summarizing all changes which have been made in any document, plan data or
information previously submitted, together with revised copies of any such document, plan or data.
k. Such other and further information as the Planning Commission, Director of Public Works/City
Engineer or City Council shall find necessary to a full consideration of the entire proposed PUD or any
stage thereof.
1. The Planning Commission may, by a written order, excuse any applicant from submitting any
specific item of information or document required herein which it finds to be unnecessary to the
consideration of the specific proposal for PUD approval.
Subd. 3. Final Plat Stage: After approval of a general concept plan for the PUD and approval of a
development stage plan for a Section of the proposed PUD, the applicant will submit the following
material for review by City staff prior to issuance of a building or other permits:
a. A detailed landscaping plan.
b. Proof of recording any easements and restrictive covenants prior to the sale of any land or dwelling
unit within the PUD and of the establishment and activation of any entity that is to be responsible for
the management and maintenance of any public or common open space or service facility.
c. All certificates, seals and signatures required for the dedication of land and recordation of
documents.
d. Final architectural working drawings of all structures.
e. Final engineering plans and specifications for streets, utilities and other public improvements,
together with a community/developer agreement for the installation of such improvements and financial
guarantees for the completion of such improvements.
f Any other plan, agreements or specifications necessary for the City staff to review the proposed
construction. (1988 Code §40.24)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
May 15, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for May 15, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Elofson, Rundle, Schiltgen, Stevenson and Smith.
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu and Love.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
VR2013-001. Consideration of a Variance for Reduced Side and 2
Rear Yard Setbacks
CU2013-002. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an 3
Oversized Garage
Discuss City Code Updates for Renewable Energy Systems 4
3. Approval of Minutes
April 17, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Smith/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the Minutes of
the April 17, 2013 regular Plamling Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
May 15, 2013
Page 2
A. VR2013-001 Consideration of a Variance for Reduced Side and Rear Yard
Setbacks
Applicant: Richard & Laurol Boik, property owners
Address: 8385 Groveland Court
Planning Associate Heller indicated Richard and Laurel Boik were requesting a variance to the
side and rear yards to allow for an addition to their home at 8385 Groveland Court. The addition
would encroach two feet into the required 10 -foot side yard setback and 4-6 inches into the
existing 25 -foot rear yard setback. The Boik's want to build a 16' x 26' addition with a covered
porch, bedroom and bathroom on the side of their house for Laurol's mother who has recently
moved in.
Associate Heller explained the Boik's have a multi-level home at the end of a cul-de-sac. She
indicated the lot was shallow and the current rear yard setback was 25 feet instead of the City
Code required 30 feet. The Boik family had a variance in place currently for their rear yard
setback. It was her opinion there was enough space on the lot for the addition and there would
still be more than 30 feet between the Boik home and adjacent home.
Associate Heller commented that as with any variance application, the Planning Commission
would have to see a demonstrated practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a
literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. Staff
reviewed the variance criteria in detail and requested the Commission hold a public hearing and
take action on the variance request.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
Chair Stevenson asked if the exterior building materials on the addition would match the exterior
of the current home.
Laurel Boik, 8385 Groveland Court, stated the materials would be the same.
Chair Stevenson questioned what type of trees would be removed from their lot.
Ms. Boik stated one oak tree would be lost with the addition.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Mounds View Planning Commission May 15, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 3
Commissioner Rundle questioned if any comments were received from the neighbors.
Associate Heller indicated the property owner to the north was in the audience and fully
supported the addition.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution
979-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance for Reduced Side and Rear Yard
Setbacks; Planning Case No. VR2013-001.
Ayes — 5
Nays — 0
Motion carried.
B. CU2013-002 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize
Garage
Applicant: Allen Hambleton, property owner
Address: 8478 Long Lake Road
Planning Associate Heller commented the applicant, Allen Hambleton, was requesting approval
of a conditional use permit to construct an oversize detached garage on his property at 8478
Long Lake Road. The applicant wants to build a new 22' x 56' detached garage behind the
existing detached garage. It was noted any building larger than 952 square feet must get City
approval through the conditional use permitting process.
Associate Heller explained City Code limits backyard building coverage to 20% of the yard area
and this garage would use approximately 8% of the backyard area. She indicated the total
accessory building square feet with the existing garage and the new garage would be 1,783
square feet, which is below the maximum of 1,800 square feet limit. The roof shall match or be
similar to the character and style of the roof of the principal structure. Since the house has a very
steep roof, the new garage roof pitch should be similar to the existing detached garage.
Associate Heller reviewed the request in further detail and recommended the Commission
approve the conditional use permit.
Commissioner Schiltgen questioned what type of driving surface would lead back to the new
garage.
Allen Hambleton, 8478 Long Lake Road, indicated he has received estimates for both blacktop
and concrete driveways.
Chair Stevenson asked if the garage had to be 56' in length
Mr. Hambleton explained he was making the request as he had the space on his lot and had many
items to store indoors. He stated he could go shorter, but already had a 26' boat and 24' trailer
that would be placed in the garage.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Commissioner Smith inquired how the building would be sided.
May 15, 2013
Page 4
Mr. Hambleton stated he was proposing to have a steel -sided building that would match the color
of the home.
Commissioner Schiltgen questioned if the garage would be able to be seen from the street.
Associate Heller stated the second garage would not likely be seen from the street.
Commissioner Scbiltgen did not oppose to the size of the garage but requested the siding match
the existing home color.
Commissioner Smith asked if the adjacent property owners bad privacy fences.
Mr. Hambleton stated there was not a fence on his property in place at this time, but he was
considering adding a privacy fence in the rear yard to screen the garage from the neighbors. He
did not oppose this requirement.
Chair Stevenson suggested a privacy fence be required to provide a buffer on the west property
line.
The Commission agreed with this recommendation.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution
980-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize
Garage; Planning Case No. CU2013-002.
Chair Stevenson recommended the Resolution add a condition that would require a privacy fence
on the west property line. In addition, the Commission requested another condition be added
requiring an improved hard surface be installed to service the new garage within 6 months of the
garage being completed.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss City Code Updates for Renewable Energy Systems
Planning Associate Heller indicated Brian Ross with CR Planning was present this evening to
discuss grant funding available for City Code updates that would incorporate solar and
renewable energy.
Brian Ross, CR Planning, discussed the Minnesota Solar Challenge in detail with the
Commission. He noted this was part of a national program called the Rooftop Challenge. The
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 15, 2013
Page 5
goal was to make solar energy competitive with other energy sources by 2020 in order to create a
self-sustaining solar energy market.
Mr. Ross explained another goal was to get solar energy cost down to $1 per watt. He noted the
cost of solar panels has dropped considerably in the last 20 years. Barriers to solar energy were
discussed in detail. He stated local government code and permitting processes were key in
moving solar energy forward. The capacity of solar radiation in Minnesota was reviewed along
with how it varied by time of day, seasons, local landscape and through weather patterns.
Mr. Ross further defined how a space could be used as a solar resource. Solar technologies
available in Minnesota were then discussed. He noted there were building integrated systems,
along with roof -mounted and ground mounted systems available. He encouraged Mounds View
to remember that solar energy was a renewable energy and belongs in the Comprehensive Plan.
He noted solar energy was becoming more cost competitive and people will want to take
advantage of this. For this reason, communities need to plan accordingly and make decisions on
how and where solar installations are done.
Mr. Ross discussed federal and state laws regarding solar energy. He indicated the best way to
regulate solar development within the City was at a local level. He then reviewed the City of
Roseville's Comprehensive Plan regarding the use of solar energy. He encouraged Mounds
View to treats solar energy best practices at a zoning level. A model ordinance with best zoning
practices was then discussed in detail with the Commission. Mr. Ross thanked the Commission
for their time this evening and asked for comments or questions.
Chair Stevenson questioned how many communities were currently prepared for solar energy
development.
Mr. Ross indicated as part of the Solar Challenge he was working with 20 communities at this
time. Prior to that, he had only worked with Minneapolis and St. Paul. He understood solar
energy to be a new technology and encouraged Mounds View to update their Code to assist with
potential future solar development.
Associate Heller asked if wind energy was becoming popular in the metro area.
Mr. Ross indicated wind energy was not as popular in an urban setting because it really doesn't
work well in the city. He stated the primary issue with wind energy is that typically unless the
turbine is at least 200 feet away from anything, it is useless and the turbine does not move.
There are also problems with them using more energy than they make and noise.
Associate Heller questioned if any communities were not allowing wind energy systems.
Mr. Ross commented this was happening as wind resources were more limited. He indicated he
had a model wind ordinance available if the City was interested in reviewing this language.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
May 15, 2013
Page 6
Council Member Meehlhause inquired if any neighboring communities to Mounds View were
addressing solar energy.
Mr. Ross stated he has spoken with representatives from Shoreview and several other members
attended his recent workshop, but he was not working with any adjoining communities at this
time.
Chair Stevenson thanked Mr. Ross for this presentation this evening.
Associate Heller encouraged the Commission to review the information presented this evening as
the City will need to consider how to address solar and wind energy use code amendments for
the City of Mounds View.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. June 5, 2013
B. June 19, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. May 1, 2013
The Commission discussed the May 1, 2013 meeting minutes and noted several changes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She noted the City Council
approved the purchase agreement for the Robert's Sports Bar property on Monday evening. The
site would hopefully be combined with two adjacent parcels and be redeveloped. She
commented the Northwood Industries and North Metro Motors CUP's were approved by the
Council on Monday.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Commissioner Elofson questioned how the Coventry Senior Living development was
progressing.
Associate Heller indicated the Council extended the Final Plat again on Monday evening and
Coventry was working to finalize the financing and construction plans.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Commissioner Smith asked if the dental office would move forward.
May 15, 2013
Page 7
Associate Heller explained their purchase agreement had been extended, and it appears that
financing is still being finalized and the City fully supported the request.
Chair Stevenson recommended the PUD language for the County Highway 10 corridor be
reviewed and amended by the Commission given the new potential for redevelopment in the
City.
Associate Heller noted this would come before the Commission in June.
11. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 9:01 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
Thne.S'aver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
- -
MoUNpS_ VIE -W
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
June 19, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
May 15, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-003 Variance for Reduced Front Setback of a New House
Address: 7313 Spring Lake Road
Applicant: Ron Santanni, Santanni Custom Homes (builder/property owner)
6. Other Planning Activity
A. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Tuesday, July 9, 2013 (Note week & date change)
B. Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (Note week & date change)
8. Review Minutes:
A. June 5, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
MOr TAme i. TFEW— Item No: 5A
v1VLJ �/il�.�V Meeting Date: June 19, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to allow a 30.5 -foot Front Setback
at 7313 Spring Lake Road; Planning Case VR2013-003
Introduction:
The applicant, Ron Santanni, with Santanni Custom Homes, one of the property owners of
7313 Spring Lake Road is requesting a variance to allow a new house to have a 30.5 -foot
front setback, which is 6.5 feet less than the prevailing setback on the block. The City Code
requires a minimum 30 -foot, or the prevailing setback on the block for new homes, without a
variance.
Discussion:
7313 Spring Lake Road is a vacant lot on the northeast corner of Spring Lake Road and
County Road H2. The applicant is part of an investment group that recently purchased the
property and he plans to build a new home. This lot was originally combined with the
property to the north, but the parcel was subdivided in 2011 creating two lots, one with the
existing house and this vacant lot. At the time of the subdivision, it was discussed that the
prevailing front setbacks on both Spring Lake Road and County Road H2 were larger and
would make it more difficult to place a house and meet all the setbacks on this new vacant
lot.
The parcel is 0.40 acres (162' wide x 107' deep), but since it is a corner lot, it has two front
yards. New homes must meet the front setbacks for both streets, along with the rear
setback. The City Code requires that front setbacks be a minimum of 30 feet or what the
prevailing setback is on the block, and rear setbacks are a minimum of 30 feet. The
proposed house cannot meet both the front prevailing setback of 37 feet and the code
required 30 foot rear setback. The house is placed facing Spring Lake Road since it has
much less traffic than County Road H2, and is planned to have a front setback of 30.5 feet
and a rear setback of 30.6 feet.
The Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission may issue a variance to provide
relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical difficulties to the
property owner in the use of the property owner's land. This is true for all variance requests.
State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each
application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set
forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. A variance may be granted only in
the event that all of the following circumstances exist:
7313 Spring Lake Rad Variance Repoli
June 19, 2013
Page 2
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these
regulations.
The zoning code requires minimum setbacks for aesthetics along the street and to
provide separation from the street and between neighbors. The required setbacks
typically can be met, but this lot is on a corner and both streets have larger than
normal front prevailing setbacks which is causing the difficulty in meeting the front
and rear setbacks.
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties, and certainly
encourages new home construction.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The applicant requests that the new house meet the 30 -foot City Code minimum front
setback requirement instead of the larger prevailing setbacks that are on both Spring
Lake Road and County Road H2. If the front setbacks on the streets were the typical
30 feet, there would not be a problem meeting the setback. The applicant wants the
house to face Spring Lake Road since County Road H2 is a high traffic street.
Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title
has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The applicant purchased the property as is, and all of the surrounding homes have
existed for many years. Both Spring Lake Road and County Road H2 have larger
than usual front setbacks since almost all of the lots on these streets are very deep.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The proposed house will still have a 30 feet setback, which is the minimum code
required amount. The house directly across Spring Lake Road from the applicant's
property is setback less than 30 feet. This area of both Spring Lake Road and County
Road H2 have deep lots so the front setbacks vary for many of the houses. Neither
street has a consistent front setback for all the homes, so a new house with a different
front setback will not alter the neighborhood character.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The 6.5 foot variance is the minimum variance needed since the Zoning Code
requires the prevailing setback, which in this case is 37 feet, for a front setback.
7313 Spring Lake Rad Variance Report
June 19, 2013
Page 3
The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited
by a variance as maybe necessary to comply with the standards established by this
Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon otherproperties in the
neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must
be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by
the variance.
Staff does not have any suggested conditions.
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, this application requires a public hearing. Staff mailed
notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant's property and a notice was
published in the Sun Focus newspaper on Thursday, June 6, 2013. Staff has not received
any comments as of June 14, 2013.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant
and the public. The Commission may take one of the following actions related to the
request:
1. Approve the variances as requested. Resolution 984-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variances. The Commission should direct staff to draft
resolutions of denial with findings appropriate to support the denials.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before
making a decision or if they decide there is a need for more discussion, the Commission
can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided.
Respectfully Submitted By,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Proposed House Elevation
4. Survey showing proposed house on the lot
5. Resolution 984-13
ZONING MAP
�w
732
z 327
dt
7344
73
7465
7215 719
7191 R-4
7180
7457
Y 325
N
7338
vr)
/
Y
7150
7317
a d
n 7310
N
N
7462
N
N
II
7447
C8
0) 00)
7448
N
7445
7425
N
7430
DR
7435
w
x
II
7415
7406
7405
p
l
p
l O
c�
N00
I71nn
�....�
M
I N
w
7385
7380
a
7381
II
7375
7350
U)
7365
I
7365
I�
7347
3
��732
33
rn
"s
N
w o
o
M
O
M
O
M
r7
O
M
G
M
N
o
a
m M
O
o
7290
M
M
oN
n
ov
M
N C
7280
-
7285
0
7270
3:
O
7275
n
7260
O
7265
o
HIDDEN
=
N
n
7255
�
U -)
n
n
n
n
7161
7149
7137
7125 I n
t
0
7474 7471 747 r '- 1 `" 1 N 1 "
W> BRONSON 74.
7 4 17373
0 00
m C> 7444N N N7434 7442 74 7440 PAI
7412 7408 73
7400 W 73
73827390 77360 73
340 7350 73
2 73
v
ao o 'O 104
p77
N N N N N I N N0 P
732
z 327
dt
7344
73
to
7215 719
7191 R-4
7180
7200
Y 325
N
7338
vr)
/
Y
7150
7317
a d
n 7310
N
N
N
N
N
3152
o]
C8
0) 00)
v
ao o 'O 104
p77
N N N N N I N N0 P
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
0
7234
O
7226
to
7215 719
7191 R-4
7180
7200
7188
7172
7151
m
7150
7111
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
I
n
It
to
N
m
7111
N
N
N
N
M
M
0) 00)
N
N
N
WOODALE
DR
w
x
p
l
p
l O
N1
N00
I71nn
�....�
M
I N
w
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
Aerial View
Oolor
4
4A
�+ • a3i i a .a I� Y� _
-{yp�lililMis _ t
�lNuwlill�i � -.
No rthstat,'t�i
Survey of New House Location
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY PROPOSED HOME
-for- SANTANNI CUSTOM HOMES 7313 Spring Lake Road
I 1903 /0-_
i
.,L,/
904.19
502.11 LINE OF THE NORTH 1
!I
/'--202.50 FEET 0E LOT 90 I
u S88°19'16)'W 107.40 02.59
01.95 �2.19 ---------
m
9
30X89 Jvvv{i I
1 Ib 902.49 5 902.39
FILL: 25 TO fix, 1- �: FIKEID
TO° OE WALL
0 901 99
001 99
90 9z 1 >< 91ve10 X902.14
90219 90112 17'+ 11
OAN20 Mei 11l 11 I 1 901. (Ix
. 1
tT� -` 00.40" 901.15 0� 90139
MAPIC -�N1 120.50 0 Wµ 901.05 901.:591 THfi y
{y, 1 1 10.00 1 17r
l{9`Dj \.I� Io "900 �31I f>� r -i
O _., 30.5 -_ 2.00 iv O� 11.50 901.08 109201 (n
9m,23 p-�ro(iosCd[��o I Q 0 1 0
�r
Drive„0 1 c> o a 901,x, snz49 - -
ti
9o039 r
c6EL _ 8001 1 n ro 326 ' pim
9D0.3' 900.15 O -U » -_- 901 61.
�
\'
1Pk0 1 1 U o H' � 901,39 �{L9
w
/� NCV I 36.00 900_32 _ 32.4 --�
V 9D3.19
900.31
(Z r 0 `O IAai1a i 2' CANT. 1� I N !
L[ c1 �x 900.69901.19 900.39 P5900.63 901.09 �, u
� �, �i�y�•� I ��
V% MAP12 w
FILL: 39 TO _ > k x900.99 >;
902.09 TOP � VIALD 901.09
1.1AP12 -( x90029 OAK2B
x 901.49
900.49 1 i{ MGM ✓(11.29
e1i
Or 9
--- 66 -- -- 90059 �z
! � Q 90199
I � = 900.49 .� s:'. t T;W.59 5
aTIRIO
BENCHMARK:
E City Eng ),t) I 901.59
909.34 901.59 10 L L112ID_
AHC80 90069 DRAINAGE ANU UTILITY EASEMENT
ASH10 1 901 9 O
902.03 ELN10 `-^t 'y 1j�.y 901.b9 90139
• '� ��.1 � L001.0 x901.69
yy0 it � IF �-
II 901.98 107.4090119
9Dzb9 -- s9zas
so2i9 -1 38 19 CliIt 1._so2n� + LINE of LOT 90
n 902 9 902.99
_._-_ -
COUNTY ROAD H2
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 984-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A 6.5 -FOOT VARIANCE FOR THE
FRONT SETBACK OF A NEW HOUSE AT 7313 SPRING LAKE ROAD;
PLANNING CASE VR2012-005
WHEREAS, the applicant, Ron Santanni of Santanni Custom Homes, property owner
of 7313 Spring Lake Road, has applied for a variance to allow a new house to have a 30.5 -
foot front setback, 6.5 feet less than the prevailing front setback on Spring Lake Road; and,
WHEREAS, 7313 Spring Lake Road is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is
legally described as follows:
That part of Lot 90, SPRING LAKE PARK KNOLLS, Ramsey County,
Minnesota which lies southerly of the north 202.50 feet thereof.
PIN 07-30-23-23-0039
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site Plan
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief
to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a
hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought
about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the
property owner's control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on June 19, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which all
must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds thereto be sufficient practical difficulty with regard to
the property located at 7313 Spring Lake Road, and makes the following findings of fact
related to its decision:
Resolution 984-13
Page 2
The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding setbacks is to create physical
separation between homes for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property
owners. The requested setback is not exceeding the minimum amount that the City
Code requires.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is
improving the property and adding new housing to the city.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because of the large front setbacks on both
Spring Lake Road and County Road H2.
4. The unique feature of this property is that it is a corner lot so both prevailing front
setbacks must be met, but both streets have large setbacks making it difficult for a
house to meet both the front and rear setback.
The setbacks on all the homes in the area vary, so there will be no change to the
existing neighborhood character from this house having a different front setback.
6. The 6.5 -foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant's
practical difficulty since forthis property the zoning code requires the prevailing front
setback on the block, which is 37 feet.
7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Ron
Santanni, Santanni Custom Homes, property owner of 7313 Spring Lake Road, to allow a
new house to have a 30.5 -foot front setback.
Adopted this 19th day of June, 2013.
Paul Schiltgen, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: June 19 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been
asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate
development along County Road 10.
The Commission has started by focusing on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and
reducing the acreage size requirements for the projects on the corridor. Staff has started
putting together language for a PUD overlay district for the Commission to review and
discuss.
Recommendation
Continue the discussion about County Road 10 Corridor District amendments that would
promote and support development on the corridor.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Proposed PUD language for County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District
1120.03
Subd. 4. County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District
a. Purpose: The PUD District is an overlay zoning technique, whereby the basic
underlying zoning district establishes the basic allowable uses and the
general standards for development and the approved PUD plan establishes
the specific regulations for development and shall govern and take
precedence over the underlying Zoning District regulations. If a zoning
change is required to accommodate the uses or general intensity of
development in the PUD, an application for a Rezoning shall be made
concurrently with the PUD application and, if approved, the Zoning Map shall
be changed both as to the underlying zoning district and designation as a
PUD district.
b. Special Requirements for the County Road 10 Corridor District: The County
Road 10 Corridor District is the primary gateway through the City. The
aesthetic impacts from new developments and redevelopments must be
evaluated to help ensure the long-term viability and success of the District.
Accomplishing the purpose of the County Road 10 Corridor District requires
particular concern for the site layout, building materials, site features (such as
landscaping, lighting and signage) and other related design elements. To that
end, new development and redevelopment shall conform to the standards in
this and related zoning requirements. In reviewing and approving land use
applications, the City Council shall make the final determination in the
compatibility and consistency with all provisions in this and related sections of
the Zoning Ordinance.
(1) Procedure. To further accomplish the stated purpose of the County
Road 10 Corridor District, the following procedures shall be used:
(a) Proposals for new construction, redevelopment of a site and
significant modifications to existing sites shall use the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) process. The PUD proposal shall
identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning
requirements and from the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay
District guidelines as well as the reasons why the modifications
would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the
purpose of the County Road 10 Corridor District. Modifications to
these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance
through the PUD process. Conditional Use Permits may also be
required for the uses listed in each zoning district.
(b) Conditional Use Permits, Site Plans, and other development
agreements that were approved for development before
, 2013, shall remain in effect but shall use the
PUD process for future site amendments.
(c) The following items shall not be considered significant
modifications to an existing site and shall be exempt from the
PUD process but shall be subject to administrative review and
approval:
1. Internal alterations to buildings that do not result in a
change to the building height, roof line, or footprint unless
the changes will have a notable increase in traffic and/or
parking needs as determined by the City Administrator or
their designee;
2. Replacement, maintenance, or repair of existing
materials, including exterior finishes, signage,
landscaping, and parking lots.
3. Minor modifications to the exterior of a building or site as
determined by the City Administrator or their designee.
c. District Area: The following area is hereby established as being within the
County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District:
(1) All parcels that have frontage on County Road 10,
(2) All parcels that are within 200 feet of the County Road 10 right-of-way,
(3) The City may determine that a specific development area will not
benefit from the PUD process and can exclude that project area from
the PUD requirement.
d. Minimum Project Size: The tract of land for which a planned unit
development, County Road 10 Corridor District is proposed and permit
requested shall contain not less than two (2) acres of land.
e. The building and/or parking setback of the planned unit development site
shall be
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for June 5, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen, and
Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Smith.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Oath of Office:
Planning Associate Heller administered the Oath of Office to Commissioner Love.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
VR2013-00. Consideration of a Variance Extension for Reduced 2
Driveway Setbacks
Renewable Energy Code Amendment Discussion 3
County Road 10 Corridor Discussion 5
3. Approval of Minutes
May 1, 2013.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Page 2
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve the
Minutes of the May 1, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 6
Nays — 0
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
Motion carried.
A. VR2011-002, VR2011-004, VR2011-005 Consideration of a Variance
Extension for Reduced Driveway Setbacks
Applicant: Mike IGnyon, property owner
Address: 5338-5340, 5372-5374, 5380-5382 Raymond Avenue
Planning Associate Heller indicated in 2011, property owner Michael Kinyon was granted
variances to allow the new driveways at five of his duplexes on Raymond Avenue to have one
and three foot setbacks. Mr. Kinyon will be adding attached garages to these duplexes, along
with new driveways to replace the existing gravel. The lots are only wide enough for a single car
garage on each unit, but the new driveways will be wide enough for two cars.
Associate Heller explained Mr. Kinyon applied for all five property's driveway variances in
2011 because the City was reconstructing Raymond Avenue that year, which included installing
curbs and driveway aprons. Mr. Kinyon knew he would not have all five driveways completed
for several years, but wanted to have the wider driveway aprons installed during the street
project. She indicated Mr. Kinyon was granted a 1 -year extension in 2012 and was now asking
for three of the variances to be extended for another year. The Planning Commission was
supportive in the past as long as Mr. Kinyon continued to make progress on installing the
driveways. It was noted Mr. Kinyon fully remodeled one of the buildings and installed
driveways on another building in 2012. She commented he intends to remodel another duplex
and install driveways on a second building this year, and would only have one building's
driveways remaining in 2014. Staff recommended the Planning Commission approve the one-
year extensions for the reduced driveway setback variances.
Chair Stevenson commended Mr. Kinyon for the investment and improvements he was making
to his duplex units.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve
Resolutions 981-13, 982-13 and 983-13, Resolutions Approving Variance Extensions for
Reduced Driveway Setbacks; Planning Case No. VR2011-002, VR2011-004, VR2011-005.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment Discussion
June 5, 2013
Page 3
Planning Associate Heller explained the Commission started a discussion on the Zoning Code in
regards to renewable energy system installations, such as solar energy, wind generators and
geothermal systems. She commented the City should update the City Code to help promote
renewable energy systems and not make it difficult for a property owner to install a system.
There is now a lot more information available about these systems, and the City can make better
decisions about how and where renewable energy system installations are done.
Associate Heller stated at the May 15, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, Brian Ross with CR
Planning gave a presentation about renewable energy and how cities are important partners in
helping more systems get installed. She reviewed several example ordinances with the
Commission stating this language will assist staff in developing new policies, applications and
fees for these systems. She questions what the Commission were willing to allow and how they
wanted to proceed with the code amendment.
Chair Stevenson recommended staff proceed with the geothermal information that was in the
other ordinances since there isn't much language needed, and that further guidance be provided
for the wind and solar systems.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu commented she did not know enough about wind systems, but did
not feel a traditional wind turbine would fit into a Mounds View residential neighborhood.
Associate Heller stated that at the last meeting, Brian Ross had stated that wind generators
typically don't work well in urban areas. He commented that unless wind turbines are at least
200 feet from any other structure, they usually aren't productive, and can cost more to operate
than the amount of electricity they generate. She indicated there would be very few properties
within the City where wind turbines could be far enough away from other structures to work, and
they can generate a great deal of noise as well. She recommended a minimum lot size standard
be set for wind turbines. She stated MedTronic and Sysco were possible candidates as they are
large properties.
Chair Stevenson stated the wind turbines could be slated only for certain zoning districts.
Commissioner Rundle questioned if there would be enough open space available to generate
enough power for these businesses.
Discussion ensued regarding the wind turbines located in North St. Paul and Maple Grove.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu supported wind turbines if the system did not interfere with
neighboring properties and space allowed, 10+ acres.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Page 4
Associate Heller suggested that wind turbines also are required to be at least 300 feet from
residential properties.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu suggested the noise ordinance be reviewed.
Associate Heller indicated she could use language from other ordinances to address noise
standards.
Commissioner Love questioned if a geothermal system was considered an accessory building.
Associate Planner Heller explained these systems were considered an accessory use as associated
with the property. She further reviewed the proposed geothermal language from other
ordinances. The Commission supported the geothermal language examples.
Associate Heller discussed the solar technology options proposed for the code amendment in
detail with the Commission. She noted that approximately two-thirds of the homes in the City
face east and west, and solar panels must face south so they would usually be on the side of the
house rather than the front.
Chair Stevenson recommended the St. Paul language be used concerning solar system line of
sight, visibility and design standards.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu agreed and inquired if staff was aware of any installed solar units
within the City of Mounds View.
Associate Planner Heller stated she was not aware of any solar panels within the City.
The Commission further discussed the need for sunlight easements. The Commission agreed
that these issues would be worked out between property owners and was something that the City
did not need to address at this time.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu recommended the number of rack panels be limited to three along a
roofline.
Associate Heller indicated this number may be too restrictive.
Chair Stevenson referred to the screening language in the Maplewood code stating this would be
valuable for ground mounted systems.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu suggested that inoperable solar units be removed after 12 months.
She also asked that roofs be properly maintained even if solar panels are installed.
Associate Heller stated this would be difficult to enforce as the City does not require other
homeowners to properly maintain their roofs.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Page 5
Chair Stevenson recommended the St. Paul language be used to address raised panels and that
panels be no higher than three feet from the highest point on a roofline.
The Commission was not in favor of allowing expanded systems beyond the existing roof edge.
Associate Heller asked if the Commission supported ground mounted units and if so, if they
should be considered an accessory structure.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu recommended the units be considered accessory structures; however,
she did not want to see these units become 18 feet in height. She commented she would need to
review images of ground mounds.
Associate Heller provided several photos for the Commission to review.
Chair Stevenson agreed that 18 feet seemed high for the residential zoning district.
Commissioner Schiltgen stated the Maplewood code allows for solar panels to be the same
height as accessory structures.
The Commission agreed to leave the language as is and allow for units to be no more than 18
feet in height and be screened from view as much as possible. In addition, ground mounted solar
panels would not be allowed to exceed the square footage within the language for accessory
structures. The panel would have to be set back five feet from rear and side yard lot lines as
well. The Commission was not in favor of allowing ground mounted units on a vacant lot.
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input this evening. She indicated she would
begin pulling together language for a Code amendment and would report back to the
Commission at a future meeting.
B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
Planning Associate Heller stated the corridor is the Council's priority this year and the
Commission has been asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and
accommodate development along County Road 10. This topic has been discussed previously by
the Commission. Some of the ideas that have been talked about include:
- Reduce the minimum required acreage amounts for PUD developments.
- Reduce parking space requirements.
- Require parking lots be placed behind buildings.
- Reduce setbacks for parking lots and buildings.
- Allow higher density (more housing units per acre)
- Increase building height limits
- Create a Corridor Overlay Zoning District
- Sign changes
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Page 6
Associate Heller commented since this is an extensive list, the Commission should start by
focusing on a couple of the ideas. Reducing the acreage size requirements for PUD's seemed to
be one of the ideas that were most important, especially since the City was in the process of
purchasing some key properties along the corridor to redevelop.
Associate Heller discussed the minimum size requirements for PUD's at this time, and requested
the Commission continue discussion on the proposed code amendment and direct staff on how to
proceed.
Associate Heller reviewed maps of the properties in the Premium Stop redevelopment area and
discussed the size of each site in detail. At this time, a senior housing PUD required 2 acres, a
residential development PUD required three acres and a commercial PUD would require 5 acres.
She stated the City would benefit by reducing these minimum PUD size requirements.
Commissioner Schiltgen questioned the size of the Walgreens redevelopment.
Chair Stevenson stated with the wetland outlot, the property was approximately 10 acres in size.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu stated the combined Roberts/Premium Stop/Taiko properties were
approximately 3.5 acres in size. She noted the commercial requirements would have to be
reduced in order to allow for a PUD for these parcels.
Further discussion ensued regarding public transportation needs along with the walkability of the
community.
Commissioner Love questioned if the City would consider any mixed use developments.
Associate Heller explained this has not always been successful in other areas, but the current
code does allow mixed-use development on a minimum 5 acre parcel.
Chair Stevenson recommended the PUD requirements only be changed along the County Road
10 corridor. He recommended that an overlay district be created which would allow for PUD's
of 2+ acres only along the corridor as this would spur redevelopment. He noted the standards for
the overlay district corridor should be separate from all other PUD requirements.
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input this evening and noted she would report
back to the Commission with more ideas. She noted she would speak with City Administrator
Ericson also regarding this matter and would report back to the Commission at a future meeting.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. June 19, 2013
B. Tuesday, July 9, 2013 (Note day and date change)
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
June 5, 2013
Page 7
8. Review Minutes:
A. May 15, 2013
The Commission discussed the May 15, 2013 meeting minutes and made no changes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
11. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 9:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
MOUNDS VIEW
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
July 9, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
June 5, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
None
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (Note week change)
B. Wednesday, August 7, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. June 19, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
NOR
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: July 9, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning ActivitV
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Renewable Energy Code Amendment
The Planning Commission has started discussion on reviewing the Zoning Code in
regards to renewable energy system installations, such as solar energy, wind
generators or geothermal systems. The City should update the City Code to help
promote renewable energy systems and not hinder or make it difficult for a property
owner to install a system. There is now a lot of information available about these
systems, and the City can make better decisions about how and where renewable
energy system installations are done.
DISCUSS:
The Planning Commission has discussed what regulations to include when creating a
new ordinance for the three different types of renewable energy: solar energy systems
(SES), geothermal systems (GSHPS) and wind energy conversion systems (WECS).
Staff has put together ordinance language that includes these three systems for the
Planning Commission to review.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission should review and discuss the proposed language for new
Chapter 1128, Renewable Energy Systems.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Proposed Chapter 1128, Renewable Energy Systems
CHAPTER 1128
RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS
1128.01: PURPOSE: The purpose of this chapter is to promote safe, effective and
efficient use of alternative energy sources and systems as the technology becomes
available. The intent is also to establish standards and procedures by which the
installation and operation of these renewable energy systems shall be governed within
the City.
1128.02: DEFINITIONS: When used in this Chapter, the following words and
phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section, except where the
context clearly indicates a different meaning:
ACTIVE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM: A solar energy system whose primary purpose is
to harvest energy by transforming solar energy into another form of energy or
transferring heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or
chemical means.
BUILDING -INTEGRATED SOLAR SYSTEM: An active solar system that is an integral
part of a principal or accessory building, rather than a separate mechanical device,
replacing or substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building.
Building -integrated systems include, but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water
solar systems that are contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights, and
awnings.
CLOSED LOOP GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP SYSTEM: A system that circulates
a heat transfer fluid, typically food -grade antifreeze, through pipes or coils buried
beneath the land surface or anchored to the bottom in a body of water.
FEEDER LINE: Any power line that carries electrical power from one or more wind
turbines or individual transformers associated with an individual wind turbine to the point
of interconnection with the electric power grid. In the case of interconnection with the
high voltage transmission systems the point of interconnection shall be the substation
serving the WECS.
GEOTHERMAL ENERGY: Renewable energy generated from the interior of the earth
and used to produce energy for heating buildings or serving building commercial or
industrial processes.
GROUND MOUNTED PANELS: Freestanding solar panels mounted to the ground by
use of stabilizers or similar apparatus.
GROUND MOUNTED WECS: Freestanding WECS mounted to the ground with
footings or other apparatus.
GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP SYSTEM (GSHPS): A system that uses the
relatively constant temperature of the earth or a body of water to provide heating in the
winter and cooling in the summer. System components include closed loops of pipe,
coils or plates; a fluid that absorbs and transfers heat; and a heat pump unit that
processes heat for use or disperses heat for cooling; and an air distribution system.
The energy must be used on-site.
HEAT TRANSFER FLUID: A non-toxic and food grade fluid such as potable water,
aqueous solutions of propylene glycol not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight or
aqueous solutions of potassium acetate not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight.
PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM: An active solar energy system that converts solar energy
directly into electricity.
RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEM: A solar energy or wind energy system. Renewable
energy systems do not include passive systems that serve a dual function, such as a
greenhouse or window.
ROOF OR BUILDING MOUNTED SES: Solar energy system (panels) that are mounted
to the roof or building using brackets, stands or other apparatus.
ROOF PITCH: The final exterior slope of a building roof calculated by the rise over the
run, typically, but not exclusively, expressed in twelfths such as 3/12, 9/12, 12/12.
SOLAR ACCESS: A view of the sun, from any point on the collector surface that is not
obscured by any vegetation, building, or object located on parcels of land other than the
parcel upon which the solar collector is located, between the hours of 9:00 AM and 3:00
PM Standard Time on any day of the year.
SOLAR COLLECTOR: A device, structure or a part of a device or structure for which
the primary purpose is to transform solar radiant energy into thermal, mechanical,
chemical, or electrical energy.
SOLAR COLLECTOR SURFACE: Any part of a solar collector that absorbs solar
energy for use in the collector's energy transformation process. Collector surface does
not include frames, supports and mounting hardware.
SOLAR ENERGY: Radiant energy received from the sun that can be collected in the
form of heat or light by a solar collector.
SOLAR ENERGY EASEMENT: An easement that limits the height or location, or both,
of permissible development on the burdened land in terms of a structure or vegetation,
or both, for the purpose of providing access for the benefited land to wind or sunlight
passing over the burdened land.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM (SES): An active solar energy system that collects or
stores solar energy and transforms solar energy into another form of energy or transfers
heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or chemical
means.
SOLAR HOT WATER SYSTEM: A system that includes a solar collector and a heat
exchanger that heats or preheats water for building heating systems or other hot water
needs, including residential domestic hot water and hot water for commercial purposes.
SOLAR MOUNTING DEVICES: Racking, frames, or other devices that allow the
mounting of a solar collector onto a roof surface or the ground.
WECS: A Wind Energy Conversion System which is an electrical generating facility
comprised of one or more wind turbines and accessory facilities, including but not
limited to, power lines, transformers, substations and metrological towers that operate
by converting the kinetic energy of wind into electrical energy. The energy must be
used on-site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
WIND ENERGY SYSTEM: Kinetic energy present in wind motion that can be converted
into electrical energy.
1128.03: SOLAR ENERGY SOURCES AND SYSTEMS
Subd. 1. Districts: Solar energy systems (SES) shall be allowed as an accessory use
in all zoning districts.
Subd. 2. General Standards:
a. Height:
1. Roof or building mounted SES in residential districts shall extend no
more than three (3) feet above the highest surface of the roof, and
shall be setback at least one (1) foot from the exterior perimeter.
2. Roof or building mounted SES in commercial or industrial districts shall
not exceed the maximum allowed height in that zoning district. For
purposes for height measurement, solar systems other than building -
integrated solar systems shall be considered to be mechanical
equipment and are restricted consistent with other building -mounted
mechanical devices.
3. Ground mounted SES shall not exceed the height of an allowed
accessory structure within the zoning district when oriented at
maximum tilt.
b. Placement:
1. Ground mounted SES shall be treated as accessory buildings for the
purpose of maximum height, maximum lot area coverage, location and
setback requirements.
2. Ground mounted SES shall be
possible without reducing their
walls, fences or landscaping.
screened from view to the extent
efficiency. Screening may include
c. Notification. Prior to the installation of a SES, the operator must provide
evidence showing their regular electrical service provider has been invormed
of the customer's intent to install an interconnected, customer -owned SES.
Off -grid systems shall be exempt from this requirement.
d. Feeder lines. Any lines accompanying a SES, other than those attached to
on-site structures by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject
parcel, unless there are existing lines in the area which the lines
accompanying an SES can be attached.
e. Commercial. All SES shall be limited to the purpose of on-site energy
production, except that any additional energy produced above the total onsite
demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical service provider in
accordance with any agreement provided by the same or applicable
legislation.
f. Restrictions on SES Limited. No homeowners' agreement, covenant,
common interest community, or other contract between multiple property
owners within a subdivision of Mounds View shall restrict or limit solar
systems to a great extent that Mounds View's renewable energy ordinance.
g. Mounds View encourages solar access to be protected in all new subdivisions
and allows for existing solar to be protected consistent with Minnesota
Statutes. Any solar easements filed, must be consistent with Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 500, Section 30.
Subd. 3. Abandonment: A SES that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
1128.04: GEOTHERMAL ENERGY SOURCES AND SYSTEMS
Subd. 1. Districts: Ground source heat pump systems (GSHPS) shall be allowed as an
accessory use in all zoning districts.
Subd. 2. General Standards:
a. All components of GSHPS including pumps, borings and loops shall be
setback at least five (5) feet from all lot lines.
b. Easements. All components of GSHPS shall not encroach on easements.
c. GSHPS are prohibited in surface waters and wetlands.
d. Only closed loop GSHPS utilizing Minnesota Department of Health approved
heat transfer fluids are permitted.
Subd. 3. Abandonment: A GSHPS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
1128.05: WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS
Subd. 1. Districts: Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS) shall be allowed with
approval of a conditional use permit in the following zoning districts and land use
designations:
a. Industrial, 1-1, or Office or Industrial PUD.
b. In all properties guided as Institutional in the City's Land Use Designations of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 2. Ground Mounted WECS:
a. Number:
1. Large WECS. One (1) large WECS shall be permitted per lot.
2. Small WECS. One (1) small WECS shall be allowed on a single lot of
one (1) to five (5) acres. All other larger parcels will be limited to one
(1) small WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
b. Height:
1. Large WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade to it's
highest point of travel, of no more than one -hundred twenty five (125)
feet.
2. Small WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade to it's
highest point of travel, of no more than sixty (60) feet.
c. Setbacks:
1. Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of
one (1) times the height from any property line, transmission line,
electric substation, or other WECS. This setback requirement from a
property line may be reduced if written permission is granted from the
affected property owner.
2. Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of
500 feet from any residential zoned property.
d. Shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street, unless
the City determines that such a location would lessen the negative impacts of
such a WECS on nearby properties.
Subd. 3. Roof Mounted WECS:
Milff on, 0743
1. Large Roof Mounted WECS. The maximum number of large roof
mounted WECS shall be approved through the conditional use permit
process in accordance with Chapter 1125.01 Subd. 3.
2. Small Roof Mounted WECS. No more than three (3) roof mounted
small WECS shall be installed on any rooftop.
b. Height:
1. Large Roof Mounted WECS: Total height of not more than twenty-five
(25) feet, measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at it's
highest point of travel.
2. Small Roof Mounted WECS: Total height of not more than twenty-five
(25) feet, measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at it's
highest point of travel.
c. Placement: Roof mounted WECS must be erected above the roof of a
building or structure. The mounts associated with the WECS may extend
onto the side of the building or structure.
Subd. 4. General Standards. The following provisions will apply to all WECS erected
under the provisions of this ordinance:
a. Rotor Clearance. Blade arcs created by the WECS shall have a minimum of
thirty (30) feet of clearance over any structure or tree within a two hundred
(200) foot radius, and maintain at least twenty (20) feet of clearance between
their lowest point and the ground.
b. Rotor Safety. Each WECS shall be equipped with both a manual and
automatic over speed controls to limit the blade rotation within design
specifications.
c. Color and Finish. All wind turbines and towers shall be white, gray, or other
non -obtrusive color. Finishes shall be matte or non -reflective.
d. Tower Access. To prevent unauthorized climbing, WECS towers must
comply with one of the following provisions:
1. Tower climbing apparatus shall not be located within twelve (12) feet of
the ground.
2. A locked anti -climb device shall be installed on the tower.
3. Towers capable of being climbed shall be enclosed by a locked,
protective fence at least six (6) feet high.
e. Signs. The place of any signs, postings or advertisements shall be
prohibited. WECS shall have a sign posted at the base of the tower and said
shall contain the following information: Warning high voltage, Manufacturer's
name, Emergency phone number, Emergency shutdown procedures.
f. Lighting. WECS shall not have no installed or accessory lighting, unless
required by federal or state regulations.
g. Electromagnetic Interference. WECS shall be designed and constructed so
as not to cause radio and television interference.
h. Noise Emission. Have a maximum noise production rating of fifty-five (55) dB
fifty (50) dBA and shall conform to this standard under normal operating
conditions as measured at any property line.
i. Utility Company Interconnection. Prior to the installation or erection of a
WECS, the operator must provide evidence showing their regular electrical
service provider has been informed of the customer's intent to install an
interconnected, customer -owned generator. Off -grid systems shall be exempt
from this requirement. All connections shall be underground.
Compliance with State Building Code. A standard drawing of the structural
components of the wind energy conversion system and support structures,
including base and footings shall be provided along with engineering date and
calculations to demonstrate compliance with the structural design provisions
of the State Building Code. Drawings and engineering calculations shall be
certified by a registered engineer.
k. Compliance with National Electrical Code. WECS electrical equipment and
connection shall be designed and installed in adherence to the National
Electrical Code.
I. Inspection. The City hereby reserves the right upon issuing any WECS
conditional use permit to inspect the premises on which the WECS is located.
If a WECS is not maintained in operational conditions and poses a potential
safety hazard, the owner shall take expeditious action to correct the situation.
Subd. 5. Submittal Requirements.
a. Site Plan Drawing. All applications for a WECS Conditional Use Permit shall
be accompanied by a detailed certified survey/site plan drawn to scale and
dimensioned, displaying the following information:
1. Lot lines and dimensions.
2. Location and height of all buildings, structures, aboveground utilities
and trees on the lot, including both existing and proposed structures
and guy wire anchors.
3. Location and height of all adjacent buildings, structures and
aboveground utilities and trees located within three hundred fifty (350)
feet of the exterior boundaries of the property in question.
4. An elevation drawing of the premises accurately depicting the
proposed WECS and its relationship to structures on the subject site
and adjacent lots.
5. Existing and proposed setbacks of all structures located on the
property in question.
b. Additional Submittal Requirements. In addition to the information required
elsewhere in this ordinance, development applications for WECS shall include
the following supplemental information:
1. A significant tree plan in conformance with Chapter 1127.04, Subd. 1,
showing the loss of significant trees within the construction area for the
WECS;
2. A letter or copy of the review response from the Federal Aviation
Administration concerning the development application and their
requirements for warning devices, height restrictions, etc;
3. The technical specifications for the WECS including, but not limited to,
the type, height, blade length, operating parameters, the anticipated
sound level and the property line, and lighting protection; and
4. Clearance distance between the farthest extensions of the WECS
blades to the property lines.
Subd. 6. Criteria for Approval.
a. Declaration of Conditions. The Planning Commission may recommend and
the City Council may impose such conditions on the granting of a WECS
conditional use permit as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and
provisions of this Subdivision. The Council must consider the following
criteria in determining whether to grant or deny a conditional use permit for a
Wind Energy Conversion System (WECS):
1. The proposed WECS compliance with the standards described in this
subdivision;
2. The potential for the WECS to cause a condition that may pose an
unreasonable threat or cause unreasonable damage to any other
property or person; and
3. The proposed WECS impact on the environment and on the visual
image of the surrounding area.
Subd. 7. Abandonment: A WECS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
June 19, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for June 19, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Love, and Schiltgen.
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Smith, Rundle and Stevenson.
Also Present:
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
VR2013-003. Variance for Reduced Front Setback of a New House
County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
3. Approval of Minutes
May 15, 2013
Page
1
2
3
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Cormnissioner Love. To approve the Minutes
of the May 15, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as presented.
Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
June 19, 2013
Page 2
A. VR2013-003 Variance for Reduced Front Setback of a New House
Applicant: Ron Santanni, Santanni Custom Homes
Address: 7313 Spring Lake Road
Planning Associate Heller stated the applicant, Ron Santanni, with Santanni Custom Homes, one
of the property owners of 7313 Spring Lake Road, was requesting a variance to allow a new
house to have a 30.5 foot front setback, which is 6.5 feet less than the prevailing setback on the
block. The City Code requires a minimum of 30 -foot setback or the prevailing setback on the
block for new homes, without a variance.
Associate Heller explained 7313 Spring Lake Road was a vacant lot on the northeast corner of
Spring Lake Road and County Road H2. The lot was originally combined with the property to
the north, but the parcel was subdivided in 2011 creating two lots, one with the existing house
and a vacant lot. The parcel is .40 acres in size but since it is a corner lot, it has two front yards.
She indicated new homes must meet the front setbacks for both streets, along with the rear
setback. The proposed house cannot meet both the front prevailing setback of 37 feet and the
code required 30 foot rear setback. The house will face Spring Lake Road since it has less traffic
than County Road H2 and have a front setback of 30.5 feet with a rear setback of 30.6 feet.
Associate Heller further reviewed the Zoning Code stating the Planning Commission may issue a
variance to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical
difficulties to the property owner. She reviewed the circumstances in which a variance could be
approved and recommended the Commission hold a public hearing to take comment from the
public and applicant.
Vice Chair Schiltgen opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
Ron Santanni, 783 Gilfillan Court in White Bear Township, thanked the Commission for
considering his request this evening. He reviewed the location of the house and driveway noting
the proposed location would reduce tree loss on the lot.
Vice Chair Schiltgen closed the public hearing at 7:09 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Elofson. To approve
Resolution 984-13, Resolution Recommending Approval of a 6.5 Foot Variance for the Front
Setback of a New Home at 7313 Spring Lake Road; Planning Case No. VR2013-003.
Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
6. Other Planning Activity
A. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
June 19, 2013
Page 3
Planning Associate Heller stated the corridor is the Council's priority this year and the
Commission has been asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and
accommodate development along County Road 10. The Commission has started by focusing on
creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and reducing the acreage size requirements to two
acres for the projects on the corridor.
Associate Heller stated the PUD overlay designation would greatly assist with future
redevelopment along the corridor. She commented she had started putting together language for
a PUD overlay district for the Commission to review and discuss with City Administrator
Ericson. This language was reviewed in detail with the Commission.
Associate Heller then discussed the overlay district PUD process with the Commission. She
recommended the original zoning remain in place for the properties along County Road 10 even
after the overlay district was in place. She indicated the signage along the corridor could be
reconsidered through the overlay district's PUD process.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu agreed with this recommendation. She encouraged the parking and
setback language to remain flexible to encourage future redevelopment along the corridor.
Vice Chair Schiltgen questioned how staff was able to pull together the proposed language.
Associate Heller indicated she has reviewed a number of cities zoning codes for overlay districts
or other similar specific districts.
Vice Chair Schiltgen recommended parking and setback requirements be further reviewed within
the language.
Commissioner Love indicated she had a book on urban development that may benefit City staff.
She commented she would forward this information to staff and the Commission members.
Associate Heller indicated she would continue to revise the language and would report back to
the Commission at a future meeting.
Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. Tuesday, July 9, 2013 (Note date change)
B. Wednesday, July 24, 2013 (Note week and date change)
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
8. Review Minutes:
A. June 5, 2013
June 19, 2013
Page 4
The Commission discussed the June 5, 2013 meeting minutes and made no changes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She noted the City Council held
the first reading on the Cargo Containers Ordinance amendment. One homeowner requested her
container be grandfathered in. This matter will be discussed further by the Council at a future
work session meeting. She then discussed USAgain donation receptacles. She noted the Apple
Tree Dental project is moving forward now.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
11. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice Chair Schiltgen
adjourned the meeting at 7:51 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
July 24, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Special Order of Business
A. Recognition of Holly Smith for Her Years of Service on the Planning Commission
4. Approval of Minutes:
June 19, 2013
5. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
6. Planning Cases
None
7. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment
B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
8. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, August 7, 2013
B. Wednesday, August 21, 2013
9. Review Minutes:
A. July 9, 2013
10. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
11. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
12. Meeting Conclusion
E
Item No: 7A
Meeting Date: July 24 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Renewable Energy Code Amendment
The Planning Commission has been reviewing the Zoning Code in regards to renewable
energy system installations, such as solar energy, wind generators or geothermal systems.
The City should update the City Code to help promote renewable energy systems and not
hinder or make it difficult for a property owner to install a system. There is now a lot of
information available about these systems, and the City can make better decisions about how
and where renewable energy system installations are done.
DISCUSS:
The Planning Commission has discussed what regulations to include when creating a new
ordinance for the three different types of renewable energy: solar energy systems (SES),
geothermal systems (GSHPS) and wind energy conversion systems (WECS). Staff has put
together ordinance language that includes these three systems for the Planning Commission
to review.
The Planning Commission discussed the proposed ordinance at the July 9, 2013 meeting and
suggested a few details to include. Staff has added a definition for large and small WECS
(wind energy conversion systems). Other ordinances defined large and small WECS by either
size or electrical capacity. Since the proposed language already specified height limitations for
the large and small WECS, staff defined them by electrical capacity. Staff also specified a two
acre minimum lot size required for large WECS in Chapter 1128.05 Subd. 2a1.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission should review and discuss the proposed language for new Chapter
1128, Renewable Energy Systems. Resolution 986-13 is included if the Commission is
satisfied with the language and ready to pass the amendment on to the City Council.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Resolution 986-13
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 986-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY
CODE TITLE 1100 FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS;
SPECIAL PLANNING CASE 18813
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View promotes safe, effective and efficient use
of alternative energy sources and systems as the technology becomes available; and,
WHEREAS, City Staff has recommended that a new renewable energy
ordinance be added to the City Code and the old language removed; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission agrees with the City Staff
recommendation to encourage renewable energy systems that have a positive impact in
energy conservation, with limited adverse impact on the community; and,
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1103.04 and 1103.05 of the
Mounds View Zoning Code by deleting the StFiG�. language text as follows:
_
CC ct
��
oil
41-01—
Resolution 386-13
Page 2
-
-
- .. ,
= -,. ME.
.-
■-
V. --
..,
-
-
-
- .. ,
Resolution 98643
Page 3
WHEREAS, City staff has added Chapter 1128 of the Mounds View Zoning Code
by deleting the i =.€r language and adding the underlined text as follows:
CHAPTER1128
RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS
1128.01: PURPOSE: The purpose of this chapter is to promote safe, effective and
efficient use of alternative energy sources and systems as the technology becomes
available. The intent is also to establish standards and procedures by which the
installation and operation of these renewable energy systems shall be governed within
the City.
1128.02: DEFINITIONS: When used in this Chapter, the following words and
phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section except where the
context clearly indicates a different meaning:
ACTIVE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM: A solar energy system whose primary purpose is
to harvest energy by transforming solar energy into another form of energy or
transferring heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical electrical, or
chemical means.
BUILDING -INTEGRATED SOLAR SYSTEM: An active solar system that is an integral
part of a principal or accessory building rather than a separate mechanical device,
replacing or substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building.
Building -integrated systems include but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water
solar systems that are contained within roofing materials windows skylights and
awnings.
CLOSED LOOP GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP SYSTEM: A system that circulates
a heat transfer fluid, typically food -grade antifreeze through pipes or coils buried
beneath the land surface or anchored to the bottom in a body of water.
FEEDER LINE: Any power line that carries electrical power from one or more wind
turbines or individual transformers associated with an individual wind turbine to the point
of interconnection with the electric power grid. In the case of interconnection with the
high voltage transmission systems the point of interconnection shall be the substation
serving the WECS.
Resolution 986-13
Page 4
GEOTHERMAL ENERGY: Renewable energy generated from the interior of the earth
and used to produce energy for heating buildings or serving building commercial or
industrial processes.
GROUND MOUNTED PANELS: Freestanding solar panels mounted to the ground by
use of stabilizers or similar apparatus.
GROUND MOUNTED WECS: Freestanding WECS mounted to the ground with
footings or other apparatus.
GROUND SOURCE HEAT PUMP SYSTEM (GSHPS): A system that uses the
relatively constant temperature of the earth or a body of water to provide heating in the
winter and cooling in the summer. System components include closed loops of pipe,
coils or plates: a fluid that absorbs and transfers heat and a heat pump unit that
processes heat for use or disperses heat for cooling; and an air distribution system.
The energy must be used on-site.
HEAT TRANSFER FLUID: A non-toxic and food grade fluid such as potable water,
aqueous solutions of propylene glycol not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight or
aqueous solutions of potassium acetate not to exceed twenty percent (20%) by weight.
PHOTOVOLTAIC SYSTEM: An active solar energy system that converts solar energy
directly into electricity.
greenhouse or window.
ROOF OR BUILDING MOUNTED SES: Solar energy system (panels) that are mounted
to the roof or building using brackets stands or other apparatus.
ROOF PITCH: The final exterior slope of a building roof calculated by the rise over the
run typically, but not exclusively, expressed in twelfths such as 3/12, 9/12, 12/12.
SOLAR ACCESS: A view of the sun, from any point on the collector surface that is not
PM Standard Time on any day of the year.
SOLAR COLLECTOR: A device structure or a part of a device or structure for which
the primary purpose is to transform solar radiant energy into thermal, mechanical,
chemical, or electrical energy.
Resolution 9866-13
Page 5
SOLAR COLLECTOR SURFACE: Any part of a solar collector that absorbs solar
energy for use in the collector's energy transformation process Collector surface does
not include frames supports and mounting hardware.
SOLAR ENERGY: Radiant energy received from the sun that can be collected in the
form of heat or light by a solar collector.
SOLAR ENERGY EASEMENT: An easement that limits the height or location or both,
of permissible development on the burdened land in terms of a structure or vegetation
or both for the purpose of providing access for the benefited land to wind or sunlight
passing over the burdened land.
SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM (SES): An active solar energy system that collects or
stores solar energy and transforms solar energy into another form of energy or transfers
heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical electrical or chemical
means.
SOLAR HOT WATER SYSTEM A system that includes a solar collector and a heat
exchanger that heats or preheats water for building heating systems or other hot water
needs including residential domestic hot water and hot water for commercial purposes.
SOLAR MOUNTING DEVICES: Racking frames or other devices that allow the
mounting of a solar collector onto a roof surface or the ground.
WECS: A Wind Energy Conversion System which is an electrical generating facility
comprised of one or more wind turbines and accessory facilities including but not
limited to power lines transformers substations and metrological towers that operate
by converting the kinetic energy of wind into electrical energy. The energy must be
used on-site with excess energy distributed into the electrical grid.
WECS Large: A Wind Energy Conversion System with a capacity of up to 100 M.
WECS Small: A Wind Energy Conversion System with a capacity over 100 kW.
WIND ENERGY SYSTEM: Kinetic energy present in wind motion that can be converted
into electrical energy.
Resolution 986-13
Page 6
1128.03: SOLAR ENERGY SOURCES AND SYSTEMS
Subd 1 Districts: Solar energy systems (SES) shall be allowed as an accessory use
in all zoning districts.
Subd. 2. General Standards:
a. Height:
1. Roof or building mounted SES in residential districts shall extend no
more than three (3) feet above the highest surface of the roof, and
shall be setback at least one (1) foot from the exterior perimeter.
Roof or building mounted SES in commercial or industrial districts shall
not exceed the maximum allowed height in that zoning district. For
purposes for height measurement solar systems other than building -
integrated solar systems shall be considered to be mechanical
equipment and are restricted consistent with other building -mounted
mechanical devices.
3. Ground mounted SES shall not exceed the height of an allowed
accessory structure within the zoning district when oriented at
maximum tilt.
b. Placement:
1. Ground mounted SES shall be treated as accessory buildings for the
purpose of maximum height maximum lot area coverage location and
setback requirements.
2. Ground mounted SES shall be screened from view to the extent
possible without reducing their efficiency. Screening may include
walls, fences or landscaping.
c. Notification. Prior to the installation of a SES, the operator must provide
evidence showing their regular electrical service provider has been informed
of the customer's intent to install an interconnected. customer -owned SES.
Off -grid systems shall be exempt from this requirement.
d. Feeder lines. Any lines accompanying a SES, other than those attached to
on-site structures by leads shall be buried within the interior of the subject
parcel unless there are existinq lines in the area which the lines
accompanying an SES can be attached.
Resolution 386-13
Page 7
e. Commercial All SES shall be limited to the purpose of on-site energy
production except that any additional energy produced above the total onsite
demand may be sold to the operator's regular electrical service provider in
accordance with any agreement provided by the same or applicable
legislation.
f. Restrictions on SES Limited No homeowners' agreement covenant
common interest community, or other contract between multiple property
owners within a subdivision of Mounds View shall restrict or limit solar
systems to a great extent that Mounds View's renewable energy ordinance.
g. Mounds View encourages solar access to be protected in all new subdivisions
and allows for existing solar to be protected consistent with Minnesota
Statutes Any solar easements filed must be consistent with Minnesota
Statutes Chapter 500, Section 30.
Subd. 3. Abandonment: A SES that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
1128.04: GEOTHERMAL ENERGY SOURCES AND SYSTEMS
Subd 1 Districts: Ground source heat pump systems (GSHPS) shall be allowed as an
accessory use in all zoning districts.
Subd. 2. General Standards:
a. All components of GSHPS including pumps borings and loops shall be
setback at least five (5) feet from all lot lines.
b. Easements All components of GSHPS shall not encroach on easements.
c. GSHPS are prohibited in surface waters and wetlands.
d. Only closed loop GSHPS utilizing Minnesota Department of Health approved
heat transfer fluids are permitted.
Resolution 986-13
Page 8
Subd. 3. Abandonment: A GSHPS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
1128.05: WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS
designations:
a. Industrial, 1-1 or Office or Industrial PUD.
b. In all properties guided as Institutional in the City's Land Use Designations of
the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 2. Ground Mounted WECS:
a. Number:
1. Large WECS. One (1) large WECS shall be permitted on a lot of at
least two (2) acres in size.
2. Small WECS. One (1) small WECS shall be allowed on a single lot of
one (1) to five (5) acres. All other larger parcels will be limited to one
(1) small WECS per five (5) acres of land area.
b. Height:
1. Large WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade to its
highest point of travel, of no more than one -hundred twenty five (125)
feet.
2. Small WECS shall have a total height including tower and blade to its
highest point of travel, of no more than sixty (60) feet.
Resolution 986-13
Page 9
c. Setbacks:
Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of
one (1) times the height from any property line, transmission line,
electric substation or other WECS. This setback requirement from a
Property line may be reduced if written permission is granted from the
affected property owner.
2. Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of
500 feet from any residential zoned property.
d. Shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street, unless
the City determines that such a location would lessen the negative impacts of
such a WECS on nearby properties.
Subd. 3. Roof Mounted WECS:
a. Number:
1. Large Roof Mounted WECS. The maximum number of large roof
mounted WECS shall be approved through the conditional use permit
process in accordance with Chapter 1125.01 Subd. 3.
2. Small Roof Mounted WECS. No more than three (3) roof mounted
small WECS shall be installed on any rooftop.
b. Height:
1. Large Roof Mounted WECS: Total height of not more than twenty-five
(25) feet measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
2. Small Roof Mounted WECS: Total height of not more than twenty-five
(25) feet measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its
highest point of travel.
c. Placement: Roof mounted WECS must be erected above the roof of a
building or structure. The mounts associated with the WECS may extend
onto the side of the building or structure.
Resolution 986-13
Page 10
Subd. 4. General Standards. The following provisions will apply to all WECS erected
under the provisions of this ordinance:
a. Rotor Clearance. Blade arcs created by the WECS shall have a minimum of
thirty (30) feet of clearance over any structure or tree within a two hundred
(200) foot radius, and maintain at least twenty (20) feet of clearance between
their lowest point and therq ound.
b. Rotor Safety. Each WECS shall be equipped with both a manual and
automatic over speed controls to limit the blade rotation within design
specifications.
c. Color and Finish. All wind turbines and towers shall be white, gray, or other
non -obtrusive color. Finishes shall be matte or non -reflective.
d. Tower Access. To prevent unauthorized climbing, WECS towers must
comply with one of the following provisions:
1. Tower climbing apparatus shall not be located within twelve (12) feet of
the ground.
2. A locked anti -climb device shall be installed on the tower.
3. Towers capable of being climbed shall be enclosed by a locked,
protective fence at least six (6) feet high.
e. Signs. The place of any signs, postings or advertisements shall be
prohibited. WECS shall have a sign posted at the base of the tower and said
shall contain the following information: Warning high voltage, Manufacturer's
name, Emergency phone number, Emergency shutdown procedures.
f. Lighting. WECS shall not have no installed or accessory lighting, unless
required by federal or state regulations.
g. Electromagnetic Interference. WECS shall be designed and constructed so
as not to cause radio and television interference.
h. Noise Emission. Have a maximum noise production rating of fifty-five (55) dB
fifty (50) dBA and shall conform to this standard under normal operating
conditions as measured at any property line.
Resolution 986-13
Page 11
Utility Company Interconnection. Prior to the installation or erection of a
WECS the operator must provide evidence showing their regular electrical
service provider has been informed of the customer's intent to install an
interconnected, customer -owned generator. Off -grid systems shall be exempt
from this requirement. All connections shall be underground.
j. Compliance with State Building Code. A standard drawing of the structural
components of the wind energy conversion system and support structures,
including base and footings shall be provided along with engineering date and
calculations to demonstrate compliance with the structural design provisions
of the State Building Code. Drawings and engineering calculations shall be
certified by a registered engineer.
k. Compliance with National Electrical Code. WECS electrical equipment and
connection shall be designed and installed in adherence to the National
Electrical Code.
I. Inspection. The City hereby reserves the right upon issuing any WECS
conditional use permit to inspect the premises on which the WECS is located.
If a WECS is not maintained in operational conditions and poses a potential
safety hazard, the owner shall take expeditious action to correct the situation.
Subd. 5. Submittal Requirements.
a. Site Plan Drawing. All applications for a WECS Conditional Use Permit shall
be accompanied by a detailed certified survey/site plan drawn to scale and
dimensioned, displaying the following information:
1. Lot lines and dimensions.
2. Location and height of all buildings, structures, aboveground utilities
and trees on the lot, including both existing and proposed structures
andguy wire anchors.
3. Location and height of all adjacent buildings, structures and
4. An elevation drawing of the premises accurately depicting the
proposed WECS and its relationship to structures on the subject site
and adjacent lots.
Resolution 986-13
Page 12
5. Existing and proposed setbacks of all structures located on the
Property in question.
b. Additional Submittal Requirements In addition to the information required
elsewhere in this ordinance development applications for WECS shall include
the following supplemental information:
1. A significant tree plan in conformance with Chapter 1127 04 Subd 1
showing the loss of significant trees within the construction area for the
WECS;
2. A letter or copy of the review response from the Federal Aviation
Administration concerning the development application and their
requirements for warning devices height restrictions etc;
3. The technical specifications for the WECS including, but not limited to,
the type height blade length operating parameters the anticipated
sound level and the property line and lighting protection; and
4. Clearance distance between the farthest extensions of the WECS
blades to the property lines.
Subd. 6. Criteria for Approval.
a. Declaration of Conditions The Planning Commission may recommend and
the City Council may impose such conditions on the granting of a WECS
conditional use permit as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and
provisions of this Subdivision The Council must consider the following
criteria in determining whether to grant or deny a conditional use permit for a
Wind Energy Conversion System (WECS):
1. The proposed WECS compliance with the standards described in this
subdivision;
2. The potential for the WECS to cause a condition that may pose an
unreasonable threat or cause unreasonable damage to any other
property or person; and
3. The proposed WECS impact on the environment and on the visual
image of the surrounding area.
Resolution 986-13
Paye 13
Subd. 7. Abandonment: A WECS that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or
inoperative state for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months and which is not
brought in operation within the time specified by the City, shall be presumed
abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the
expense of the operator.
WHEREAS, amending the City Code to add new language for renewable energy
systems would better serve the public and would clarify the zoning requirements; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment
to the City Code is warranted and justified.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of amendments to Chapters 1103 and 1128 of the
Mounds View City Code to remove and add regulations as defined herein.
HE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs
staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 24th day of July, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 7B
Meeting Date: July 24 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been
asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate
development along County Road 10.
The Commission has started by focusing on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and
reducing the acreage size requirements for the projects on the corridor. Staff has put
together language for a PUD overlay district for the Commission to review and discuss.
The Planning Commission has talked about changing the style and height allowances of
the signage that is along the Corridor to only allow monument style signs, and to reduce
the 15 foot setback amount. The Commission may opt to amend the sign code rather
than having different requirements for the corridor. The majority of the commercial
signage is along the corridor so it may make more sense to have the sign code be
consistent for the whole City. Chapter 1008, Signs and Billboards is attached for the
Commission to discuss possible amendments. Chapter 1008.09 Subd. 2 and Subd. 3,
and 1008.10 Subd. 1 are the sections of the code for height and setback.
Recommendation
Continue the discussion about County Road 10 Corridor District amendments that would
promote and support development on the corridor.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Proposed PUD language for County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District
2. Chapter 1008, Signs and Billboards
PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR COUNTY ROAD 10 OVERLAY DISTRICT
1120.03
Subd. 4. County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District
a. Purpose: The PUD District is an overlay zoning technique, whereby the basic
underlying zoning district establishes the basic allowable uses and the
general standards for development and the approved PUD plan establishes
the specific regulations for development and shall govern and take
precedence over the underlying Zoning District regulations. If a zoning
change is required to accommodate the uses or general intensity of
development in the PUD, an application for a Rezoning shall be made
concurrently with the PUD application and, if approved, the Zoning Map shall
be changed both as to the underlying zoning district and designation as a
PUD district.
b. Special Requirements for the County Road 10 Corridor District: The County
Road 10 Corridor District is the primary gateway through the City. The
aesthetic impacts from new developments and redevelopments must be
evaluated to help ensure the long-term viability and success of the District.
Accomplishing the purpose of the County Road 10 Corridor District requires
particular concern for the site layout, building materials, site features (such as
landscaping, lighting and signage) and other related design elements. To that
end, new development and redevelopment shall conform to the standards in
this and related zoning requirements. In reviewing and approving land use
applications, the City Council shall make the final determination in the
compatibility and consistency with all provisions in this and related sections of
the Zoning Ordinance.
(1) Procedure. To further accomplish the stated purpose of the County
Road 10 Corridor District, the following procedures shall be used:
(a) Proposals for new construction, redevelopment of a site and
significant modifications to existing sites shall use the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) process. The PUD proposal shall
identify any requested modifications from the applicable zoning
requirements and from the County Road 10 Corridor Overlay
District guidelines as well as the reasons why the modifications
would be in the public interest and would be consistent with the
purpose of the County Road 10 Corridor District. Modifications to
these requirements may be granted by the City without a variance
through the PUD process. Conditional Use Permits may also be
required for the uses listed in each zoning district.
(b) Conditional Use Permits, Site Plans, and other development
agreements that were approved for development before
, 2013, shall remain in effect but shall use the
PUD process for future site amendments.
(c) The following items shall not be considered significant
modifications to an existing site and shall be exempt from the
PUD process but shall be subject to administrative review and
approval:
1. Internal alterations to buildings that do not result in a
change to the building height, roof line, or footprint unless
the changes will have a notable increase in traffic and/or
parking needs as determined by the City Administrator or
their designee;
2. Replacement, maintenance, or repair of existing
materials, including exterior finishes, signage,
landscaping, and parking lots.
3. Minor modifications to the exterior of a building or site as
determined by the City Administrator or their designee.
c. District Area: The following area is hereby established as being within the
County Road 10 Corridor Overlay District:
(1) All parcels that have frontage on County Road 10,
(2) All parcels that are within 200 feet of the County Road 10 right-of-way,
(3) The City may determine that a specific development area will not
benefit from the PUD process and can exclude that project area from
the PUD requirement.
d. Minimum Project Size: The tract of land for which a planned unit
development, County Road 10 Corridor District is proposed and permit
requested shall contain not less than two (2) acres of land.
e. The City encourages buildings and/or parking lots to have very minimal
setbacks from the corridor. Reduced parking requirements will be
considered.
f. The City encourages shared parking and stormwater management systems
when possible.
1008.005
SECTION:
1008.005:
1008.01:
1008.011:
1008.012:
1008.013:
1008.02:
1008.03:
1008.04:
1008.05:
1008.06:
1008.07:
1008.08:
1008.081:
1008.09:
1008.10:
1008.11:
1008.12:
1008.13:
1008.14:
1008.15:
1008.16:
1008.01 (Rev. 1/09)
CHAPTER 1008
General Intent
Purpose
Scope of Regulations
Severability
Substitution Provision
Definitions
Building Permit Required; Exceptions
Application for Permit
Permit Fees; Waiver
Issuance of Permit; Review Process and Conditions
Sign Installer's License Provisions
Maintenance of Premises
Sign Maintenance, Repair, Permits and Inspections
General Location, Design and Construction Standards
Specific Sign Type Standards and Requirements
Miscellaneous Signage Requirements and Provisions
Prohibited Signs
Nonconforming Signs
Abrogation and Greater Restriction
Violation of Provisions
Sign Variances (Ord. 644,12-13-99; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
1008.005: GENERAL INTENT: In order to preserve Mounds View as a desirable City to
live and to do business in, having a pleasing and visually attractive urban environment is important.
The regulation of signs is an important means to help achieve the desired results of the City. As
such, the City has prepared these sign regulations to enhance the urban environment and to promote
the well-being of the City. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.01: PURPOSE: This Chapter is intended to establish a comprehensive and balanced
system of sign control that accommodates the need for a well-maintained, safe, and attractive
community, and the need for effective conununications including business identification. The City
of Mounds View finds it is necessary for the promotion and preservation of the public health, safety,
welfare, image and aesthetics of the community that the construction, location, size and
maintenance of signs be controlled. Further, the City finds that: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
1008.01
1008.01 (Rev. 1/09)
a. Permanent and temporary signs have a direct impact on and relationship to the image and
aesthetics of the City; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
b. The manner of installation, location and maintenance of signs affects the public health,
safety, welfare and aesthetics of the City; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
c. an opportunity for viable identification of residences, businesses and institutions in the
City must be established; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
d. the safety of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians and other users of public streets and
property is affected by the number, size, location and appearance of signs that create
hazards for drivers and unduly divert the attention of drivers; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord.
816,1-22-09)
e. installation of signs suspended from, projecting over, or placed on the tops of
buildings, walks or other structures may constitute a hazard during periods of high winds
and an obstacle to effective fire -fighting and other emergency service; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
f. uncontrolled and unlimited signs and sign types, particularly moving signs and signs
with dynamic displays, adversely impact the image and aesthetic attractiveness of the
City and thereby undermine economic value and growth; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-
22-09)
g. uncontrolled and unlimited signs, particularly temporary signs which are commonly
located within or adjacent to public right-of-way or are located at driveway/street
intersections, result in roadside clutter and obstruction of views of oncoming traffic. This
creates a hazard to drivers and pedestrians and also adversely impacts a logical flow of
information; (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
h. signs are generally incompatible with residential uses and should be strictly limited in
residential zoning districts; and (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
i. the right to express opinions in any zoning district must be protected, subject to
reasonable restrictions on size, height, location and number. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Ord.5-8-06)
j. the City does not intend to nor does it propose to regulate the message on any sign.
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
k. the City intends to protect the public from the dangers of unsafe signs. (Added, Ord.
816,1-22-09)
1008.011 1008.02 (Rev. 1/09)
1008.011: SCOPE OF REGULATIONS: The sign regulations established in this Chapter
shall apply to all structures and all land uses. This Chapter describes the sign standards for all the
zoning districts of the City. The City establishes specific additional regulations for signs that are
unique in purpose and not easily addressed by district regulations. No person, property owner or
lessee shall place, erect, alter, modify, enhance or change a sign in any way that does not meet the
requirements of this Chapter and other applicable regulations. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.012: SEVERABILITY: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or other part
of this Chapter is held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the validity or enforceability of
the rest of this Chapter. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted the Chapter in
each section, subsection, sentence or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one (1) or more
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases are declared invalid. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
1008.013: SUBSTITUTION PROVISION: The owner or operator of any sign that this
Chapter would otherwise allow may substitute a non-commercial sign in lieu of any other
commercial or non-commercial sign. The owner may make this substitution without any additional
City approval or permit. The purpose of this provision is to prevent any inadvertent favoring of
commercial speech over non-commercial speech, or the favoring of any particular non-commercial
message over any other non-commercial message. This provision shall prevail over any more
specific provision to the contrary. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.02: DEFINITIONS: The following terms have the meanings ascribed to them in this
Section: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
ABANDONED SIGN: A sign that becomes vacant, unoccupied or unused; or a sign promoting a
business or activity no longer in operation or incorrectly or inaccurately conveying a message, or a
sign promoting an obsolete message or sign copy, for a period in excess of one (1) month. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01)
ANIMATED SIGN: A sign that has any moving or rotating part; or uses movement or change of
lighting to depict action or create a special effect or scene, but is not a dynamic display sign. Refer
also to electronic scrolling message or marquee signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
AREA IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A freestanding sign which identifies the name of a connnunity,
neighborhood, a residential subdivision, a multi -family residential complex consisting of three (3) or
more structures, a planned unit development, or any combination of the above located on
contiguous properties. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
AWNING SIGN: A sign displayed on or attached flat against the surface or surfaces of an awning
attached to or extending from a building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
BANNER: Any sign of lightweight, flexible material affixed to a building, poles, vehicle or other
supporting structures upon which a message, slogan, design or logo is displayed. National, state, or
municipal flags shall not be considered a banner. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.02 1008.02 (Rev. 1/09)
BEACON: Any light with one (1) or more beams directed into the atmosphere or directed at one
(1) or more points not on the same lot as the light source; also, any light with one (1) or more beams
that rotate or move. Otherwise known as searchlights. For the purposes of this Section, beacons
or searchlights shall be considered temporary signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
BENCH SIGNS: A sign which is affixed to a bench or shelter at a bus stop. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
BILLBOARD: A large, outdoor advertising structure typically mounted on one (1) or more poles,
located off the site or premises where the advertised product is sold , available or offered. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
BUSINESS SIGN: A sign that states the proper name of the business, organization or institution
located on the premises on which the sign is located. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
CAMPAIGN SIGN: A temporary sign promoting the candidacy of a person running for a
government office, or promoting an issue to be voted on at the next election. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
CANOPY SIGN: A sign affixed to the visible surface of an attached or freestanding canopy
stricture, often backlit to provide internal illumination. For the purposes of sign area computation,
canopy signs shall be treated as a wall sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
CHANGEABLE COPY SIGN: A sign or portion thereof with characters, letters or illustrations that
can be changed or rearranged electronically or manually without altering the face or the surface of
the sign but is not a dynamic display. A sign on which the message changes more than eight (8)
times a day shall be considered an animated sign for the purposes of this Section. That portion of a
sign on which the only copy that changes is an indication of the time and temperature shall be
considered a public informational sign. Portable or non -permanent changeable copy signs shall, for
the purposes of this Section, be considered temporary signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
COMMERCIAL SIGN: A sign advertising a business, profession, commodity, service or
entertainment. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
CONSTRUCTION SIGN: A sign placed at a construction site identifying the project and/or names
of the architect, engineers, developers, contractors or other individuals or firms associated with the
project. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
DIRECTIONAL SIGN: A sign for the purpose of making specific commercial, industrial or public
and semi-public locations known and to assist in finding these locations on the property where the
sign is located. Such signs may be located within street right-of-ways subject to approval of the City
and appropriate governmental agency. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.02 1008.02 (Rev. 1/09)
DYNAMIC DISPLAY: Any characteristics of a sign that appear to have movement or that appear
to change, caused by any method other than physically removing and replacing the sign or its
components, whether the apparent movement or change is in the display, the sign structure itself, or
any other component of the sign. This includes a display that incorporates a technology or method
allowing the sign face to change the image without having to physically or mechanically replace the
sign face or its components. Such technologies or methods may include, but are not limited to,
cathode-ray tube (CRT), light -emitting diode (LED) displays, plasma displays, liquid -crystal
displays (LCD) or other technologies used in commercially available televisions or in computer or
video monitors. This also includes any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking, or animated
display or structural element and any display that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights
manipulated through digital input, "digital ink" or any other method or technology that allows the
sign face to present a series of images or displays. Signs with this technology that a government or
public agency installs for directing or regulating pedestrian or motor vehicle movement are exempt
from this definition. (Added, Ord. 801, 1-7-08; Amended, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
FLAG OR PENNANT STRINGERS: A series of flags, pennants or streamers connected by a
string or a rope. Such stringers shall be considered temporary signs for the purpose of this Section.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
FLASHING SIGN: A sign or portion thereof whose illumination is characterized by a repetitive
cycle in which the period of illumination is either the same as or less than the period of non -
illumination. For the purposes of this Section, flashing will not be defined as occurring if the
cyclical period between on-off phases of illumination exceeds four (4) seconds. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
FREESTANDING SIGN: A sign principally supported by a structure affixed to the ground, and not
supported by a building, including signs supported by one (1) or more columns, poles or braces
placed in or upon the ground. Also referred to as a Ground Sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
GOVERNMENT OR REGULATORY SIGN: A sign which is erected by a governmental unit for
identification, traffic control or other regulatory purposes. Such signs are often located within street
right-of-ways. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
GRAND OPENING: The commencement of operation of a new business. For purposes of this
Section and Chapter, the City considers a grand opening to occur if there is a business name change
or if there is a change in the type of business or activity. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
GRAPHIC SIGN: A sculpture attached to or sign painted directly on a wall that is primarily
symbolic or representational in nature and not alpha or numeric in content or copy. (Added, Ord.
816,1-22-09)
GROUND SIGN: A sign principally supported by a stricture affixed to the ground, and not
supported by a building, including signs supported by one (1) or more columns, poles or braces
placed in or upon the ground. Also referred to as a Freestanding Sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.02 1008.02 (Rev. 1/09)
HOME OCCUPATION SIGN: A sign erected upon a residential property to advertise a home
based business or occupation taking place at that location. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
IDENTIFICATION SIGN: A sign, the primary function of which is to identify a residential,
commercial, industrial or public or semi-public use located upon the premises where such sign is
located or to which such sign is affixed. Signs identifying commercial uses may call attention to the
product, service or activity that is sold or offered upon the premises. Signs identifying industrial
uses may call attention to the product, goods or material which is produced, processed, assembled or
stored upon the premises. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
ILLEGAL SIGN: A sign erected without a permit or in violation of this Section. Such signs shall
be subject to removal upon written notice by the City. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
ILLUMINATED SIGN: Any sign that has characters, letters, figures, designs or outlines that an
artificial light source illuminates. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
INCIDENTAL SIGN: A sign, generally informational, that has a purpose secondary to the uses on
the property on which it is located. Such signs might include, but are not limited to, "No Parking,"
"Entrance," "Exit," "ATM," or "Payphone." No sign with a message legible off the premises shall
be considered incidental. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
INFLATABLE SIGN: A portable device inflated with air or helium used to draw attention to an
activity or business upon which the device is attached. Such object may or may not display
advertising copy. For the purposes of this Section, inflatable devices shall be considered a
temporary sign. (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
MONUMENT SIGN: A freestanding sign attached to the ground by means of a freestanding
support structure, solid from grade to the top of the sign structure, typically encased or supported by
masonry materials. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
NON-COMMERCIAL SIGN: A sign disseminating messages not classified as commercial that
include, but are not limited to, messages about political, religious, social, ideological, public service
and information topics. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
NUISANCE SIGN: A sign in a state of disrepair, deterioration or damage whereupon one fourth
(1/4) or more of the sign surface is no longer clearly legible or recognizable at a distance of forty
feet (40'). Also, any sign in violation of the provisions of this Chapter shall be considered a
nuisance sign except for legal nonconforming signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
ON -PREMISE SIGN: A sign related to the property or activity and use occurring on the property
on which the sign is located. On -premise signs include multi -tenant identification signs that may
advertise tenants on a different property provided such tenants are in the same PUD and the
properties share parking and access. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.02 1008.02 (Rev. 1/09)
POLE SIGN: A freestanding sign supported by or erected upon one (1) or more narrow columns,
shafts or poles. Also referred to as a Pylon sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
PORTABLE SIGN: Any sign not permanently attached to the ground or other permanent structure,
or a sign designed to be transported, including, but not limited to, signs on wheels, signs converted
to "A" or "T" flames, menu and sandwich boards, inflatable devises, advertising umbrellas, and
signs attached to or painted on vehicles parked and visible from the public right-of-way, unless said
vehicle is used in the normal day-to-day operations of the business. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
PROTECTING SIGN: A sign other than a wall sign which is perpendicular to and projects more
than eighteen inches (18") from a building face or wall or fiom a structure whose primary purpose
is other than the support of the sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
PUBLIC SIGN: A traffic control sign in Minnesota State Statutes; any identification sign installed
in a public park by a public agency or authority; and any other identification, regulatory or warning
sign approved by the City for installation on public land. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
PYLON SIGN: A freestanding sign supported by or erected upon one (1) or more narrow columns,
shafts or poles. Also referred to as a Pole sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
REAL ESTATE SIGN: A sign advertising the sale, lease or rental of the property or premises upon
which the sign is located. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
REFACING: The process of replacing the sign copy, message, logo or graphic on a sign without
altering or moving the structure to which the sign face is attached. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
ROOF SIGN: A sign erected, constructed, mounted or attached wholly or in part upon any roof or
over the highest roofline of a building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
ROTATING SIGN: A sign or a portion of a sign where the sign or the sign structure moves in a
rotating, oscillating or similar manner other than changing signs. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
SECURITY SIGN: A small, incidental sign identifying the presence of a security system. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01)
SIGHT TRIANGLE: A triangle formed at a property corner abutting two (2) street right-of-ways
where two (2) triangle legs are thirty feet (30) long with the third leg traversing the property to
connect the other two (2) legs. (Refer to the graphic in Section 1008.09, Subdivision lb) (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
SIGN: Any written message, pictorial presentation, number, illustration, decoration, banner or other
device that is used to announce, direct attention to, identify or advertise a product, service or activity
or otherwise make anything known. For purpose of maintenance or removal, the term "sign" also
shall include frames and support structures. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.02 1008.03 (Rev. 1/09)
SIGN AREA: That area of a sign within the marginal lines of the surface, which bears the
announcement, name, advertisement or other message or, in the case of letters, figures or symbols
attached directly to any part of a building, the area which is included in the smallest rectangle which
can be made to circumscribe all letters, figures or symbols displayed thereon. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
SIGN COPY: The letters, numbers, figures, symbols, logos, and graphical elements comprising the
content or message of the sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
SIGN HEIGHT: The distance measured perpendicular from the highest point of the sign structure
to the average elevation of the ground or grade adjacent to the base of the sign. (Added, Ord. 816,
1-22-09)
TEMPORARY SIGN: Any sign displaying a message erected or maintained for a limited period of
time and not of a permanent nature and that is not permanently affixed to the land or to a structure.
Such signs shall include banners, inflatable signs or devices, sandwich boards, portable changeable
copy signs or any other device intended to attract attention. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06;
Ord. 816,1-22-09)
TRANSIT ENCLOSURE SIGN: Cormnercial advertising located within a transit enclosure or
shelter. Such signage shall not include route schedules, service announcements or other similar
notices. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
WALL SIGN: A sign attached to or erected against the exterior wall of a building or structure with
the exposed face of the sign in a plane approximately parallel to the face of said wall, not to project
more than twelve inches (12") from the surface to which it is attached. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
WINDOW SIGN: A sign affixed to the interior or exterior of a window or inside the building
within three feet (3') of the window with its message intended to be visible to and readable by the
public from the outside of the building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.03: PERMITS REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 1. Permit Required: It is unlawful to install, construct, erect, alter, revise, reconstruct or
relocate any outdoor sign or structure, as defined in Section 1008.02 of this Chapter, in the
City without first obtaining a permit therefor as required by this Chapter, except as provided
in subdivision 2 of this Section (below). (1988 Code §39.02) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816,
1-22-09)
Subd. 2. Exceptions: Permits need not be obtained for any sign less than or equal to eight (8)
square feet in area (excluding temporary signs), or for the specific signs addressed below,
provided all other requirements of this Section and Chapter are satisfied: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Ord. 816,1-22-09)
a. A sign pertaining only to the sale, rental or lease of the premises upon which displayed.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.03
1008.04 (Rev. 10/10)
b. A sign on residential property stating only the name or identity of the occupant. (Ord.
679,5-29-01)
c. Construction sign or sign belonging to a contractor performing work upon a property.
Such sign shall be removed immediately upon completion of the work. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. A campaign sign as provided for in Section 1008.10, Subdivision 7 of this Chapter.
(1988 Code §39.03; 1993 Code; Ord. 607, 5-11-98) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. Home occupation signs and incidental residential signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
f National, state, regional, local, institutional or cultural flags. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord.
769,5-8-06)
g. Advertising on a transit bench or within a transit shelter or enclosure. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
h. Official notices authorized by a court, public body or public safety official. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
i. Government signs. All governmental signs, including but not limited to traffic control
and other regulatory purpose signs, street signs, identification signs, informational signs,
danger signs and signs for official City events. (Added, Ord. 847,10-21-10)
j. Flag or pennant stringers. (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
k. Sandwich boards not exceeding eight (8) square feet and ground signs not exceeding four
(4) square feet that are located within fifteen (15) feet of business advertised on sign.
(Added, Ord. 847,10-21-10)
1. Noncommercial sign. For all types of property, the City allows one (1) sign that
expresses an opinion or a viewpoint of a non-commercial nature. The noncommercial sign
shall not be illuminated or exceed nine (9) square feet. For multiple unit residential
properties, the sign must be attached to the dwelling unit or placed in a location that clearly
indicates ownership and does not represent the opinions of other residents in the area who
have not agreed to the sign. (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
1008.04: APPLICATION FOR PERMIT: Application for sign permits shall be made upon
forms provided by the City and shall include the following information, unless waived by the City
Administrator or their designee. The City will consider a sign application incomplete and will not
process the sign application if the applicant has not supplied all the required information: (Ord. 679,
5-29-01; Ord. 816,1/22-09; Amended, Ord. 844,5-20-10)
Subd. 1. The name, address and telephone number of the applicant.
1008.04
1008.05 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 2. The location, address and parcel identification number (PIN) of the building, structure or
lot to which or upon which the sign is to be placed. (Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 3. Complete and detailed plans showing the position of the sign or other advertising
structure in relation to nearby buildings, structures and streets or highways, and to the
nearest property lines. (Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 4. Two (2) complete and detailed blueprints or ink drawings of the plans, including
elevations, distances, size and details, and specifications and method of construction and
attachment to the building or to the ground. Such plans shall fully and clearly represent the
proposed sign and the construction. (Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 5. A copy of the stress sheets and calculations may be required by the Inspector, on larger
signs, showing that the structure is designed for dead load and wind pressure in any
direction in the amount required by this Chapter and any other applicable law.
Subd. 6. The name of the person or company erecting the structure, if not the applicant, or the
name of the person on whose property the structure is to be located, if not the applicant.
(Amended, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd, 7. The written consent of the owner of the property, if not the applicant.
Subd. 8. A statement as to whether the sign will be illuminated or not.
Subd. 9. A statement as to whether any electric lights on the sign will be "moving" or blinking.
Subd. 10. A statement as to whether the sign will be single -faced, double-faced or multi -faced.
Subd. 11. A statement as to whether or not the copy on the sign will be changeable.
Subd. 12. A statement as to whether or not the copy on the sign will relate only to the business or
activity conducted on the premises on which the sign is to be located. (1988 Code §39.09)
Subd. 13. A statement as to whether the sign would have any dynamic display and if so, the
specifics in area and style of the dynamic display. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.05: PERMIT FEES; WAIVER: (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
Subd. 1. Fee: The application for a permit shall be accompanied by the required permit fee. The
permit fee shall be established by resolution of the City Council. The City shall charge a
double fee if a sign is erected without first obtaining a permit for such sign. (1988 Code
§39.10) (Amended, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
1008.05
1008.07 (Rev. 5/10)
Subd. 2. Waiver: Temporary sign permit fees shall be waived for civic or religious organizations.
(1988 Code §39.11) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
1008.06: ISSUANCE OF PERMIT; REVIEW PROCESS AND CONDITIONS: (Ord.
679, 5-29-01; Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 1. Review Process: The City Administrator or his or her designee shall approve or deny the
sign permit application in an expedited manner from the receipt of the completed
application, including all plans, specifications and applicable fees. The City will notify all
applicants in writing if the City denies the sign application. Such notification shall include
the reasons the City denied the proposed sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1/22/09;
Amended, Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
Subd. 2. Variances: In the event an application is made for a sign which does not conform to the
requirements of this Section, the City will deny the application or the applicant shall either
modify the application or apply to the City for a variance according to the provisions
established in Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code. No permit for a non -conforming sign shall
be issued without evidence of an approved variance. (1988 Code §39.14) (Ord. 679, 5-29-
01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.07: SIGN INSTALLER'S LICENSE PROVISIONS: (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
Subd. 1. License Required: No person shall engage in the business of installing signs nor shall be
entitled to receive a permit to install a sign in connection with such business unless first
licensed by the City to do so. (1988 Code §34.04) (Amended, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 2. Application and Fee: A license may be granted by the Council upon written application
to the City Administrator on such form as required by the City Administrator and
accompanied by an annual license fee as established by resolution of the City Council.
(1988 Code §34.05) (Amended, Ord. 844,5-20-10)
Subd. 3. Liability Insurance: Any person holding a license shall file with the City Administrator
policies of public liability and property damage insurance which shall remain and be in force
and effect during the entire term of said license and which shall contain a provision that they
shall not be cancelled without ten (10) days' written notice to the Municipality. Public
liability insurance should not be less than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for
injuries, including accidental death to any one (1) person and subject to the same limit for
each person in an amount not less than three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00) on
account of any one (1) accident, and property insurance in the amount of not less than fifty
thousand dollars ($50,000.00). (1988 Code §39.07) (Amended, Ord. 844, 5-20-10)
Subd. 4. Expiration: Licenses shall be issued on an annual basis, with the license year running
from January 1 through the following December 31. (1988 Code §39.08) (Ord. 679, 5-29-
01)
1008.07
1008.081 (Rev. 5/10)
Subd. 5. Revocation: A license may be terminated and renewal thereof may be denied by the
Council for violations of this Chapter or other applicable ordinances. (1988 Code §34.06)
(Ord. 679, 5-8-06)
1008.08: MAINTENANCE OF PREMISES: Premises on which ground signs are located
shall be maintained free of weeds and debris, and where landscaping was part of the original sign
permit, such landscaping shall be maintained in the manner provided in such permit. (1988 Code
§39.12) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.081: SIGN MAINTENANCE, REPAIR, PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS: (Added,
Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 1. All owners and property managers shall keep signs in good condition and repair and free
from peeling paint, rust, damaged or rotted support, framework or other materials, broken or
missing faces or missing letters. When any sign becomes insecure, in danger of falling, or is
otherwise deemed unsafe or a nuisance by a City Inspector, or if any sign shall have been
unlawfully installed, erected or maintained in violation of any of the provisions of this
Section and Chapter, the owner or from using such sign shall, upon written notice by the City
Inspector, make such sign conform to the provisions of this Section and Chapter or shall
remove the sign within ten (10) days. If the sign owner, user or responsible party has not
corrected such violation within ten (10) days, the City Inspector may remove or cause such
sign to be removed at the expense of the owner or user of the sign. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
Subd. 2. Obsolete Sign Copy: The owner or user of any property or sign that has any sign copy
that no longer advertises or identifies a use conducted on the property on which the sign is
located must cover or remove the sign copy within thirty (30) days after written notification
from the City Inspector. The City considers such a sign to be a nuisance sign. (Added, Ord.
816,1-22-09)
Subd. 3. The owner or user of any structure from which they have moved or removed a sign shall
repair and/or paint the structure with colors and materials to match the existing background.
(Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 4. Sign Permit Not Required: Activities considered to be normal maintenance and repair
shall not require a sign or building permit from the City. Such activities shall include
replacing or repairing lamps, ballasts, transformers, trim, sign fasteners, nuts or washers;
painting the pole or supports of freestanding signs; and painting the cabinet of the
freestanding signs or building signs. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 5. Sign Permit Required: For any sign that initially required a permit, the City requires a
permit for all of the following additional activities (the City does not consider such activities
as normal maintenance): (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.081 (Rev. 5/10)
a. Refacing a sign, except for the text on a manual changeable message sign. (Added, Ord.
816, 1-22-09)
b. Removing the sign for the repair of the cabinet or any part thereof. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-
22-09)
c. Changes made to a sign's size, illumination or electrical service, including, but not
limited to, height, width, weight, area, adding or removing illumination. (Added, Ord. 816,
1-22-09)
d. Changes to poles, structural supports, bases or shrouds, footings or anchor bolts, moving
the sign to a new location, or replacement of the interior or exterior cabinet frame, except
the sign face. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 6. Building Permit: The City also will require a building permit for signs or sign repair that
involves the construction of, or changes to, a sign, a sign structure, billboards and/or
electrical connections. All signs using electricity shall be subject to the State's current
electrical code. The contractor shall bury or conceal all electrical wiring for such signs.
(Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 7. Inspection Authority: All signs are subject to inspection by the Building Official or his
or her designee, who the City authorizes to enter any property or premise to detennine if the
provisions of this Chapter are being met. The inspector or City staff person shall make such
an entrance or inspection during regular business hours, unless there is an emergency.
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 8. Signs in Disrepair: The Building Official or their designee may order the removal of any
sign that the owner or the responsible party is not maintaining according to the provisions of
this Chapter. Upon failure to meet the requirements of a correction notice in the specified
time in such an order, the City Council may declare the sign to be a public nuisance, may
have it removed and impounded and assess the cost of the removal to the sign owner or to
the property owner. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 9. Impoundment of Signs on Public Property or Within Public Right-of-way: The City
Administrator or their designee may, at any time and without notice, remove and impound
signs that have been installed on public property, within a public right-of-way, or within a
public easement that are in violation of this Chapter. The sign owner or their agent may
retrieve an impounded sign subject to the following rules: (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
a. Any impounded sign may be retrieved from the impound area within five (5) business
days of the impoundment or the City Administrator or their designee may dispose of it. The
impound area can be located by contacting City Hall. Any cost incurred by the City for
disposal of an impounded sign may be assessed to the sign owner or the sign owner's agent.
(Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
1008.081
1008.09 (10/10)
b. The City shall have no obligation to notify a property owner or sign owner or their agent
that it has impounded a sign. (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
c. The City shall not be held liable for any damage to an impounded sign. (Added, Ord.
847,10-21-10)
1008.09: GENERAL LOCATION, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS:
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 1. General Standards: Every sign shall conform to the standards of this Section and Chapter
whether or not a permit is required, and nothing contained herein shall be construed as
modifying or repealing any of the provisions of this Code relating to zoning. No sign shall
be so located as to obscure or tend to obscure any existing sign. The following additional
requirements are to be followed and met: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
a. Each sign shall be securely built, constructed and erected on the building or ground.
Temporary signs shall be so designed that they are not readily overturned. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
b. No sign structure shall be attached or placed upon any building in such a manner as to
obstruct any fire escape or any window or door nor shall any sign structure be attached to a
fire escape.
c. The illumination of any sign located near a residential district shall be defused or indirect
and located so as not to direct light on residences. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. No swinging sign shall hereafter be erected or hung on or attached to any building within
the City, and every such sign so erected, hung or attached prior to the effective date hereof
which is deemed unsafe by the Building Inspector shall be immediately removed by the
owner thereof or changed to conform with the requirements of this Chapter when so ordered
by the Building Inspector. (Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
e. Where portions of a sign are subject to a different classification, each portion shall meet
the requirements of its classification.
f. All illuminated signs shall have a shielded light source. The City does not permit signs
that have light sources directly visible to pedestrians or to the operators of motor vehicles.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.09 (Rev. 10/10)
g. No sign shall display matter that has been deemed obscene by a court of competent
jurisdiction. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
h. No sign shall have moving sections or intermittent, blinking or flashing lights, except for
government signs and signs with dynamic displays as allowed in subdivision 1008.10(9) of
this Chapter. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
i. Each sign shall be used and maintained only in the manner permitted and subject to the
conditions imposed at the time the permit therefor was granted. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
j. Clearance of Signs from Conductors: The minimum clearance of any sign from
unprotected electrical conductors (whether poles or other installations) shall not be less than
thirty six inches (36") for conductors carrying not over six hundred (600) volts and forty
eight inches (48") for conductors carrying more than six hundred (600) volts. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
k. Signs Along Freeways: Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter and subject to State
and federal laws, signs located on property adjacent to any freeway within the municipality
(including hiterstate Highway 35W and US Highway 10) shall be business signs advertising
businesses being conducted on the premises on which the signs are located. No changeable
copy signs shall be located to face any freeway or be visible from the freeway. The
provisions of this subdivision and Chapter, however, shall not be construed to render illegal
or nonconforming any signs that are legally located along any such freeway at the effective
date herein. (Ord. 644, 12-13-99; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.09
1008.09 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 2. Signs Allowed by District: The following table represents the allowable signage and area
requirements (in square feet) by zoning district: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord.
816, 1-22-09; Ord. 829, 9-3-09; Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
Sign Type
RR=1
RR=2
RR=3
R_4
R_5
B_1
B-2
B_3
B_4
I_1
CRP
PUD
Ground
No
No
32
32
32
100
200
200
200
200
100
Wall
No
No
64
64
No
100
100
100
100
100
Projection
No
No
No
No
No
8
24
24
24
No
Window
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Identification
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
8
8
4
Temporary
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Real Estate
10
10
32
32
10
32
32
32
32
64
32
32
Horne
Occupation
I
1
No
No
1
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Campaign
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Billboards
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Directional
No**
No**
4
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
Construction
8
8
8
8
8
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
Incidental
1
I
1
I
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
Noncommercial
6
6
6
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
* Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as allowed by the PUD Narrative document. If no such document exists, signage shall
be as permitted for a B-3 zoning district.
** Directional signs may be allowed within right of ways upon written approval of the City, the appropriate governmental agency
having jurisdiction over the road way (if not the City) and the owner of the property directly abutting said sign.
Subd. 3. Ground Sign Height, by District: The following table represents the maximum height
allowed for ground signs in each zoning district. (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
I R-5
1 B-1
1 B-2
B-3
I
I-1
CRP
PUD
(1)
(0
8
1 8
1 8
20
201'1
35131
35
1 35131
35131
1013)
(1) No ground sign, other than home occupation, campaign, real estate, incidental and temporary
signs shall be allowed in these districts.
(2) Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as indicated by the PUD Narrative document. If
no such document exists, signage shall be as allowed for a B-3 zoning District. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
(3) Maximum billboard sign height in some locations is 45 feet. Refer to Section 1008.10,
Subdivision 6 of this Code. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06).
1008.10 1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
1008.10: SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 1. Ground Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all ground signs,
excluding incidental, temporary, home occupation, campaign, identification and real estate
signs: (Ord. 679, 5-29-0 1)
a. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than three feet (3') to any building unless
such sign is placed parallel to the side of the building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than 15 feet (15') to any perimeter lot line nor
located within a thirty (30) -foot sight triangle on any property abutting two (2) intersecting
street right of ways. (Refer to the graphic below.) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
County Road X
Right of Way E 30 ft
Sight Triangle*� ( w
I I�
1 1
Sign is set back
15 feet from 1
both front and
side property lines 1
1
1
Property
Lines 1
I
Sign cannot be
1
1
located within
1 X o
sight triangle.
1 3
1 0
1 �o
or
1 1< a
-C
I
The sight triangle is formed by connecting the two end points of 30 -foot lines extending in both
directions from the intersection of two property lines abutting a street or highway.
c. The owner, lessee or occupant of the land on which the ground sign is located and the
owner of the sign shall keep the property on which the sign is located free of long grass,
weeds or other rank growth, rubbish or debris. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. All parts of ground signs shall be designed for wind pressure of not less than thirty
(30) pounds per square foot, and ground signs of wood construction shall have all
members which extend into the ground protected from decay by treatment with a
preservative approved by the Building Inspector. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. No permit shall be granted for the location of any ground sign having a sign area of
more than forty (40) square feet within one hundred feet (100') of any single-family
residence. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.10
1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
f. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 6 of this Section (1008.10, subdivision 6),
no more than one (1) pole or pylon sign shall be allowed per lot. However, the ground sign
area allowance may be divided between one (1) pole or pylon sign and a monument sign or
between multiple monument signs, subject to the requirements herein, provided that one (1)
or more of the following conditions are applicable: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06;
Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(1) The lot abuts multiple street right-of-ways, in which case a sign may be located
along each frontage. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) There are multiple curb cuts or driveways accessing the property, in which case
a sign may be located near each access point or driveway, provided the signs are
separated by no less than two hundred feet (200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(3) The width of the lot, as measured along its longest street frontage, exceeds two
hundred and fifty feet (250'), in which case multiple signs may be located along the
long frontage provided such signs are separated by no less than two hundred feet
(200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) The property or properties are within an approved Planned Unit Development
(PUD). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 2. Wall Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all wall signs: (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
a. No wall sign shall have a projection over a private sidewalk or an established building
line of more than twelve inches (12"). (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
b. The wall sign area allowances as indicated in Section 1008.08, Subdivision 2 for B-2, 13-
3, B-4 and I-1 zoning districts are per building occupant. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
c. The wall sign area allowances as indicated in Section 1008.08, Subdivision 2 for the R-3,
R-4, PF and CRP zoning districts are per building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. In the B-1 zoning district, the area allowance, as indicated in Section 1008.08,
subdivision 2, reflects the combined area for all wall, ground and projection signage on that
lot. (Ord. 679,5-29-01; Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
Subd. 3. Projection Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all projection signs:
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. All portions of projection signs shall be designed for a wind pressure of not less than
thirty (30) pounds per square foot. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
f 11: n
1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
b. Such signs shall not project over public street right-of-way but may project over private
sidewalks. No such sign shall be less than twelve feet (12') above the level of the sidewalk;
except that such signs which do not exceed four (4) square feet and which do not project
more than two feet (2') over the sidewalk may be eight feet (8) or more above the sidewalk.
No projection sign shall project more than eight feet (8) over any private sidewalk. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01)
c. There shall be no more than two feet (2) of space between the inner edge of any such
sign and the face of the wall from which it projects, nor shall the outer edge of the sign be
more than eight feet (8) from the face of the wall. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. The building or structure from which any such sign projects and all attachments or
fastenings must be so constructed as to safely resist the dead load and the wind load added
by the attached sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. All such signs shall be of noncombustible materials or of not less than one (1) hour
fire -resistive construction. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
f Such signs shall be securely fixed in place and shall not be able to swing or sway. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01)
Solid. 4. Temporary Signs: All temporary signs shall comply with the provisions of this Section
and with this Chapter. The following general and specific standards shall be observed for all
types of temporary and portable signs: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
a. General Provisions:
(1) Except as provided herein, no temporary sign shall be located on any property in
the City without first obtaining a permit from the City. If the City determines to approve a
permit for any such temporary sign it may impose conditions upon the granting thereof, and
it shall be unlawful to locate or maintain any such sign for a longer period or in a different
manner than that specified in the permit. No permit for a temporary sign shall be issued if
prohibited by other provisions of this Code. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) Temporary signs shall not be hung or installed to cover, either partially or
completely, any door, window or opening required for ventilation. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord.
816, 1-22-09)
(3) No temporary sign for which a permit is required shall be located on any
property in the City for more than twenty one (21) days at one time or for more than three
(3) twenty one (21) day periods in any calendar year. A fifth (5h) temporary sign permit is
allowed for a banner only. Permit periods may run consecutively without interruption if so
approved. Except as provided in Subdivision 4g of this Section, only one (1) temporary sign
shall be allowed on a property at a time. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Amended, Ord. 847,10-21-10)
1008.10
1008. 10 (Rev. 10/10)
(4) The City prohibits temporary signs with blinking, flashing or fluttering lights or
with dynamic displays. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
b. Banners:
(1) Banners shall be strongly constructed and shall be securely attached to their
supports. They shall be repaired or removed (including all framework and supports) as soon
as damaged or torn and immediately upon expiration of the permit. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) Banners shall not exceed one hundred twenty (120) square feet or twenty
percent (20%) of the surface area of the building face or front upon which the banner is
attached, whichever is less. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Amended, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
c. (Deleted, Ord. 847,10-21-10)
d. Changeable Copy Signs:
(1) Portable and temporary changeable copy signs shall not exceed forty eight (48)
square feet on each side and the entirety of the sign copy shall be maintained within the forty
eight (48) square foot area. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) No part of such sign shall extend into or encroach onto public right-of-way.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(3) Such sign shall not obscure motorist or pedestrian vision and shall not block or
otherwise interfere with a public or private sidewalk or trailway. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) Such sign may be lighted provided said lighting is not a nuisance to motorists or
to adjoining properties. Flashing lights, strobe lights or lights which could be confused for
that of an emergency vehicle shall be prohibited. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. Inflatable Signs: (Amended, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(1) Inflatable signs and devices shall be securely tethered and attached to the
ground. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(2) The City prohibits the installation or placement of inflatable signs and devices or
balloons on building roofs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(3) Balloons less than two (2) feet in diameter are excluded from the permit
provisions of this Section. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) No Mylar or metallic balloons shall be permitted to be displayed or flown
outside. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.10
f (Deleted, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
g. Grand Openings and Other Events: Subject to all other requirements of this subdivision
and Chapter, a permit may be issued for a grand opening or other special event that would
utilize a combination of temporary signs at any one (1) principal location. No more than
one (1) special event permit shall be allowed per business in a calendar year. (Ord. 679, 5-
29-01; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 5. Window Signs: In the interest of public safety, the City requires that commercial or retail
businesses operating in the B-1, B-2, B-3 or B-4 zoning districts meet the following
regulations and requirements governing signs placed upon window interiors. (Ord. 679, 5-
29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
a. No business shall obscure more than fifty percent (50%) of any window section or pane.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Amended, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
b. Such window signage shall not obscure or block from view that area of a window or door
between four feet (4) and seven feet (T) from the interior floor level, unless such area does
not offer any visibility to interior public space. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
c. Window signs as allowed herein shall be exempt from any permit requirements. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01; Amended, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
Subd. 6. Billboards: A new or renewed interim use permit shall not be issued for any new or
currently existing billboard within the City: (Ord. 644, 12-13-99; Ord. 656, 3-27-00; Ord.
679, 5-29-01; Ord. 801, 1-7-08)
a. Interim Use Permit: Any IUP issued for an interim use billboard shall automatically
expire no later than July 1, 2037 or earlier if so indicated in the resolution approving the
IUP. (Ord. 644, 12-13-99; Ord. 656, 3-27-00; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 708, 12-30-02; Ord.
769, 5-8-06; Ord. 801, 1-7-08)
b. Maximum Sign Area: The maximum gross surface display area of the sign cannot
exceed seven hundred (700) square feet per side except that any rectangular billboard may
contain temporary extensions, cutouts, or top lettering which occupy a total area not in
excess of twenty five percent (25%) of the area of the basic billboard and form an integral
part of the design thereof. No such temporary extension, cut out, or top lettering may
project more than six feet (6) from the top, eighteen inches (18") from either side or fifteen
inches (15") from the bottom of the basic rectangular advertising message. The area of an
extension, cutout, or top lettering shall be deemed to be the area of the smallest rectangle
into which such extension, cutout, or top lettering will fit. (Ord. 644, 12-13-99; Ord. 679,
5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.10
1008. 10 (Rev. 10/10)
c. Orientation of Sign Faces: Billboards may have no more than two (2) sign faces. Sign
faces must be back-to-back with sign faces parallel or angled. All billboards with their faces
back-to-back and parallel shall have no greater distance than eight feet (8) between the
faces. All billboards with faces at an angle shall have no greater angle than thirty-five
degrees (35°). (Ord. 644,12-13-99; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
d. Maximum Sign Height: The maximum allowable height of billboards shall be forty-five
feet (45'), except for billboards located on County Road 10 or on Interstate 35W between
County Road H2 and County Road 1, in which cases the height shall be limited to thirty-five
feet (35'). The height shall be measured ftom the grade at the base of the sign or from the
surface of the roadway whichever is higher. (Ord. 644, 12-13-99; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord.
769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
e. Obstruction: No billboard may be located in such a manner as to obscure or otherwise
interfere with the effectiveness of an official traffic sign, signal, or device, or obstruct or
interfere with a driver's view of approaching, merging, or intersecting traffic. (Ord. 644,
12-13-99; Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
f. Dynamic Displays: All billboards with dynamic displays shall meet all the requirements
of Section 1008. 10, subdivision 9 of this Chapter. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 7. Campaign Signs: Subject to Minnesota Statutes, the following regulations shall apply to
all campaign signs for political candidates or issues: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. No more than one (1) sign shall be erected per candidate or issue along each street
frontage of any parcel of land. Campaign signs shall not be allowed on public property.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. Campaign signs shall not exceed twelve (12) square feet and not exceed four feet (4') in
height above the ground; except, where such signs are located no closer than one hundred
fifty feet (150') to the property line of a residential dwelling, the maximum size shall be
thirty two (32) square feet, and the maximum height above the ground shall be six feet (6).
(Ord. 679,5-29-01)
c. For local regular elections and referendums, campaign signs may be posted ftom forty-
six days before the local general election or referendum until ten (10) days following the
election or referendum. (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
d. For local special elections and referendums, campaign signs may be posted from the date
of filing until ten (10) days following the special election or referendum. (Added, Ord. 847,
10-21-10)
e. All campaign signs must be removed no later than the (10) days after an election; except,
that after a primary election, signs for the winning primary candidates need not be removed
until after the ensuing general election. (1988 Code §39.14; 1993 Code) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Amended, Ord. 847,10-21-10)
1008.10
1008. 10 (Rev. 11/11)
Subd. 8. Home Occupation Signs: In the R-1, R-2 and R-5 residential zoning districts, a sign not
to exceed one (1) square foot is allowed to be displayed provided such sign is attached to the
house or garage of the property on which the home occupation takes place. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
Subd. 9. Dynamic Display Signs: (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
a. The City allows noncommercial dynamic display signs wherever the City allows
commercial dynamic display signs. Such signs are subject to the same standards and total
maximum allowances per site or building of each sign type specified in this Chapter.
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
b. Standards for all dynamic display signs: (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord.
864,11-3-11)
(1) The images and messages displayed on the sign must be static, complete in
themselves, without continuation in content to any other sign. The messages, content and
images on all such displays shall not flash, blink, or move and shall not include any video
images or content. (Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864,11-3-11)
(2) No person or contractor shall install a dynamic display sign that because of its
position, shape, movement or color, interferes with the proper functioning of a traffic sign,
signal or that constitutes a traffic hazard. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(3) All dynamic display signs shall have ambient light monitors and shall, at all
times, allow such monitors to automatically adjust the brightness level of the sign based on
light conditions. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(4) The manufacturers, owners and operators of dynamic display signs must design
and equip such signs with a fully functional monitoring off switch system that automatically
slits the sign off or will freeze the device or sign in one (1) position; if a malfunction
occurs. The signs and displays also must be equipped with a means to shut off or
discontinue the display if it malfunctions. The sign owner or operator must stop or shut off
the dynamic display within one (1) hour or as soon as reasonably possible of the City
notification that the sign is not meeting the standards of this Section of Chapter. (Added,
Ord. 816,1-22-09)
1008.10
1008.10 (Rev. 11/11)
(5) Any dynamic display sign capable of accessing and utilizing MN Amber Alert
technology shall display such messages as they are made available by the N N Dept. of
Public Safety or other responsible agency. (Added, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(6) All dynamic display signs shall meet the following brightness standards:
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(a) No sign shall be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate
visibility and no sign shall exceed 500 Nits (candelas per square meter) at
night and 7,500 Nits (candelas per square meter) during the day. (Added,
Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(b) No sign shall be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a
motor vehicle driver with average eyesight nor shall such a sign interfere
with the driver's operation of a motor vehicle in any way or manner.
(Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09)
(c) No sign may be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the
effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal. (Added, Ord. 816,
1-22-09)
(d) The person owning or controlling a sign with a dynamic display shall
adjust the sign to meet the brightness standards according to the City's
instructions. The sign owner or operator shall adjust the sign within one (1)
hour or as soon as reasonably possible upon notice of non-compliance from
the City. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(e) All dynamic display signs installed after December 31, 2008, shall be
equipped and operated with an ambient light monitor or a mechanism that
automatically adjusts the brightness level of the sign in response to light
conditions. These signs also shall be equipped with a means to turn off
immediately the display or lighting if the sign malfunctions, and the sign
owner or operator must turn off the sign or lighting within one (1) hour or as
soon as reasonably possible after the City notifies the owner or operator that
the sign is not meeting the standards of this Section or Chapter. (Added,
Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008,10
1008.10 (Rev. 6/12)
(f) Subsequent to November 1, 2011, no dynamic display sign shall
have the capacity to operate in excess of 7,500 Nits (candelas per square
meter). The lamp wattage and luminance level in Nits (candelas per square
meter) shall be provided at the time of permit application. Dynamic display
sign permit applications must also include a certification from the owner or
operator of the sign stating that the sign shall at all times be operated in
accordance with City codes. (Added, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(g) In addition to the brightness standards required above, dynamic display
signs shall meet the City's lighting requirements as listed in Section 1103.09
(Glare) of the City Code. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864,
11-3-11)
c. In addition to all other standards of this chapter, the City allows on-site dynamic display
signs subject to the following additional conditions: (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended
Ord. 864, 11-3-11, Ord. 872, 6-7-12)
(1) Such signs may be located only in the Limited Business (B-2), Highway
Business (B-3), Regional Business (B-4) or Commercial Planned Unit Developments
(PUD's) zoning districts. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864,11-3-11)
(2) Notwithstanding subsection 1 above, such signs may be located on the sites of
schools, churches, places or worship or other institutional land uses, subject to the following
additional conditions: (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11, Ord. 872,
6-7-12)
(a) City Council approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) as outlined in
Section 1106.04 and Section 1125.01, subdivision 3 of the City Code.
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(b) Dynamic display signs in residentially zoned districts must utilize amber
color lights. (Added, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(c) Such signs shall not cause glare, disturbance or other problems to any
residential properties or land uses. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended,
Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(3) The owner or operator of a dynamic display sign shall control and display the
primary or background images and messages on the sign so they maintain each display for a
minimum of four (4) seconds. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11,
Ord. 872, 6-7-12)
1008.10
1008. 10 (Rev. 6/12)
(4) Dynamic display signage shall not exceed fifty (50) square feet of the sign area
or fifty percent (50%) of the total square footage of said sign face, whichever is less.
(Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864,11-3-11, Ord. 872, 6-7-12)
(5) Such signs may only display and advertise information about products, events,
persons, institutions, activities, businesses, services, or subjects that are located on the
premises or on the site or only to provide public service or community service information.
(Added, Ord. 816,1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864,11-3-11)
(6) Such signs must meet all other City location and setback requirements. (Added,
Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
d. The City allows off-site dynamic display signs subject to Section 1008. 10, subdivision 6
(Billboards) of the City's Code, the above-mentioned standards for all dynamic display
signs, and the following operational standards and additional conditions: (Added, Ord. 816,
1-22-09, Amended Ord. 864,11-3-I1)
(1) The images and messages displayed on the billboard must be static and each
display must be maintained for a minimum of eight (8) seconds. The transition from one (1)
static display to another must be instantaneous and without any special effects or videos.
(Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(2) Only billboard faces located adjacent to Interstate 35W and more than 1,000 feet
from any residentially zoned property in the City of Mounds View may be retrofit to a
dynamic display, and only subsequent to a building permit issued by the City. One hundred
percent (100%) of the sign face may be used for dynamic display. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09, Amended, Ord. 864, 11-3-11)
(3) Public Safety. If City staff determines that a dynamic display sign is not being
operated pursuant to this Chapter due to its location or display capabilities, City staff can
require the sign owner or operator to modify the sign after the City notifies the property
owner or operator about the operational issues. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Amended, Ord.
864,11-3-11)
1008.11
1008.11 (Rev. 11/11)
1008.11 MISCELLANEOUS SIGNAGE REQUIREMENTS AND PROVISIONS
Subd. 1. Signage Allowances for Specific Land Uses: Public or semi public recreational buildings
and neighborhood and community centers; public and private education institutions limited
to elementary, middle and senior high schools; religious institutions, such as churches,
chapels, temples, synagogues; nursing homes, senior assisted living facilities and
commercial day care facilities; may be allowed the following signage: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. Wall signage not to exceed 100 square feet per principal building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. Ground signage not to exceed 100 square feet, subject to Section 1008.10, Subdivision
le. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 2. Traffic -Control Related Sign Regulations: Compliance with the following regulations
relative to traffic control is required: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. No animated or moving sign shall be located or maintained within fifty feet (50') of an
intersection at which traffic semaphores are located. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. No sign shall be designed, located or maintained to obscure or conceal or cause
confusion as to any traffic -control sign or device. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
c. No sign shall be located or maintained on or over any public street or highway right-of-
way unless specifically permitted herein. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. There shall be no use of revolving beacons, zip flashers, flashing signs or similar devices
that would distract automobile or motor vehicle traffic to constitute a safety hazard. (Ord.
679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
e. The sign shall be located or maintained so as not to interfere with the ability of drivers or
pedestrians to see any crossroad or crosswalk. (1988 Code §39.13) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 3. (Reserved)
1008.11
1008.12 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 4. Area Identification Signs: The City Council at its discretion may allow for the placement
of an Area Identification Sign to define a neighborhood, community, development,
subdivision or multi -family complex and may require that: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. The applicant is a duly noted representative of the appropriate group or organization.
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. The land upon which the sign is located has been dedicated for such a use by easement,
plat or other legal and recordable instrument unless such sign would otherwise be permitted
herein. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
c. A maintenance agreement be recorded which among other things would provide for the
long term responsibility, care and maintenance of such sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 5. Off -Site Directional Signs: Off -Site Directional signs may be permitted within a public
right-of-way subject to approval of the City, written approval of the appropriate
governmental agency having jurisdiction over the roadway (if not the City) and the written
approval of the owner of the property to which the sign may be adjacent, if applicable. (Ord.
679,5-29-01)
1008.12: PROHIBITED SIGNS: The following signs and sign types are prohibited in the
City of Mounds View: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 1. Flashing signs. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-9)
Subd. 2. Signs, or lights attached to signs, which mimic or have an appearance similar to those on
an emergency vehicle or a traffic control light. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 3. Roof signs, unless integrally incorporated into the roof design, then such sign shall be
considered a wall sign. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
Subd. 4. Temporary or permanent signs posted within public right-of-ways, excluding directional
signs and signs expressly allowed herein and by other govermilental agencies. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
Subd. 5. Vehicles Used as Signs: Vehicles or trailers that display advertising and are parked in
such a way as to attract public attention shall be prohibited, except for signs on vehicles or
trailers which are magnetic, decals or permanently painted upon the surface of the vehicle
without obscuring any vehicle window area. Such sign shall not alter the profile or silhouette
of the vehicle. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Subd. 6. Nuisance Signs: Any sign considered a nuisance as defined herein shall be prohibited.
The property owner of the land upon which the sign is located or the owner of the sign shall
act to remove the sign or bring the sign into compliance upon notification of the City
Inspector. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.12 1008.13 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 7. Signs that have blinking, flashing or fluttering lights. (Added, Ord. 801, 1-7-08; Ord. 816,
1-22-09)
Subd. 8. Billboards, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter or Code. (Added, Ord. 801, 1-7-
08; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 9. Beacons and searchlights. (Added, Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
1008.13 NONCONFORMING SIGNS: It is the intent of the City with this Chapter that
nonconforming signs shall not be enlarged or expanded, nor should a person use this Chapter as
grounds for adding other signs or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. It is further the
intent of the City with this Chapter to permit legal nonconforming signs to remain if such signs are
safe, maintained in good condition and if such signs have not been abandoned, moved or removed.
Any sign, including a billboard, legally existing at the time of the passage of this Ordinance that
does not conform to the provisions of this ordinance shall be considered a legal nonconforming sign
and may be continued including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or
improvement but not including the moving, enlargement or expansion of the sign. "Expansion"
shall be defined as any structural alteration, change or addition that is made outside of the original
sign structure or design. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 1. Nothing in this Ordinance shall prevent the return or repair of a sign structure that has been
declared unsafe by the Building Official to a safe condition. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-
8-06; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 2. When any lawful nonconforming sign is discontinued for more than one (1) year, or is
changed to a conforming sign, any future sign or sign structure shall meet the provisions of
this Chapter. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 3. Any legal, nonconforming sign shall be removed and shall not be repaired, replaced,
restored, or rebuilt if it is damaged by fire or other similar peril to the extent of greater than
fifty percent (50%) of its market value at the time of destruction and no sign permit or
building permit (if applicable) has been applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of
the date of destruction. The City's Building Official shall be responsible for making the
determination whether a nonconforming sign has been destroyed greater than fifty percent
(50%) of its market value at the time of destruction. In making this determination, the
Building Official shall consider the market value of the entire sign at the time prior to the
destruction and the replacement value of the existing sign. In the event a building permit is
applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of the damage or destruction
and the sign did not withstand damage greater than fifty percent (50%) of its market value at
the time of destruction, the City may impose reasonable conditions upon the building permit
in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent properties. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
1008.13
1008.16 (Rev. 9/11)
Subd. 4. A lawful nonconforming sign shall not be changed to a similar nonconforming sign or to a
more restrictive nonconforming sign. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
Subd. 5. Sign Regulation Conformance. Should a sign owner, operator or contractor permanently
move a nonconforming sign or a nonconforming sign structure for any reason for any
distance, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this Chapter and with the zoning
district standards that it is in after the owner or contractor moves it. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
1008.14: ABROGATION AND GREATER RESTRICTION: Where the conditions
imposed by any provisions of this Chapter are either more or less than comparable conditions
imposed by any other code, rule or regulation of the City, the code, rule or regulation which
imposes the more restrictive condition, standard or requirement shall prevail. (1988 Code §39.14)
(Ord. 679,5-29-01)
1008.15: VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS: Any person found violating any of the
provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. (1988 Code §39.15)(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.16: SIGN VARIANCES: (Ord. 644,12-13-99; Ord. 679,5-29-01)
Subd. 1. A variance to the provisions of Chapter 1008 may be considered by the Board of
Adjustment and Appeals to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code
imposes practical difficulties to the property owner. Applications shall be submitted and
reviewed in the same manner as indicated in Chapter 1125 of the Mounds View Zoning
Code. (Ord. 644,12-13-99; Ord. 679,5-29-01; Ord. 816, 1-22-09, Ord. 861,9-22-11)
Subd. 2. Variance Requests; Fees: All requests shall be made in writing on the form provided by
the City and the request shall include the fee specified in the City's Fee Charges. All
information required when applying for a sign permit, as outlined in Section 1008.03, shall
be required before the request for a variance is considered. (Ord. 585, 7-15-96)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
July 9, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Schiltgen at 7:22 p.m. for July 9, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen, and Stevenson (arrived
at 7:25 p.m.).
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu and Smith.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
Renewable Energy Code Amendment 2
3. Approval of Minutes
June 5, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Elofson. To approve the Minutes of
the June 5, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment
July 9, 2013
Page 2
Planning Associate Heller commented the Commission started discussion on the Zoning Code in
regards to renewable energy system installations, such as solar energy, wind generators or
geothermal systems. She reviewed the language that has been pulled together for the ordinance
and recommended wind turbines proceed as a conditional use. She requested further comment
from the Commission.
Chair Stevenson supported having wind turbines as a conditional use due to the fact a
neighborhood would be affected by its installation.
Discussion ensured regarding a solar system currently installed in Mounds View. The
Commission was in favor of having solar panels not exceed the roof peak by more than three feet
in the R-1 zoning district.
Commissioner Love did not object to the visual appearance of solar panels. She questioned how
large solar panels could be. She recommended the City invite a solar panel vendor to speak to
the Commission at a future meeting.
Chair Stevenson asked what qualified as a `large' or `small' wind turbine.
Associate Heller stated there could be industry standards for these terms and she would look into
this further and report back to the Commission.
Commissioner Love inquired if two homeowners could share a wind turbine.
Associate Heller indicated this could only be completed if all setback requirements within the
ordinance were met. She stated requests may come before the City in the future and a variance
could be considered by the Planning Commission.
Discussion ensued regarding tree replacement plans and the criteria for approval for wind
turbines.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
July 9, 2013
Page 3
Associate Heller commented she would continue to revise the language on the Code and bring it
back before the Commission at a future meeting.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. July 24, 2013 (Note week change)
B. August 7, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. June 19, 2013
The Commission discussed the June 19, 2013 meeting minutes and noted a couple of changes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She noted the City recently
purchased the Taiko Restaurant and was hoping to purchase Robert's Sports Bar in the near
future. These properties could then be combined with the city -owned Premium Stop site for a
future redevelopment.
Associate Heller noted the Apple Tree Dental financing was approved last night by the Council
and hoped to close on the property in mid-August. She indicated the Northwoods Outdoor
business was open for business and would holding a ribbon cutting ceremony in the near future.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Commissioner Love encouraged the Commission members to read a book called Vision for
Better Communities. She found the information in this book to be current and progressive when
addressing planning activities.
Associate Heller commented the Commission had funds available for training and could possibly
use it to purchase these books.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
11. Adjournment
July 9, 2013
Page 4
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 8:22 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TinzeSaner OffSite Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
August 7, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
July 9, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. MU2013-001 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for an
1,140 Square Foot and 21 -foot Tall Oversize Garage
Address: 2917 County Road H2
Applicant: Peter McIntyre
6. Other Planning Activity
None
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, August 21, 2013
B. Wednesday, September 4, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. July 24, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
AN
MOT ND t T*� r Item No: 5A
VLV1J �/j��/ Meeting Date: August 7, 2013
Type of Business: Planning Case
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit
and Variance for an Oversized Garage at 2917 County Road
H2; Planning Case MU2013-001
Introduction:
The applicant, Peter McIntyre, is requesting approval of a conditional use permit and a
variance for an oversize detached garage on his property at 2917 County Road H2. The
applicant wants to expand his existing 840 square foot garage and make it 10 feet deeper, to
30'w'x 38'd, (1,140 square feet).
The applicant has submitted plans for a garage larger and taller than what the City Code
allows without a planning action. The City limits the size of accessory buildings, whether
attached or detached from the house, to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any single building
larger than 952 square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The garage
the applicant is proposing would be 1,140 square feet. The applicant is also requesting to be
able to build the garage addition the same height as the garage currently is, which no longer
meets the Zoning Code. The garage height met the Zoning Code at the time it was built, but
is now considered legal non -conforming. If a structure is non -conforming, it can be
maintained and repaired, but not expanded without a variance.
Conditional Use Permit Discussion
Requirements:
Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building,
the number of accessory buildings, the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings and
specifies roof style and pitch. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for garages
exceeding 952 square feet.
Section 1106.04, Subd. 6: This part of the Code enumerates the conditions for garages
exceeding 952 square feet. The garage must be permanent, be uniform in appearance with
the home, not exceed 35 feet in width, and not exceed 1,800 square feet of total accessory
building area on the lot.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1: The Planning Commission is required to review the possible
adverse effects of the requested conditional use.
Discussion:
The request fora Conditional Use Permit to construct the 1,140 square foot garage satisfies
the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds
View Zoning Code. The proposed garage meets all City setback and accessory building
coverage requirements, and the Commission will decide on the height. The City Code limits
backyard building coverage to 20% of the yard area. The expanded garage and the
additional existing 308 square foot accessory building would total 1,448 square feet which is
below the maximum of 1,800 square feet limit, and have approximately 5% coverage of the
backyard area.
2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request
August 7, 2013
Page 2
The applicant wants to expand the existing garage by adding 10 feet to the rear for a
workshop. The expansion would not change the appearance of the garage from the front.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and
address any potential adverse effects of a conditional use that include, but are not limited to,
the relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential
depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a
use. Staff has addressed each of these potential adverse effects below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as low-density residential, as well as the surrounding area. The Comp Plan
encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas to improve the quality,
appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. With this
project, the applicant would be creating a garage workshop.
The Geographical Area Involved. The applicant's home is located on a large lot in a
residential area on County Road H2.
Depreciation. The proposed garage expansion would benefit the subject property both in a
practical sense by providing additional indoor storage and workspace, as well as in an
economic sense, as the addition would increase the "value" of the property. Increased property
values are a benefit to everyone.
The Character of the Surroundinq Area. The applicant's neighborhood is entirely single-family
residential. The homes in this area are a variety of styles and ages, but the immediate area
properties all have large lots. The garage expansion would be into the backyard and not
change the look of the front of the garage. This is a larger property at 106 feet wide and 375
feet deep (0.89 acres), so the total accessory building coverage will only be about 5% of the
backyard area. The expansion of 10 more feet to the rear of the existing garage will not be
very noticeable. The adjacent property also has a 1,152 square foot oversize garage.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicant is proposing to expand his existing
garage into a 1,140 square foot garage by adding a 10 foot addition in the rear to create a
workshop. Both the applicant and his wife have hobbies that require a lot of storage space.
Variance Discusssion
The applicant built the existing garage in 1993, and the 21 foot height met the Zoning Code
at the time. The Code has since been amended and the maximum height for accessory
buildings was changed to 18 feet. The applicant has requested a variance so the height of
the expanded garage area can be the same as the existing garage, rather than the back 10
feet being a different height. The access to the second floor storage area is on the exterior
rear of the garage, and the doorway would have to be much smaller if the roof was three feet
shorter.
2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request
August 7, 2013
Page 3
The Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission may issue a variance to provide relief
to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical difficulties to the property
owner in the use of the property owner's land. This is true for all variance requests. State
statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application
and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section
1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. A variance may be granted only in the event that
all of the following circumstances exist:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these
regulations.
The zoning code limits the height of buildings in order to maintain visual consistency
throughout neighborhoods. This garage is already 21 feet tall and allowing the expanded
area to continue the same height will visually and practically make more sense than having
only the rear 10 feet of the garage be a different height. The 21 foot height met the Zoning
Code at the time it was built.
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
While the Comprehensive Plan does not specify design or size criteria for buildings, it does
support improvements to and the maintenance of properties.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The property owners have hobbies that require a lot of storage, and want to keep the exterior
of their yard looking neat by being able to store their things inside.
d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had
no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
This existing garage is a height that previously met the Zoning Code, but because the Code
was recently amended, it is now a non -conforming structure.
The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The applicant's neighborhood consists of large, almost one acre size lots, and the applicant
has a 2 -story house, so the height and garage size does not feel overwhelming to the property
or the neighborhood. The expanded garage will have no effect on the look of the property
from the street.
f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The 21 foot height variance is the minimum variance needed to alleviate the practical
difficulties since the garage already exists.
2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request
August 7, 2013
Page 4
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited
by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or
to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood,
and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to
and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Staff has no suggestions for conditions. The Planning Commission may add conditions as
they see applicable.
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, this application requires a public hearing. Staff mailed
notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant's property and a notice was
published in the Sun Focus newspaper on Thursday, July 25, 2013.
Recommendation:
After taking testimony from staff, the applicant and affected neighbors, the Commission may
take any of the following actions below related to the requests. Staff recommends approval
of this conditional use permit and variance.
Recommend approval of the CUP as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution
985-13 that approves the conditional use permit if the Commission chooses this
action.
2. Approval of the Variance as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution 987-13 that
approves the variance if the Commission chooses this action.
Choose to deny the conditional use permit or variance. If the Commission chooses this
option, Staff would need direction from the Planning Commission to prepare a
resolution of denial with findings of fact to support the denial.
4. Table one or both of the requests. If the Planning Commission needs more information
before making a decision or if they decide that there is need for more discussion, the
Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been
provided. Because of 60 -day requirements, the Commission would need to act upon
the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1.
Zoning Map
2.
Aerial View
3.
Site Plan
4.
Photos
5.
Resolution 985-13 for CUP
6.
Resolution 987-13 for VR
Zoning Map
O M
N
N
d
N
O
N
m
co
709
LN
V)
d
�
o
7085
g
/4bb
rn
7100
7474
707
7471
N
N
N
7457
0
0
0
N
N
N
�
N
OR
7092
ton M
74
7062
7095
7462
7074
0
Z
54
>
7069:T7006404
7456
�BR(D
Y
00
7057
/054
7447
7448
7044
7445
—
74
0 7451
ro
ro
m
7444
II
N
N
N
7415
7442
71
7425
7430
7435
7434
7409
7440
PP
II
7415
740
7405
7412
7408
7:
7405
7395
7400
Lu
J
7;
7385
738o
x
7381
7382
7:
a
7390
to
i'
7375
7350
N
7365
7360
0
7375
7:
Iz
7365
7350
7;
3
a¢Z
IQ
7347
7373
2
T
34
732
3
z
Y
732
325
.r
N
M
ro
7344
7;
7338
0
N
n
O
O
33
N
7317
M M
-�
7310
M
M
M
N
N
3 5
O
CountyRoad
H
NO
C11
-O
O
0-
OO
O
p7290
N
NN
N
N
NO
NN
N
COo
E
'
7280
7265
o
7270
3
726
o
0
n
O
7275
7260
n
0
7265
w
o HIDDEN
=
7234
>
vx
n
N
N 7255
7226
n
M
a
^
n
7200
7215
719
7188
7191
R-4
7161
7172
718
714901
7150
ffc
M7137
N104)
03
00
NN
5
M
cro
WOODALE
DR
Y
1n M
N
N
d
N
O
N
m
co
709
V)
d
�
o
7085
g
M
rn
7100
7070
707
O
N to M
O
"�
N
N
N
7094
0
0
0
N
N
N
�
N
OR
7092
ton M
7090
7062
7095
7074
0
Z
7072
7069:T7006404
Y
60
7057
/054
7044
7095
N
N
d
N
O
N
m
co
709
7085
7070
707
7060
7063
0
N
703
N
N
N
�
N
OR
3
o:
7034 7041 WOODCREST
7028 ap ry t 0 J
7026 S 702 g n N
non �° �° �° �?
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
& i
2�3
B
fAJ:ll
r
II
i
1{'
f 4
ry� �1'
r_ 6F
NNW
1{'
4K'
I.
e�� '• k�g 4k tiir r jJ M 714 w. „fir a .. s-.:i'.f S ,,y;: ..� "
�b.. f 0 � '�� f• f ys' : r 4.) / r �l J x-, �• l la t'.P
Wi
OF7
� l �� �`••'—{. . I�',.•i � i .�%r ?'S d F�i ° � r''°„r7' oi.
`1p1
y�+; • � � r� r i, w
- -.+... 6,*. _ � •�F _.rpt
m
c
tifo
i � T
+� i
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 985-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW FOR A 1,140 SQUARE -FOOT GARAGE AT 2917 COUNTY ROAD H2;
PLANNING CASE MU2013-001-CU-1
WHEREAS, property owner Peter McIntyre has applied fora conditional use permit
to expand the existing detached garage to 1,140 square foot garage; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 2917 County Road H2, is zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Lot 93, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 06-30-23-12-0124
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in excess
of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to exceed 1,800
square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed garage would be 1,140 square feet, thus requiring City
approval of a conditional use permit; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on August 7, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
a. Zoning Map
b. Aerial View
C. Site plan
d. Photographic documentation
e. Staff Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit
request:
1. The proposed oversized 1,140 square foot garage satisfies the zoning
requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the
Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential
areas to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and
residential property in general.
Resolution 98.5-13
Page 2
3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and
geography of the surrounding area involved.
4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood.
5. The applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the proposed
oversized garage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED thatthe Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit forthe 1,140 square foot
garage, with conditions as follows:
1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other
uses not allowed within the R-1 Single -Family Residential district or by the Zoning
Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use
permit shall be considered null and void.
2. The expanded garage area shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform
appearance with the existing garage.
3. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall become null and void if the work for
which the CUP was granted is not completed within one year from the date of
approval unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has
been granted by the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of
the minutes.
Adopted this 7th day of August, 2013.
Paul Schiltgen, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 987-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A THREE (3) FOOT HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR THE 10'X
30' EXPANDED AREA OF AN EXISTING DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING AT
2917 COUNTY ROAD H2; PLANNING CASE MU2013-001-VR-1
WHEREAS, the applicant, Peter McIntyre, property owner of 2917 County Road H2,
has applied for a three (3) foot height variance for the 10' x 30' expanded area of an
existing detached garage that is currently 21 feet tall; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 2917 County Road H2, is zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Lot 93, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 06-30-23-12-0124
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give
relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements
restricts the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or
extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's
control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on August 7, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which
all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
Resolution 987-13
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds thereto be sufficient practical difficulty with regard
to the property located at 2917 County Road H2, and makes the following findings of fact
related to its decision:
The existing 21 foot tall garage met the Zoning Code when it was built in 1993,
and the owner only wants the 10' x 30' expanded area to have the same height
as the rest of the garage.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant
will add a significant improvement to his property and can store more items
indoors.
3. The applicant owns several vehicles and other tools and equipment that could
be stored indoors. He will be able to maintain his property by being able to
store most or all of his items inside.
4. The applicant's lot is almost an acre in size, which is larger than most in the
city.
5. The existing taller garage does not appear to be an overwhelming size for the
neighborhood or the applicant's property.
6. The three (3) foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the
applicant's practical difficulty since the garage already exists with a 21 foot
height.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may
be necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such
variance upon other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Peter
McIntyre, property owner of 2917 County Road H2, to allow a three (3) foot height variance
for the garage.
Adopted this 7th day of August, 2013.
Paul Schiltgen, Vice Chairperson
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
July 24, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for July 24, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Rundle, Schiltgen, and Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Love and Smith.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
3. Special Order of Business
Chair Stevenson recognized Holly Smith for her past three years of service on the Plamung
Commission and wished her well on behalf of the City of Mounds View. She noted Holly was
moving out of state.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes
Renewable Energy Code Amendment
County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
4. Approval of Minutes
June 19, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve the
Minutes of the June 19, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Mounds View Planning Commission July 24, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 2
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
5. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
6. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment
Planning Associate Heller explained the Planning Commission has been reviewing the Zoning
Code in regards to renewable energy system installations. The systems include solar energy,
geothermal systems and wind energy conversion. Staff was recommending that this portion of
City Code be updated to help promote renewable energy systems and not hinder or make it
difficult for a property owner to install a system.
Associate Heller reviewed the revised Ordinance language in detail, which included the three
renewable energy systems and recommended Commission discuss and approve the new Chapter
for City Code.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve
Resolution 986-13, a Resolution Recommending a New Chapter to City Code, Chapter 1128
regarding Renewable Energy.
Ayes — 5
Nays — 0
B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
Motion carried.
Planning Associate Heller stated the County Road 10 corridor was the Council's priority this
year and the Planning Commission has been asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better
promote and accommodate development along County Road 10. She indicated the focus of the
Commission has been on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and reducing the acreage size
requirements for the projects on the corridor. Signage requirements to only allow shorter
monument style signs in the overlay district were discussed. She suggested that since the
Commission liked the idea of monument signs, they should consider amending the sign code so
it would affect all properties, rather than just redevelopment sites. She reviewed the proposed
language for a PUD overlay district in further detail with the Commission.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
July 24, 2013
Page 3
Chair Stevenson stated if only monument style signs were allowed in the corridor, would
building mounted signs be allowed.
Associate Heller stated there were two different allowances within the Code for wall signs and
ground signs.
Chair Stevenson supported the ground sign language, but recommended having this be a City-
wide change and not just along the corridor.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned if the Code addressed dynamic display signs.
Associate Heller indicated electronic and dynamic display signs were addressed within the sign
code, and the allowed size of dynamic signs is limited.
Discussion ensued regarding sign setbacks along the corridor.
Chair Stevenson recommended a five foot setback be used along the corridor.
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input this evening. She commented she
would research size examples of existing signs and report back at a future meeting.
Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. August 7, 2013
B. August 21, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. July 9, 2013
The Commission discussed the July 9, 2013 meeting minutes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. Chair Stevenson noted he would
not be in attendance at the August 7, 2013 meeting. She reported Keith Cramblit was appointed
to the open position on the Planning Commission and would begin attending meetings in August.
She noted the City purchased the Robert's Sports Bar property on Monday. She explained this
property along with Taiko's would be demolished and graded for future redevelopment.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
11. Adjournment
July 24, 2013
Page 4
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
MOUNDS VIEW
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
August 21, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
July 24, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
None
6. Other Planning Activity
A. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion —Sign Code Amendments
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, September 4, 2013
B. Wednesday, September 18, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. August 7, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
II
MOUNDS VIEW
of Mounds View Staff
.Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: August 21, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been
asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate
development along County Road 10.
The Commission has started by focusing on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and
discussing general development ideas to make the Corridor look better. One of those
ideas was changing the style and height allowances of the signage that is along the
Corridor to only allow monument style signs, and to reduce the 15 foot setback amount.
The Commission discussed sign code changes at the July 24, 2013 meeting and feels
that amending the sign code (Chapter 1008) rather than only having specific requirements
for the corridor, is a better option. The majority of the commercial signage is along the
corridor so it makes more sense to have the sign code be consistent for the whole City.
Recommendation
Continue the discussion about sign code amendments. Staff has included several photos
of existing business signs in the city, along with information about how tall the signs are.
Sincerely,
ONI�� I l
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Photos and size information of existing Mounds View signs
2. Chapter 1008, Signs and Billboards
JI,
FedTech on Mustang
Circle
12' tall x 8' wide
SA on County Road 10 &
County Road I
Just the top "sign" square is
13' tall x 10' wide
Wynnsong movie theater
25' tall x 15' wide
Edgewood
Commerce
Center
20' tall x 14' wide
Auto Outlet 26' tall
Mounds View Animal
Hospital
2625 County Road 10
9' tall x 10' wide
CVS Pharmacy 24' tall x 12' wide
ig
Haagen-Dazs
2�AS
1008.005
CHAPTER 1008
1008.09
1008.01 (Rev. 1/09)
1008.09 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 2. Signs Allowed by District: The following table represents the allowable signage and area
requirements (in square feet) by zoning district: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord.
816, 1-22-09; Ord. 829, 9-3-09; Ord. 847, 10-21-10)
Sign Type
R_1
RR=2
R_3
RR=4
RR=5
B_1
BB=2
B_3
BB=4
II_1
CRP
PUD
Ground
No
No
32
32
32
100
200
200
200
200
100
Wall
No
No
64
64
No
100
100
100
100
100
Projection
No
No
No
No
No
8
24
24
24
No
Window
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Identification
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
8
8
8
4
Temporary
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Real Estate
10
10
32
32
10
32
32
32
32
64
32
32
Home
Occupation
1
1
No
No
1
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Campaign
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Billboards
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No,
No
Directional
No**
No**
4
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
Construction
8
8
8
8
8
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
Incidental
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Noncommercial
6
6
6
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
* Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as allowed by the PUD Narrative document If no such document exists, signage shall
be as permitted for a B-3 zoning district.
** Directional signs may be allowed within right of ways upon written approval of the City, the appropriate governmental agency
having jurisdiction over the road way (if not the City) and the owner of the property directly abutting said sign.
Subd. 3. Ground Sign Height, by District: The following table represents the maximum height
allowed for ground signs in each zoning district. (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
R-1
R-2
R-3
I R-4
I R-5
B-1
I B-2
I B-3
I B-4
1 I-1
1 CRP
PUD
(1)
(1)
8
1 8 1
8
20
2001
35(3)
35
35131
3501
(z)(s)
(1) No ground sign, other than home occupation, campaign, real estate, incidental and temporary
signs shall be allowed in these districts.
(2) Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as indicated by the PUD Narrative document. If
no such document exists, signage shall be as allowed for a B-3 zoning District. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
(3) Maximum billboard sign height in some locations is 45 feet. Refer to Section 1008.10,
Subdivision 6 of this Code. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06).
1008.10 1008. 10 (Rev. 10/10)
1008.10: SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 1. Ground Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all ground signs,
excluding incidental, temporary, home occupation, campaign, identification and real estate
signs: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than three feet (3') to any building unless
such sign is placed parallel to the side of the building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than 15 feet (15') to any perimeter lot line nor
located within a thirty (30) -foot sight triangle on any property abutting two (2) intersecting
street right of ways. (Refer to the graphic below.) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
County Road X
Right of Way 30 ft
Sight Triangle*� 1 m
I Ix
1 I
Sign is set back
16 feet from
both front and
side property lines
1
1
Property
Lines
T
Sign cannot be
I
I n
located within
1 X o
sight triangle.
1
0
00
)
11< a
* The sight triangle is formed by connecting the two end points of 30 -foot lines extending in both
directions from the intersection of two property lines abutting a street or highway.
c. The owner, lessee or occupant of the land on which the ground sign is located and the
owner of the sign shall keep the property on which the sign is located free of long grass,
weeds or other rank growth, rubbish or debris. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. All parts of ground signs shall be designed for wind pressure of not less than thirty
(30) pounds per square foot, and ground signs of wood construction shall have all
members which extend into the ground protected from decay by treatment with a
preservative approved by the Building Inspector. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. No permit shall be granted for the location of any ground sign having a sign area of
more than forty (40) square feet within one hundred feet (100') of any single-family
residence. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
1008.10
1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
f Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 6 of this Section (1008.10, subdivision 6),
no more than one (1) pole or pylon sign shall be allowed per lot. However, the ground sign
area allowance may be divided between one (1) pole or pylon sign and a monument sign or
between multiple monument signs, subject to the requirements herein, provided that one (1)
or more of the following conditions are applicable: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06;
Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(1) The lot abuts multiple street right-of-ways, in which case a sign may be located
along each frontage. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) There are multiple curb cuts or driveways accessing the property, in which case
a sign may be located near each access point or driveway, provided the signs are
separated by no less than two hundred feet (200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(3) The width of the lot, as measured along its longest street frontage, exceeds two
hundred and fifty feet (250'), in which case multiple signs may be located along the
long frontage provided such signs are separated by no less than two hundred feet
(200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) The property or properties are within an approved Planned Unit Development
(PUD). (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
1008.13 NONCONFORMING SIGNS: It is the intent of the City with this Chapter that
nonconforming signs shall not be enlarged or expanded, nor should a person use this Chapter as
grounds for adding other signs or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. It is further the
intent of the City with this Chapter to permit legal nonconforming signs to remain if such signs are
safe, maintained in good condition and if such signs have not been abandoned, moved or removed.
Any sign, including a billboard, legally existing at the time of the passage of this Ordinance that
does not conform to the provisions of this ordinance shall be considered a legal nonconforming sign
and may be continued including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or
improvement but not including the moving, enlargement or expansion of the sign. "Expansion"
shall be defined as any structural alteration, change or addition that is made outside of the original
sign structure or design. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 1. Nothing in this Ordinance shall prevent the return or repair of a sign structure that has been
declared unsafe by the Building Official to a safe condition. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-
8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 2. When any lawful nonconforming sign is discontinued for more than one (1) year, or is
changed to a conforming sign, any future sign or sign structure shall meet the provisions of
this Chapter. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 3. Any legal, nonconforming sign shall be removed and shall not be repaired, replaced,
restored, or rebuilt if it is damaged by fire or other similar peril to the extent of greater than
fifty percent (50%) of its market value at the time of destruction and no sign permit or
building permit (if applicable) has been applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of
the date of destruction. The City's Building Official shall be responsible for making the
determination whether a nonconforming sign has been destroyed greater than fifty percent
(50%) of its market value at the time of destruction. In making this determination, the
Building Official shall consider the market value of the entire sign at the time prior to the
destruction and the replacement value of the existing sign. In the event a building permit is
applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of the damage or destruction
and the sign did not withstand damage greater than fifty percent (50%) of its market value at
the time of destruction, the City may impose reasonable conditions upon the building permit
in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent properties. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 4. A lawful nonconforming sign shall not be changed to a similar nonconforming sign or to a
more restrictive nonconforming sign. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
Subd. 5. Sign Regulation Conformance. Should a sign owner, operator or contractor permanently
move a nonconforming sign or a nonconforming sign structure for any reason for any
distance, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this Chapter and with the zoning
district standards that it is in after the owner or contractor moves it. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
August 7, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Schiltgen at 7:00 p.m. for August 7, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Cramblit, Elofson, Love, and Schiltgen.
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Rundle and Stevenson.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
2A. Oath of Office
Planning Associate Heller administered the Oath of Office to newly appointed Planning
Commission member Keith Cramblit.
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
MU2013-001. Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance
For an 1,140 Square Foot and 21 -foot Tall Oversize Garage
3. Approval of Minutes
July 9, 2013.
Page
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Love. To approve the Minutes
of the July 9, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
August 7, 2013
Page 2
A. MU2013-001 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for
an 1,140 Square Foot and 21 -foot Tall Oversize Garage
Applicant: Peter McIntyre
Address: 2917 County Road H2
Planning Associate Heller stated the applicant, Peter McIntyre, is requesting approval of a
conditional use permit and a variance for an oversize garage on his property at 2917 County
Road H2. The applicant wants to expand his existing 840 square foot garage to the rear and
make it 10 feet deeper to 30' wide x 38' deep. The garage would then be 1,140 square feet.
Associate Heller explained the applicant has submitted plans for a garage larger and taller than
what the City Code allows. The City limits the size of accessory buildings, whether attached or
detached from the house to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any single building larger than 952
square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant is also requesting
to be able to build the garage addition the same height as the garage currently is, which no longer
meets the Zoning Code. The garage height met the Zoning Code at the time it was built, but is
now considered legal non -conforming. If a structure is non -conforming, it can be maintained
and repaired, but not expanded without a variance.
Associate Heller reviewed the conditional use permit and variance requirements in detail with
the Commission. She noted public hearing notices were sent out for both the variance and the
conditional use permit. Staff received no comments either for or against the request. She
recommended approval of the requests.
Vice Chair Schiltgen opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.
Commissioner Cramblit asked when construction would begin on the garage addition.
Peter McIntyre, 2917 County Road H2, stated he had requested bids from a contractor. He
anticipated the work would not begin until the end of August or beginning of September.
Commissioner Love questioned if the applicant had spoken to his neighbors regarding the garage
expansion.
Mr. McIntyre conunented he had discussed the project with his neighbors.
Vice Chau Schiltgen closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
August 7, 2013
Page 3
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve
Resolution 985-13, Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a
1,140 square foot garage at 2917 County Road H2; Planning Case No. MU2013-001-CU-1.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Elofson/Commissioner Cramblit. To approve Resolution
987-13, Resolution Recommending Approval of a three (3) foot height Variance for the 10' x 30'
expanded area of an existing detached accessory building at 2917 County Road H2; Planning
Case No. MU2013-001-VR-1.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
None.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. August 21, 2013
B. September 4, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. July 24, 2013
The Commission discussed the July 24, 2013 meeting minutes and recommended approval as
submitted at the next meeting.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She encouraged all to attend
Festival in the Park on August 17, 2013 in City Hall Park.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
11. Adjournment
August 7, 2013
Page 4
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Vice Chair Schiltgen
adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
September 18, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
August 7, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-004 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in the Front Yard of a
Corner Lot
Address: 5048 Greenwood Drive
Applicant: John Ellis
6. Other Planning Activity
None
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, October 2, 2013
B. Wednesday, October 16, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. August 21, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 5A
MOUNDS vTIE Meeting Date: September 18, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Six -Foot Tall
Fence in the Front Yard of 5048 Greenwood Drive;
Planning Case VR2013-004
Introduction:
The applicant, John Ellis, is requesting a variance to install a 6 -foot tall fence in the "second
front yard" of his corner lot located at 5048 Greenwood Drive. The property is located at the
northeast corner of Greenwood Drive and County Road H. Since two streets border corner
lots, they have two front yards. As such, the City Code requirement for front yard applies to
two sides of the property, which means that corner lots to have additional limitations. The
Zoning Code indicates that no fence in front of the front line of a building in a residential
district may exceed four feet in height. The applicant recently purchased this newly
constructed house and would prefer to have a 6 -foot tall wood fence for screening from
County Road H, and thus has applied for the variance.
Discussion:
According to the Municipal Code, Section 1103.08, Subdivision 3, fences of a height greater
than 48 inches (4 feet) are not allowed in the front yard of a property without a variance. The
Zoning Code also establishes a sight triangle that limits all obstructions within the area at the
corner of intersections, measured thirty (30) feet from the point where the property lines meet
at the intersection of two streets. The proposed fence would not be located within the sight
triangle.
Variance Considerations:
For the City to approve this variance, as with any variance request, there needs to be
demonstrated practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation
of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that
the governing body (the Planning Commission) review a set of specified criteria for each
application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. The City has set these
criteria in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a
hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria and a staff comment
about each are as follows:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations.
The property at 5048 Greenwood Drive is a corner lot, which is not in itself unique;
however, the applicant seeks permission to have a 6 -foot tall fence for the purpose of
privacy and screening from busy County Road H. This property is also very close to
Sunnyside Elementary School which in itself creates a lot of vehicle and pedestrian
traffic, and there is a Metro Transit bus stop in front of this house. There will also be a
new sidewalk along this side of County Road H within the next two years. The taller
fence would provide privacy and security for this property.
5048 Greenwood Variance Report
September 18, 2013
Page 2
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties. The applicant, owning a
corner lot, is at a disadvantage to improve the property as other homeowners might
because the property has two front yards. Every property owner has the right to apply for
a variance to improve the function and livability of their property.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The applicant cannot control the fact that his property is a corner lot with two front
setbacks. The corner lots are much more restricted by the City Code and many times
the resident's use and privacy of the property is limited because of these restrictions.
d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the ownerof the property since the enactment of this Title
has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in
that most property owners do not have to work with these setback constraints. The City
has approved similar variances for taller fences in front yard areas of corner lots that are
along busier streets. When the applicant's house was built, the builder placed it close to
the north end of the property in order to give more separation from County Road H. The
house has a 15 foot side setback on the north side and approximately a 65 foot setback
from the south property line. A big portion of this home's backyard is considered the
front yard according to the City Code.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The proposed fence will be setback about 16 feet from the edge of the County Road H
pavement so it should not impact sight lines, include the view for vehicles going south
from Greenwood Drive and turning onto County Road H. There are other homes along
County Road H that have been granted variances for 6 -foot tall fences in their front yards
due to how busy this road is.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The two foot variance is the minimum variance needed since the Zoning Code limits front
yard fence heights to four feet.
5048 Greenwood Variance Report
September 18, 2013
Page 3
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited
by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this
Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the
neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must
be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by
the variance.
Staff does not have any suggested conditions. A zoning permit for the fence has already
been applied for.
Based upon the review of the above criteria, it appears to staff that the requested variance
does satisfy the practical difficulty threshold.
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, a public hearing is required. City staff mailed notices to all
property owners within 350 feet of 5048 Greenwood Drive. Staff received one email not in
favor of this request (included in this report).
Recommendation:
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and any
neighbors, the Commission should take one of the following actions:
Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 988-13 is attached for the Commission's
approval if they so choose.
2. Deny the requested variance. To move forward with this option, the Commission should
direct staff to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the
denial.
3. Table the request. If the Commission needs more information before making a decision or
if more discussion is needed, the Commission can table the request until they are provided
such information.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Corner Lot Fence Diagram
5. Resident Comment Email
6. Resolution 988-13
ZONING MAP
5149 5165 5152 5155 515 515 u I `1O
5140 5140 5141 5140 5141 5140 Y 5132
5141 5155 5142 5141 514 514 g
5132 5132 5133 5132 513 5132 p 5126
5133 W 5125 5124 12 5145 it 5132 5135 513 513 5120
5124 5125 p 5124 5 5124
5135 5114
5116 5117 � 5116 5117 5116 5117 5116 5125 " x'31 512 512
Z
5109 51p$ 5109 �••� •15 5114 511 5108
W 5108 5109 p 5108 5108 5115
5100 5101 5100 5101 5100 5101 m 5105 5108 5107 5108 Ln
a) 5100
eq I
WOODCREST
5092 5092 5091 5092 5091 5092 5091 5092 N 5091 5092
5086 508 5086 5085 5086 508 509 50$6 5085 5086 5085508 5083 5084
508 5079 5079 5080 5079 p 5080 15'7
3 5080 5080 Z 508 O 07 50795074
I 507 507 5072 5071 = 5072 5071 5072 5071 p 5072068 506 z 5064
506 506 5066 5065 0 5066 5065 Z 506 5065 � 5066Lj 06 5061 OJ5060506 5051 5060 5059 m 506 5059 5060 50592 5060056 505054 505 5054 5053 5054 5053 M 5054 5053 5054 5054504 504 5045 504 5045 5046 5045 5046 5051 / 5046
= •= _ i _ County Road H�'
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential
Aerial View
Per City Code- only the RED line area can have a fence more than 4 -feet tall without a
variance.
The YELLOW lines are where the applicant is requesting a variance to install a 6 -foot tall
privacy fence.
Sur
f. y �,' � •. "tom{ �.'��`efti '�.
j � r
IF
7- V'�� i �
T T� t1N1
i
I
0
is another 6 -foot fence 1
to the west at the NE corner
Atwood & County Road H
starts at arrow)
Greenwood Drive
City Code Permitted Fence Location for Corner Lots
r------------------------ ......................
Fence Heights:
----- 8'orless
" NOTES
i(See 1 — 3 above)
I
(
I
I
I
I
Front
Line of
House
E...............................
......................1 4' or less
Chain Link
House
Only chain link fences 4' tall or less are '
allowed within 30' of a property corner 30'
formed by two street right of ways.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::w
Street Frontage 30'
rn
Front
N
Line of
c
House
LL
K
:U)
Only chain link fences 4' tall or less are '
allowed within 30' of a property corner 30'
formed by two street right of ways.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::w
Street Frontage 30'
Public Comment
Sent fiom my Sprint phone.
------ Original message -
Fronn: winterglen
Date: 9111/2013 6:46 PM
To: heidi.lneller@monmds-view.nur.us;
Subject:Variance request for fence facing Comity Road H
Not certain I like the thought of a six foot fence along the Cty Rd H side of 5048 Greenwood Dr. It will be out of
keeping with the other property owners along H who also have "2 front' yards. Tha lot is already higher than the
road by 18 to 22 inches already ... so the fence will have a "stockade" appearance.
Also, has the City informed the home owner of the impending 10 foot wide walking and bike path that is being
debated right now? The fence would certainly impact sightlines for any traffic either on H or Greenwood... possibly
causing a driver to miss an aproachirng child.
Sony for lateness.
Kinnberley Thompson
5051 Long Lake Road
Sent from my Sprint phone.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 988-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A SIX-FOOT TALL
FENCE IN THE SOUTH FRONT YARD OF 5048 GREENWOOD DRIVE;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2013-004
WHEREAS, the applicant, John Ellis, has applied for a variance to allow a six-foot tall
fence in the south front yard (near County Road H) of his property at 5048 Greenwood
Drive; and,
WHEREAS, 5048 Greenwood Drive is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and
legally described as follows:
That part of the South % of the South % of the Southeast % of Section 7, Township 30 North, Range
23 West, described as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Section 7; thence North 10 rods; thence West 16 rods;
thence South 10 rods; thence East 16 rods to point of beginning, except the East 152.24 feet
thereof, according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Ramsey County,
Minnesota
And
That part lying South of the North 75 feet of Lot 7, Block 1, Twelve Oaks. Subject to a reservation
by State of Minnesota of all minerals and mineral rights over all but the North 75 feet of above Lot 7
PIN: 07-30-23-44-0117
WHEREAS, Section 1103.08 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the
maximum height of a fence in a front yard four feet (4'); and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to allow a six foot (6) fence in
the front yard abutting County Road H; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents about this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief
to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a
hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought
about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the
property owner's control; and,
Resolution 988-13
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Wednesday,
September 18, 2013, about this variance request; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria that must be
satisfied in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission
hereby makes the following findings related to this request:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission
finds that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard
to the property located at 5048 Greenwood Drive, and makes the following findings of
fact related to its decision:
The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding limited fence heights in front yards is
to not close off the front of the property from the visual openness of the street, but yet
still allow a fence for safety and some sense of privacy for the property owners. This
becomes difficult is on corner lots, particularly lots that front a busy street, where the
property owners really want the privacy due to the high traffic along one of their front
yards.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is
improving the property.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because the front yard height limitations
would preclude having a fence tall enough to provide security, screening and
buffering from busy County Road H.
4. The unique feature of this property is that it is a corner lot which creates two front
yards, and the house was built close to the north side of the lot so the second front
yard is very large.
5. There are other properties along County Road H that have a 6 -foot tall fence in the
front yard and have not changed the existing neighborhood character or caused
visibility problems for traffic.
6. The 2 -foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant's
practical difficulty since the Zoning Code limits front yard fence heights to four feet.
7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
Resolution 988-13
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, does hereby approve the variance request for
a six-foot tall fence in the south front yard of 5048 Greenwood Drive.
Adopted this 18th day of September, 2013.
Paul Schiltgen, Vice -Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
August 21, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for August 21, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Cramblit, Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen,
and Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present:
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
County Road 10 Corridor Discussion
3. Approval of Minutes
July 24, 2013.
Page
1
2
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve the
Minutes of the July 24, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as presented.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
5. Planning Cases
None.
6. Other Planning Activity
August 21, 2013
Page 2
A. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion — Sign Code Amendments
Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that the corridor is the City Council's
priority this year and the Planning Commission has been reviewing and discussing development
design along County Road 10. The Commission started focusing on creating a PUD Corridor
Overlay District and discussing general development ideas to make the corridor look better. One
of those ideas was changing the style and height allowances of the signage that is along the
corridor and reducing the 15 -foot setback amount.
Associate Heller explained the Commission discussed sign code changes at the July 24t" meeting
and feels that amending the sign code rather than only having specific requirements for the
corridor overlay district, is a better option since they will be applicable for the entire city rather
than limited to the Corridor. She requested the Commission discuss the specific sign code
amendments further and direct Staff how to proceed.
Chair Stevenson questioned if the monument sign requirements should be held just to the
corridor. He indicated the new standards could adversely impact businesses throughout the
community if it were approved universally throughout the entire City.
Commissioner Cramblit was in favor of adjusting the sign code for only those businesses within
the overlay district. He supported a zero setback for monument signs along the corridor.
Chairperson Stevenson suggested the setback be reduced to five feet on the County Road 10 side
of properties since there is so much right-of-way. He discussed the Walgreens monument sign
size and style. The Commission supported this recommendation.
Commissioner Love asked if the City would be purchasing the redevelopment books she
suggested at a previous meeting.
Associate Heller commented she would be purchasing four copies for the Commission and
interested Council members to share.
Associate Heller questioned if the Commission was in favor of requiring masonry, stucco, stone
or brick on the monument signs.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu was in favor of having some of the monument signs be masonry,
stucco, stone or brick. The Commission agreed with this recommendation.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
August 21, 2013
Page 3
Chair Stevenson discussed the suggested monument sign height. The Commission was in favor
of limiting the monument sign height to 16 feet.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu recommended the sign square footage remain consistent along the
corridor. She questioned how non -conforming signs would be handled.
Associate Heller indicated all existing signs would be able to remain in place unless they were
damaged 50% of its value at which time, the sign would have to meet the new standards.
Commissioner Cramblit suggested the City look into a loan program to assist businesses in
updating or improving their signs.
Commissioner Love was in favor of a loan program also possibly assisting with sign design.
Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input this evening.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. September 4, 2013
B. September 18, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. August 7, 2013
The Commission discussed the August 7, 2013 meeting minutes and made no changes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She updated the Commission on
the recent actions taken by the City Council, noting the City would be demolishing both the
Robert's Sport Bar and Taiko/Sandwich King properties by the end of September. She indicated
that Apple Tree Dental would be closing on the building very soon. She noted the Council
approved the conditional use permit for the oversize garage on County Road H2.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
11. Adjournment
August 21, 2013
Page 4
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
•
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
October 2, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
August 21, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-005 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in the Front Yard of a
Corner Lot
Address: 7700 Bona Road
Applicant: David Farrell
B. VR2013-006 Variance Request to Allow a Reduced Driveway Setback
Address: 2833 County Road H
Applicant: Kent Reed
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss Proposed Sign Code Amendments
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, October 16, 2013
B. Wednesday, November 6, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. September 18, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 5A
MT 7�T Meeting Date: October 2, 2013
OVIVDS VIEW Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Six -Foot Tall Fence in
the Front Yard of 7700 Bona Road;
Planning Case VR2013-005
Introduction:
The applicant, David Farrell, is requesting a variance to install a 6 -foot tall fence in the "second
front yard" of his corner lot located at 7700 Bona Road. The property is located at the southwest
corner of Bona Road and County Road I. Since two streets border corner lots, they have two front
yards. As such, the City Code requirement for front yard applies to two sides of the property, which
means that corner lots to have additional limitations. The Zoning Code indicates that no fence in
front of the front line of a building in a residential district may exceed four feet in height. The
applicant would prefer to have a 6 -foot tall wood fence for screening from County Road I, and thus
has applied for the variance, although after installing the fence.
Discussion:
According to the Municipal Code, Section 1103.08, Subdivision 3, fences of a height greater than
48 inches (4 feet) are not allowed in the front yard of a property without a variance. The Zoning
Code also establishes a sight triangle that limits all obstructions within the area at the corner of
intersections, measured thirty (30) feet from the point where the property lines meet at the
intersection of two streets. The proposed fence would not be located within the sight triangle.
Variance Considerations:
For the City to approve this variance, as with any variance request, there needs to be
demonstrated practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of
the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that the
governing body (the Planning Commission) review a set of specified criteria for each application
and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. The City has set these criteria in Section
1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all
of the criteria are met. The individual criteria and a staff comment about each are as follows:
The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations.
The property at 7700 Bona Road is a corner lot, which is not in itself unique; however, the
applicant seeks permission to have a 6 -foot tall fence for the purpose of privacy and
screening from busy County Road I. This property is across the street from several
apartment buildings which create a lot of vehicle and pedestrian traffic, and there is a
sidewalk along County Road I, adjacent to the applicant's property. The taller fence would
provide privacy and security for this property.
7700 Bona Road Variance Report
Ociober2, 2013
Page 2
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties. The applicant, owning a
corner lot, is at a disadvantage to improve the property as other homeowners might because
the property has two front yards. Every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to
improve the function and livability of their property.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable mannernot permitted by this
Title or the City Code.
The applicant cannot control the fact that his property is a corner lot with two front setbacks.
The corner lots are much more restricted by the City Code and many times the resident's use
and privacy of the property is limited because of these restrictions.
Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the
same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances
over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control.
The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that
most property owners do not have to work with these setback constraints. The City has
approved similar variances for taller fences in front yard areas of corner lots that are along
busier streets.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The fence is setback about 35 feet from the edge of the County Road I pavement so it should
not impact any sight lines, including the view for vehicles going south from Bona and turning
onto County Road I.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The two foot variance is the minimum variance needed since the Zoning Code limits front
yard fence heights to four feet.
The Planning Commission mayimpose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a
variance as maybe necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title orto
reduce orminimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood,
and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to
and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Staff does not have any suggested conditions. A zoning permit for the fence has already
been applied for.
7700 Bona Road Variance Report
October 2, 2013
Page 3
Based upon the review of the above criteria, it appears to staff that the requested variance does
satisfy the practical difficulty threshold.
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, a public hearing is required. City staff mailed notices to all
property owners within 350 feet of 7700 Bona Road. Staff has not received any comments as of
September 27, 2013.
Recommendation:
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and any neighbors,
the Commission should take one of the following actions:
1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 989-13 is attached for the Commission's
approval if they so choose.
2. Deny the requested variance. To move forward with this option, the Commission should direct
staff to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the denial.
Table the request. If the Commission needs more information before making a decision or if
more discussion is needed, the Commission can table the request until they are provided such
information.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Statement from Applicant
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Corner Lot Fence Diagram
6. Resolution 989-13
ZONING MAP
` W 7870 7861
6 g 7841 7836 3
0 7829 g 784"
1
7817
7695
7820
p
7833
783
1
7837
/1
7687
7809
766
781
3
7815
7581
]752
71
7801
7535
7806
78147827
7521
7817
66 R-4
0
7797
7800
7801
780
7
0
7787
7778
7749
7750
7807
7777
7768
7739
7740
7751
7767
0
7753
7748
7729
7730
7741
7'
7741
7729
771
7720
Q
77317'
Z
7729'
7710
77ps
771
p
7217
1 O
71
N
N
N
7711
7700
7Q
N
R-2
County Road I
CO
1
0
7695
t0
o
N
0
7635
to G
to tf
N C,
1
9
7625
7687
766
J61
759
7
7581
]752
7
7535
7521
66 R-4
1
9
766
7
7655
7645
B-3 N to u) N
N N N N
.r Cl
N Cl
w n �-
784
7715 n
—00
7701 N
1
0
7639
C
7635
1
3
C�
W
7625
761
J61
759
7581
M
N
7661
7651
7641
R-4
7631
7531
7521
7511
7501
" Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential
F
5
5
5
5
5
5
■
7565
C
7551
]752
7
7535
7521
M
N
7661
7651
7641
R-4
7631
7531
7521
7511
7501
" Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential
F
5
5
5
5
5
5
■
Aerial View
11 1i • I ..
Per City Code- only the RED line area can have a fence more than 4 -feet tall without a
variance.
The YELLOW lines are where the applicant is requesting a variance to install a 6 -foot tall
privacy fence.
Statement from Applicant
Ifni wr7wFinw nP Dmftnen0 /e ,k mnnnrWnn rinnimanhafinn W nProccarul nll// 0 1, to,
et�fQ Ur Q
___--r . . - .._r..__. �_--__.. __ ._._.._.-_rr-__�
T.P
_-
.1`-C- .Q91 iL i VI
kdk J7 ,' kum ALL!
NIA, WiluIt _
1
cone nl- Io
ra e,
r
o V. rodo VA,
Jb CIA i a ; J . Fen et tog, Id
a Ijd
410
UI c , ¢ (.e
IAf �e
I l r` c
l
rMIA910 ;b 6v 4
64-,V our'prog (k�-ul yi A ua aW(.e Pr) dace o -- 7
V✓cvp rl dw
7fter �� uli{0 - pcl
M &ln6td P aJ i f
- - Awe, a,
inq' r o Dick'
Iffs
GL kl � a - —
mma,
4-
r,"-.
City Code Permitted Fence Location for Corner Lots
" NOTES:
(See 1 — 3 above)
l-�Front
Line of
House
-----------------�......................
Fence Heights:
----- 8'orless
........................ 4' or less i 3
Chain Link
............................................ .
Garage
Only chain link fences 4'tall or less are
allowed within 30' of a property corner
formed by two street right of ways.
Front
Line of
House
i
Street Frontage 30'
30'
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 989-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A SIX-FOOT TALL FENCE
IN THE SOUTH FRONT YARD OF 7700 BONA ROAD;
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2013-005
WHEREAS, the applicant, David Farrell, has applied for a variance to allow a six-foot tall
fence in the south front yard (near County Road 1) of his property at 7700 Bona Road; and,
WHEREAS, 7700 Bona Road is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and legally described
as follows:
Greenfield, The East 15 feet of the West % of Lot 10. Subject to Road; The East % of
said Lot 10, Block 2. Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 05-30-23-33-0034
WHEREAS, Section 1103.08 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the
maximum height of a fence in a front yard four feet (4'); and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to allow a six foot (6) fence in the
front yard abutting County Road I; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents about this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to
property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a
hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about
by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's
control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Wednesday, October 2,
2013, about this variance request; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria that must be satisfied in
order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
Resolution 989-13
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby
makes the following findings related to this request:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission
finds that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard to
the property located at 7700 Bona Road, and makes the following findings of fact related to
its decision:
The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding limited fence heights in front yards is to
not close off the front of the property from the visual openness of the street, but yet still
allow a fence for safety and some sense of privacy for the property owners. This
becomes difficult on corner lots, particularly lots on busy streets, where the property
owners really want the privacy due to the high traffic along one of their front yards.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is improving
the property.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because the front yard height limitations would
preclude having a fence tall enough to provide security, screening and buffering from busy
County Road I.
4. The unique feature of this property is that it is a corner lot with two front yards, and there is
a sidewalk along County Road I that is adjacent to the applicant's property.
5. The 6 -foot tall fence in the front yard should not change the existing neighborhood
character or cause visibility problems for traffic.
6. The 2 -foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant's practical
difficulty since the Zoning Code limits front yard fence heights to four feet.
7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance upon
other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, does hereby approve the variance requestfor a six-
foot tall fence in the south front yard of 7700 Bona Road.
Adopted this 2nd day of October, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
MUMS MEW Item No: 5B
iL.�Y Meeting Date: October 2, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to allow a 3 -foot Driveway Setback
at 2833 County Road H; Planning Case VR2013-006
Introduction:
The applicant, Kent Reed, property owner of 2833 County Road H is requesting a variance
to allow the driveway to have a 3 -foot setback. The City Code requires a five foot setback
for driveways without a variance.
Discussion:
2833 County Road H is a large lot with the existing home placed 17 feet from the west side
of the property. There is a gravel driveway that runs past the house to the detached
garage behind the home. The applicant will be installing a new hard surface driveway but
wants to keep the driveway in the existing location with a 3 -foot setback because there is
limited room between the side entry steps on the house and the property line for a
driveway. The driveway will have a 5 -foot setback behind the house so that it lines up with
the garage.
The Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission may issue a variance to provide
relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical difficulties to the
property owner in the use of the property owner's land. This is true for all variance
requests. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified criteria
for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria
are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. A variance may be
granted only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these
regulations.
The zoning code requires minimum driveway setbacks for aesthetics and to provide
separation and some sense of privacy between neighbors. The required setbacks
typically can be met, but because the house was placed closer to the west side
property line and the detached garage is behind the house, the driveway has to run
next to the house to reach the garage. The house was built in 1940 and the
driveway location has likely existed with a 3 -foot setback since then.
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties.
2833 County Road H Driveway Variance Report
October 2, 2013
Page 2
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by
this Title or the City Code.
The applicant is asking for the driveway to remain as it has been for many years, with
a 3 -foot setback rather than the required 5 -foot setback. The driveway width for
vehicles to pass the house's side entrance steps could be 10.5 feet if the driveway
can have a 3 -foot setback.
d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in
the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other
circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title
has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The unique feature of this lot is where the house was placed on the lot. The
property owner purchased the property as it is currently.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
This driveway has been in the same location for many years, so there will be no
change to the existing character of the neighborhood.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The 2 foot variance is the minimum variance needed since that is what the Zoning
Code requires for a driveway setback.
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises
benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards
established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon
other properties in the neighborhood, and to better carry out the intent of the
variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough
proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
Staff does not have any suggested conditions. A zoning permit has already been
applied for the driveway construction.
2833 County Road 14 Driveway Variance Report
October 2, 2013
Page 3
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, this application requires a public hearing. Staff mailed
notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant's property and a notice was
published in the Sun Focus newspaper on Thursday, September 19, 2013. Staff has not
received any comments as of September 27, 2013.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant
and the public. The Commission may take one of the following actions related to the
request:
1. Approve the variances as requested. Resolution 990-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variances. The Commission should direct staff to draft
resolutions of denial with findings appropriate to support the denials.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before
making a decision or if they decide there is a need for more discussion, the Commission
can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided.
Respectfully Submitted By,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photos
3. Photographic Documentation
4. Statement from Applicant
5. Proposed Site Plan
6. Resolution 990-13
ZONING MAP
N I 1 111INI NI NI_N,N I N
WOODALE DR Y
rn o
m rn rn 7100
N N N
70940
O
7090
7074 Z
060 Y
2940
c
2932 SP C
tO
I \ N N
7095
CO
N
N
709
I
N
v
M
N
7085
.—
N
N
N
7070
707E-
706
-
7063
0
MM-!
N
703
N
N
N
CO
N
IIIIUUUI.rCLJ 1
I
*
v
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
s
t
D
5086
695 ""� VV,
6940 5066 506E
69 5 -
- -- 5060 505E
N �
N
e _ _ f1
5166516 5
5164 516 Q 5
5162 5161 O
)ODALE D
I n 514 Sy
! N _
5139 `
5133 F
512
�T 5119
5113
5107
00
T2,r�, I
N71)/fI
5060
5054 5053 v I avo auoo
00 N N N 5046 5045 5046 5045
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
Garage with 5 foot
setback
3
N.,
I
V•
- 1 s
Statement from Applicant
Reed Variance Application
Purpose: Pave existing class 5 gravel driveway at 2833 County Road H (Figure 1) with concrete.
This project is part of a larger home remodel and requires a setback variance.
Existing conditions: fused on GIs maps and direct measurements, the existing house
foundation, built in 1940, is approximately 17 %: ft from the property line (Figure 2). The
existing side entry to the home extends from the foundation an additional 5Y2 ft resulting in a
current distance from the entry deck to the property line of less than 12 ft (Figure 3). Current
building plans call for removal of the side entry deck and replacement with a narrower
structure specifically designed to increase the available clearance by 2 ft (Figure 4). The existing
driveway is located more than 35 ft from the neighboring house at 2841 County Rd H, and the
concrete pad in front of the garage meets the minimum 5 'ft setback.
Proposed: We propose to construct a 14 ft wide (measured from the closest point of the house
foundation to the property line) concrete driveway running parallel with the property line to
the existing curb cut on County Road H (Figure 5). At the back of the house, the West edge of
the driveway would be angled to adjoin the existing concrete pad. The resulting setback would
be a minimum of 3 ft in front of the house with a gradual increase from 3 to 5 ft where the new
concrete adjoins the existing garage pad. All concrete work to be completed by Goodmanson
Construction.
Justification: This proposal is in keeping with current use of the property. The paved driveway
would essentially lie on top of the current gravel driveway and align with the existing street
curb cut. Replacement of the side entry deck, at a significant cost to the homeowner, is
intended to minimize the needed variance. Granting this variance would allow for a useable
driveway clearance width of approximately 10 ft alongside of the new entry. Relocating the
driveway to the East side of the house is not a practical solution as it would require extensive
grading in addition to the removal of the existing gravel driveway, the removal of several
mature trees, removal and replacement of the curb cut, and construction of extended
sidewalks to entrances to the house. In addition to the added financial burden, this would
significantly impact use of the yard.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 990-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A DRIVEWAY WITH A THREE-FOOT
SETBACK AT 2833 COUNTY ROAD H; PLANNING CASE VR2013-006
WHEREAS, the applicant, Kent Reed, property owner of 2833 County Road H, has
applied for a variance to allow the driveway to have a 3 -foot setback; and,
WHEREAS, 2833 County Road H is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is
legally described as follows:
Knollwood Park, Lot 114, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 07-30-23-34-0047
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site Plan
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give
relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements
imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical
difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that
are beyond the property owner's control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding
this request on October 2, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which
all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard
to the property located at 2833 County Road H, and makes the following findings of fact
related to its decision:
Resolution 990-13
Page 2
The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding setbacks is to create physical
separation between driveways for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property
owners. The requested setback is the same that has existed for many years.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is
improving the property.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because the driveway runs past the house
that only has a setback of 17 feet, and in order to have a 10.5 foot wide drive aisle
past the house, the driveway setback needs to remain at 3 feet.
4. The unique feature of this property is the location of the house close to the west
side of the lot, and because the garage is in the backyard so that the driveway has
to run past the house in the limited space that is there.
5. The driveway has been in the same location with a 3 -foot setback for many years,
so there will be no change to the existing character of the neighborhood.
6. The 2 -foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant's
practical difficulty since that is what the zoning code requires for driveway setbacks.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Kent Reed,
property owner of 2833 County Road H, to allow a driveway to have a 3 -foot setback.
Adopted this 2nd day of October, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
AND
of Mounds View Staff
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: October 2, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
To: Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Sign Code Amendment Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been
asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate
development along County Road 10.
The Commission has started by focusing on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and
discussing general development ideas to make the Corridor look better. One of those
ideas was changing the style and height allowances of the signage that is along the
Corridor to only allow monument style signs, and to reduce the 15 foot setback amount.
The Commission discussed sign code changes at the July 24, 2013 and August 21, 2013
meetings and feels that amending the sign code (Chapter 1008) rather than only having
specific requirements for the corridor is a better option. The majority of the commercial
signage is along the corridor so it makes more sense to have the sign code be consistent
for the whole City.
The proposed added changes are underline and highlighted in blue, and deleted
language is stricken and highlighted in red. There is already language for nonconforming
signs, which are signs that don't meet the City Code after it's amended.
Recommendation
Review the proposed sign code amendments.
Sincerely,
♦%i
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Chapter 1008, Signs and Billboards with proposed amendments
1008.005
CHAPTER 1008
SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS
1008.01 (Rev. 1/09)
1008.09 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 2. Signs Allowed by District: The following table represents the allowable signage and area
requirements (in square feet) by zoning district: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord.
816,1-22-09; Ord. 829,9-3-09; Ord. 847,10-21-10)
Sign Type
RR=1
RR=2
R_3
RR=4
RR=5
B_1
BB=2
BB=3
B_4
I_1
CRP
PUD
Ground
No
No
32
32
32
100
35
200
200
100
Wall
No
No
64
64
No
16
16(31
100
100
100
Projection
No
No
No
No
No
$48
24
24
No
Window
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Identification
2
2
2
2
2
4
8
8
4
Temporary
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Real Estate
10
10
32
32
10
32
32
32
32
64
32
32
Home
Occupation
1
1
No
No
I
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Campaign
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Billboards
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Directional
No**
No**
4
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
8
8
Construction
8
8
8
8
8
32
32
32
32
32
32
32
Incidental
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Noncommercial
6
6
6
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
* Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as allowed by the PUD Narrative document. If no such document exists, signage shall
be as permitted for a B-3 zoning district.
** Directional signs may be allowed within right of ways upon written approval of the City, the appropriate governmental agency
havingjurisdiction over the road way (if not the City) and the owner of the property directly abutting said sign.
Subd. 3. Ground Sign Height, by District: The following table represents the maximum height
allowed for ground signs in each zoning district. (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
I B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
1 I-1
CRP
PUD
o)
(0
8
8
8
35
-1
cl)O
'
16
16(3)
16(31
16
16
16(31
(3)
(1) No ground sign, other than home occupation, campaign, real estate, incidental and temporary
signs shall be allowed in these districts.
(2) Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as indicated by the PUD Narrative document. If
no such document exists, signage shall be as allowed for a B-3 zoning District. (Ord. 679,
5-29-01)
(3) Maximum billboard sign height in some locations is 45 feet. Refer to Section 1008.10,
Subdivision 6 of this Code. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06).
1008.10 1008.10 (Rev. 10/10)
1008.10: SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 1. Ground Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all ground signs,
excluding incidental, temporary, home occupation, campaign, identification and real estate
signs: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than three feet (3') to any building unless
such sign is placed parallel to the side of the building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than 15 feet (15') to any perimeter lot line,
except signs on properties along County Road 10 may have a five foot (5') setback from the
lot line adjacent to County Road 10. No ground sign shall be ner located within a thirty
(30) -foot sight triangle on any property abutting two (2) intersecting street right of ways.
(Refer to the graphic below.) (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
County Road X
Right of Way < 30ft
e e e e e — — Sight Triangle* _fie w
0 ox
o a
Sign is set back V
15 feet from
both front and
side property lines V
0
0
Property ,1
Lines
0
0
Sign cannot be A
located within X
sight triangle. 8
8 0 g
p �0
* The sight triangle is formed by connecting the two end points of 30 -foot lines extending in both
directions from the intersection of two property lines abutting a street or highway.
c. The owner, lessee or occupant of the land on which the ground sign is located and the
owner of the sign shall keep the property on which the sign is located free of long grass,
weeds or other rank growth, rubbish or debris. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. All parts of ground signs shall be designed for wind pressure of not less than thirty
(30) pounds per square foot, and ground signs of wood construction shall have all
members which extend into the ground protected from decay by treatment with a
preservative approved by the Building Inspector. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
e. No permit shall be granted for the location of any ground sign having a sign area of
more than forty (40) square feet within one hundred feet (100') of any single-family
residence. (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
1008.10
1008. 10 (Rev. 10/10)
f. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 6 of this Section (1008.10, subdivision 6),
no more than one (1) pole or pylon sign shall be allowed per lot. However, the ground sign
area allowance may be divided between one (1) pole or pylon sign and a monument sign or
between multiple monument signs, subject to the requirements herein, provided that one (1)
or more of the following conditions are applicable: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06;
Ord. 816,1-22-09)
(1) The lot abuts multiple street right-of-ways, in which case a sign may be located
along each frontage. (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
(2) There are multiple curb cuts or driveways accessing the property, in which case
a sign may be located near each access point or driveway, provided the signs are
separated by no less than two hundred feet (200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(3) The width of the lot, as measured along its longest street frontage, exceeds two
hundred and fifty feet (250'), in which case multiple signs may be located along the
long frontage provided such signs are separated by no less than two hundred feet
(200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) The property or properties are within an approved Planned Unit Development
(PUD). (Ord. 679,5-29-01)
g Ground signs must include masoM construction materials such as stone, brick or stucco.
1008.13 NONCONFORMING SIGNS: It is the intent of the City with this Chapter that
nonconforming signs shall not be enlarged or expanded, nor should a person use this Chapter as
grounds for adding other signs or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. It is further the
intent of the City with this Chapter to pennit legal nonconforming signs to remain if such signs are
safe, maintained in good condition and if such signs have not been abandoned, moved or removed.
Any sign, including a billboard, legally existing at the time of the passage of this Ordinance that
does not conform to the provisions of this ordinance shall be considered a legal nonconforming sign
and may be continued including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or
improvement but not including the moving, enlargement or expansion of the sign. "Expansion"
shall be defined as any structural alteration, change or addition that is made outside of the original
sign structure or design. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 1. Nothing in this Ordinance shall prevent the return or repair of a sign structure that has been
declared unsafe by the Building Official to a safe condition. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-
8-06; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
Subd. 2. When any lawful nonconforming sign is discontinued for more than one (1) year, or is
changed to a conforming sign, any future sign or sign structure shall meet the provisions of
this Chapter. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769,5-8-06; Ord. 816,1-22-09)
1008.13
1008.13 (Rev. 10/10)
Subd. 3. Any legal, nonconforming sign shall be removed and shall not be repaired, replaced,
restored, or rebuilt if it is damaged by fire or other similar peril to the extent of greater than
fifty percent (50%) of its market value at the time of destruction and no sign permit or
building permit (if applicable) has been applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of
the date of destruction. The City's Building Official shall be responsible for making the
determination whether a nonconforming sign has been destroyed greater than fifty percent
(50%) of its market value at the time of destruction. In malting this determination, the
Building Official shall consider the market value of the entire sign at the time prior to the
destruction and the replacement value of the existing sign. In the event a building permit is
applied for within one hundred eighty (180) days of the date of the damage or destruction
and the sign did not withstand damage greater than fifty percent (501/o) of its market value at
the time of destruction, the City may impose reasonable conditions upon the building permit
in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent properties. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01;
Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
Subd. 4. A lawful nonconforming sign shall not be changed to a similar nonconforming sign or to a
more restrictive nonconforming sign. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06)
Subd. 5. Sign Regulation Conformance. Should a sign owner, operator or contractor permanently
move a nonconforming sign or a nonconforming sign structure for any reason for any
distance, it shall thereafter conform to the regulations of this Chapter and with the zoning
district standards that it is in after the owner or contractor moves it. (Added, Ord. 816, 1-22-
09)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
September 18, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Schingen at 7:00 p.m. for September 18, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Love, Rundle, and Schiltgen.
Absent and Excused: Commissioners Cramblit and Stevenson.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
VR2013-004 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in a Front Yard 2
of a Corner Lot
3. Approval of Minutes
August 7, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the
Minutes of the August 7, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as presented.
Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
5. Planning Cases
September 18, 2013
Page 2
A. VR2013-04 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in the Front Yard of a
Corner Lot
Applicant: John Ellis
Address: 5048 Greenwood Drive
Planning Associate Heller indicated the applicant, John Ellis is requesting a variance to install a
6 -foot tall fence in the "second front yard" of his corner lot located at 5048 Greenwood Drive.
The property is located at the northeast corner of Greenwood Drive and County Road H. The
Zoning Code indicates that no fence in front of the front line of a building in a residential district
may exceed four feet in height. The applicant recently purchased this newly constructed housing
and would prefer to have a 6 -foot tall wood fence for screening from County Road H and has
applied for a variance.
Associate Heller reviewed the variance considerations in detail and recommended the
Commission hold a public hearing and approve of the variance as requested.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu asked what material the fence would be made out of.
John Ellis, 5048 Greenwood Drive, explained the fence would be a maintenance -free material
and would be a clay tan color.
Vice Chair Schiltgen questioned if any trees would need to be removed for the fence.
Mr. Ellis stated no trees would be removed for the proposed fence.
Commissioner Rundle did not think the proposed fence would affect the sight lines along County
Road H.
Commissioner Love inquired if the lot was fairly level.
Mr. Ellis indicated the proposed location for the fence was level and the small bene along
County Road H would be removed when the sidewalk is installed.
Acting Chair Schiltgen opened the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
Acting Chair Schiltgen closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Coimnissioner Elofson. To approve
Resolution 988-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance to Allow a 6 -foot Fence
in a Front Yard of a Corner Lot; Plarming Case No. VR2013-04.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
September 18, 2013
Page 3
Commissioner Love commented there was a long length of six foot fencing along Silver View
Park and she found this to be suitable along County Road H.
3
None.
Ayes — 5
Other Planning Activity
Nays — 0
Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. October 2, 2013
13. October 16, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. August 21, 2013
The Commission discussed the August 21, 2013 meeting minutes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Motion carried.
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases noting she had two planning cases
scheduled for the October 2, 2013 meeting. The first case was a driveway setback and the other
was a six-foot fence request. It was noted the Taiko building would be demolished on Thursday,
September 19t" and Robert's would be taken down on Monday, September 23`d. She explained
Apple Tree Dental would be closing on their property next week with renovations to begin
shortly thereafter. Staff anticipated Apple Tree Dental would be open for business next spring.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Vice Chair Schiltgen commented his street was being completed this year and he was pleased
with the quality of the work conducted by the contractor.
11. Adjournment
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
September 18, 2013
Page 4
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
October 16, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
September 18, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. M12013-001 Minor Subdivision to Adjust a Common Lot Line
Address: 3030 & 3032 County Road J
Applicant: John Engberg
B. CU2013-005 Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage
Address: 8280 Eastwood Road
Applicant: Ryan Carlisle & Sarah Lange
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Proposed Sign Code Amendments
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, November 6, 2013
B. Wednesday, November 20, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. October 2, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
MOUNDS VtE-W
of Mounds View Staff
To:
From:
Item Title/Subject:
Introduction:
Item No: 5A
Meeting Date: October 16, 2013
Type of Business: Planning Case
Mounds View Planning Commission
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Consideration of a Minor Subdivision: Lot Line Change
between 3030 & 3032 County Road J;
Planning Case M12013-001
John Engberg, owner of 3030 County Road J, has applied for a minor subdivision to adjust
the lot line between his property and his late mother's property next door at 3032 County
Road J. The lot line change is not for development purposes or to create any additional lots,
but simply an extra 1,020 square feet of backyard area for the applicant. The applicant has
submitted a Certificate of Survey that shows the property line change. The property at 3032
County Road J is now owned by the children of Mary Engberg and they have agreed to this
subdivision.
Discussion:
A minor subdivision is ordinarily a division of land less than two acres in area in which no
more than one additional lot is created. Even though this particular request isn't creating
additional lots, it is still processed as a minor subdivision.
The lot is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and the Comprehensive Plan designates this
area for low density residential. The minimum lot width for interior residential parcels is 75
feet and the minimum lot area is 11,000 square feet, and corner lots must be a minimum of
100 feet wide and 12,500 square feet. Below is a table which shows the rear dimensions for
the parcels before and as a result of the proposed adjustment (the front dimensions won't be
changing):
As this table shows, the proposed lots still exceed all city standards.
Park Dedication Requirements.
Subdivisions of land are subjectto park dedication requirements consistentwith Chapter 1204
of the City Code. When the subdivided parcels are not going to be developed, Staff typically
recommends that the park dedication fee not be required. Since there will be no additional
development on the lots, staff is recommending that the park dedication fee not be required.
Before
After
Area Sq. Feet
Area Sq. feet
Mary Engberg lot
28,059 square feet
27,039 square feet
Parcel A
Rear width 120.86 feet
Rear width 100.01 feet
John Engberg lot
23,673 square feet
24,693 square feet
Parcel B
Rear width 108.86 feet
Rear width 112.01 feet
As this table shows, the proposed lots still exceed all city standards.
Park Dedication Requirements.
Subdivisions of land are subjectto park dedication requirements consistentwith Chapter 1204
of the City Code. When the subdivided parcels are not going to be developed, Staff typically
recommends that the park dedication fee not be required. Since there will be no additional
development on the lots, staff is recommending that the park dedication fee not be required.
Engberg Subdivision Staff Report
October 16, 2013
Page 2
Easements.
With most subdivisions, the City requires the owner to dedicate drainage and utility
easements around the perimeter of the lot. Since there will be no construction occurring, staff
is not requiring that these easements be added at this time. The applicant is adding a 15 foot
easement to the rear of the 3032 County Road J property so he will be able to access pipes
he installed to drain stormwater from his backyard, across the 3032 lot and into an existing
underground pipe after the 3032 property is sold.
Public Notice.
No public notice is required for a minor subdivision.
Summary.
The proposed subdivision will simply adjust part of the property line between 3030 and 3032
County Road J to give 3030 County Road J 1,020 more square feet. All minimum city
requirements are met with this request.
Recommendation:
Because the proposed subdivision satisfies all city code requirements, Staff is recommending
approval of Resolution 991-13, a resolution approving the minor subdivision of 3030 County
Road J, owned by John Engberg, and 3032 County Road J, owned by the family of Mary
Engberg.
Respectfully Submitted By,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Map
3. Resolution 991-13
4. Certificate of Survey
Zoning Map
/ 85TH
/ M
to
M
1
AVE.
`° 00 9
o
t
0 48 8493 N
=k5
t34Ei'1
8461
(CU
8477
8468
8469
-8458
2 8457
8454
�
8461
E
m
eQ
8444
8441
8449 -t
8434
8431
8422
8421
8425
8411
8430
8401
8421
1839,22
839
8419
8406
8389)
8407
8386
8387
8403
8380
8385
8391
8380
8370
1 8371
848
8485
8477
8468
8469
Q
8454
�
8461
E
m
8455
8442
8449 -t
8436
8425
8430
8421
8418
8419
8406
8407
8394
8403
8391
8380
8387
8 734
8383
8368
8371
t
NE—
847
847
841
8372
, we
8489
8479
8469
8463
8459
8445
8439
8429
8423
8419
8415
8409
8401
8391
8381
8371
8351
Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
.r
t.
'i T
--- — — �
__ >.�
��-
.,
a
1r i
.. . � �
■
� - �_
� '"
. 1
Q�1} i
- � ' � kS733'
O ! �� ��,!' . ,
.;._. •.
1 _ .' I ...
S'
` �
� '�
�. _ �w
I
.v ��I
a'1�' '
j' �. � �
'j+ 1
>, � �� ne
.'! .
,:
_ _�
� : T-:
_ ,
�- � 'd.'�J S�
r iTT
. +'. � ` 1_
.i
� �:
w�J
.. \111 °`'{'i
V 3 � � ug W2YxjW t`2 v4wi.
qlm j W
U.1
pp' N
�>. 4 YO aNih 0!�m1 U~ w
m wF �k
05 '9
CL
ppb �- 2N LN p NY Y y
dJ y yq `•N 4 �u�4i�Q�` o'a u`:n w H���° 5"�
UE i_-. W nE
Lij
W o°' 'awi O wm W�i W N 2 w�•.00c h :i 4 i h �r j
o�� 0$i• W o0 $w�
cc
Q_
`y UY q O OV 99V OV VUU
C9 ga c° hpq, o"o a4 h E 4 �0
W
O � �. Q Q �4' P12U�'�'
OU
Ew
a I �k Y3> .�.khxxC ^gg k we
d8'8Fd ?&ZO. hOON
co
Llj
ro na;uN„ - o a N.
OI w^ � wa � 4 x4UW
48751 M„ZO.it>OON �' - e. _ i--sr_—_—.__.�.
• _ �/ ___QSq
10581 ZO,9P.00cc
Z
Ol r.
n
-aP ZP- Ol ZSZ 489.9Zo00N
an o� r
la
k -
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 991-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION
BETWEEN 3030 COUNTY ROAD J AND 3032 COUNTY ROAD J;
PLANNING CASE NO. M12013-001
WHEREAS, John Engberg, has requested approval of a minor subdivision to
adjust the common lot line between 3030 County Road, J and 3032 County Road J; and,
WHEREAS, both of the properties are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and
are legally -described as:
3030 County Road J
The West 100 feet of the East 532 feet of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89,
Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 06-30-23-22-0088
3032 County Road J
That part lying West of the East 532 feet of Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 89,
Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN 06-30-2322-0089
WHEREAS, the 12 feet by 85 feet of land being detached from 3032 County
Road J and attached to 3030 County Road J is legally described as:
The East 12 feet of the South 85 feet thereof, as measured at right angles.
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to adjust the lot line dividing 3030 and 3032
County Road J to give the property at 3030 County Road J an additional 1,020 square feet
(12'x 85'); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Applicant's request for a
minor subdivision and has determined that it is in conformance with Chapters 1104, 1201,
and 1202 of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Applicant's request fora minor
subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and,
Resolution 991-1:3
Paye 2
WHEREAS, since no additional homes or development will occur as part of this
subdivision, a park dedication fee is not required with this subdivision application; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Applicant shall have 6 months
from final approval to file proper documentation with Ramsey County, and furnish proof of
such recording to the City. If such action is not accomplished by the date so indicated, this
minor subdivision approval shall be considered null and void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of a minor subdivision, lot line adjustment, of 3030 and
3032 County Road J, subject to the following stipulations:
1. The Applicant shall complete any and all requirements after final review of the
Certificate of Survey and title commitment by the City Attorney.
2. The Applicant shall arrange to amend the Certificate of Survey if any changes
are required by Ramsey County.
3. The Applicant is responsible for reimbursing the City of all fees associated with
this subdivision request.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of
the minutes.
Adopted this 16th day of October, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
Ite
MOUNDS v 1L' �Y Meeting Date: October 16, 2 13
Type of Business: Planning Case
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized
Garage at 8280 Eastwood Rd; Planning Case CU2013-005
Introduction:
The applicants, property owner Sarah Lange and Ryan Carlisle, are requesting approval of a
conditional use permit to construct an oversize attached garage on their property at 8280
Eastwood Road. The applicants want to demolish the existing 22'x 21'-8" (476 square feet)
garage and build a new 22'x50' attached garage (1,100 square feet).
The applicants have submitted plans for a garage larger than what the City Code allows
without a planning action. The City limits the size of accessory buildings, whether attached
or detached from the house, to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any building larger than 952
square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The garage the applicants
are proposing would be 1,100 square feet. The applicants indicate that they want the extra
space to store a boat and a classic car, among other things.
Requirements:
Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building,
the number of accessory buildings, the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings and
specifies roof style and pitch. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for garages
exceeding 952 square feet.
Section 1106.04, Subd. 6: This part of the Code enumerates the conditions for garages
exceeding 952 square feet. The garage must be permanent, be uniform in appearance with
the home, not exceed 35 feet in width, and not exceed 1,800 square feet of total accessory
building area on the lot.
Section 1125.01, Subd. 1: The Planning Commission is required to review the possible
adverse effects of the requested conditional use.
Discussion:
The request fora Conditional Use Permit to construct the 1,100 square foot garage satisfies
the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds
View Zoning Code. The proposed garage would meet all City setback, height and accessory
building coverage requirements. The applicants' property is 0.43 acres (81'x 231'). The City
Code limits backyard building coverage to 20% of the yard area. The added garage area
that extends into the backyard along with the existing 192 square foot shed would cover
approximately 5.7% of the backyard area. The total accessory building square feet with the
shed and new garage would be 1,292 square feet which is below the maximum of 1,800
square feet limit.
8280 Eastwood CUP Request
October 16, 2018
Page 2
The City Code also specifies that the roof for all accessory buildings exceeding 250 square
feet, shall match or be similar to the character and style of the roof of the principal structure,
and have a pitch or slope of at least 2-12, but no steeper than 12-12. The proposed garage
will have a pitch that matches the house since it's an attached garage.
CUP Considerations:
Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and
address any potential adverse effects of a conditional use that include, but are not limited to,
the relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential
depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a
use. Staff has addressed each of these potential adverse effects below.
Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as low-density residential, as well as the surrounding area. The Comp Plan
encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas to improve the quality,
appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. With this
project, the applicants would be creating more garage space to have more indoor storage for
their recreational vehicles. Such additional storage would be a benefit to the property and to
the neighborhood.
The Geographical Area Involved. The applicants' home is located on Eastwood Road, in a
residential neighborhood, towards the north end of the City.
Depreciation. The proposed garage would benefit the subject property both in a practical sense
by providing additional on site, indoor parking and storage, as well as in an economic sense, as
the addition would increase the "value" of the property. Increased property values area benefit
to everyone.
The Character of the Surrounding Area. The applicants neighborhood is entirely single-family
residential. The homes in this area are a variety of styles, with the lot sizes all around half an
acre. The garage would still look like a typical 2 -car size garage from the front, but would
extend deeper into the backyard. It would be visible to the adjacent backyard neighbors, but
the properties in this area are all fairly large at 80-100 feet wide and 230 feet deep (0.59
acres), so the deeper garage should not look out of place.
The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicants are proposing a 1,100 square foot
garage that would allow for parking recreational vehicles and a boat inside.
8280 Eastwood CUP Request
October 16, 2013
Page 3
Recommendation:
After taking testimony from staff, the applicants and affected neighbors, the Commission
may take one of the following actions below related to the request. Staff recommends
approval of this conditional use permit.
Recommend approval of the CUP as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution
992-13 that approves the conditional use permit if the Commission chooses this
action.
2. Choose to deny the conditional use permit. If the Commission chooses this option,
Staff would need direction from the Planning Commission to prepare a resolution of
denial with findings of fact to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before
making a decision or if they decide that there is need for more discussion, the
Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been
provided. Because of 60 -day requirements, the Commission would need to act
upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site Plan
4. Photos
5. Resolution 992-13
Zoning Map
8443
8444
yy
8415 840
8425 k8384
8405 8
8445
8444W
8241
8231 m
8453
N
8435
8434
8433
8432
8441
8425
84248428
8425
8365
8429
8325
8415
8414
8415
8405
8404
8415
8408
8290
8378
8390
8405
8400
8395
8384
8395
8380
8381
8373
8370
8385
8370
8379
8375
8367
8360
8375
8360
8359
8350
8355
8350
8345
8340
8345
8340
371
V8357
8335
8330
8331
8330
8325
8320
831518320
831588323
8291
8271
8310
8290
828
8270
8303WW8305
83218295
858287Z
738281((n
8265
8273
8260
8261
8255
8267
8250
8251
8250
6261
8240
yy
8415 840
8425 k8384
8405 8
t 0 ro m
N N N N N
8444
8241
8231 m
8255
N
AVE Ardan Avenue
t34b4
yy
8415 840
8425 k8384
8405 8
8454
8444
8424
8400
8390
3
8395
8380
8376
8385
8375
8378
8372
8340
8365
8372
8325
8360
8321
8346
8320
8315 8340
8305 8330
8300
8295 8310
8273
8267 8300
8255 8280
� M N 8 260
N N CIj
8290
8280
8260
8250
82420
WZW
W
6232825082501
8307
ARDAI
PARK
8283
8271
8247
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
I.
•�.'
i
--.
jL
Ar.
r `
Jr
�
-x
Expanded
77
Garage
r
i
406
i
r:
Site Plan
\i`h Ti
Jf< 1
�Y
t5
I
L j
ti..
)-L i
•. _ /' Sly p � 1 �p r � 4 - ,
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 992-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
ALLOW FOR A 1,100 SQUARE -FOOT GARAGE AT 8280 EASTWOOD ROAD;
PLANNING CASE CU2013-005
WHEREAS, property owner, Sarah Lange, has applied for a conditional use permit
to construct a 1,100 square foot garage; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 8280 Eastwood Road, is zoned R-1,
Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows:
Lot 2, Block 2, East Oaks, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 06-30-23-11-0078
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally allows garages in excess
of 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area not to exceed 1,800
square feet; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed garage would be 1,100 square feet, thus requiring City
approval of a conditional use permit; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial View
3. Site plan
4. Photographic documentation
5. Staff Report
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission makes the following findings of fact related to the conditional use permit
request:
1. The proposed oversized 1,100 square foot garage satisfies the zoning
requirements as outlined in Chapters 1104 and 1106 the Zoning Code.
2. The request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive Plan in that the
Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential
areas to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and
residential property in general.
I~;esolu ion 992-13
Page 2
3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and
geography of the surrounding area involved.
4. The proposed garage would not depreciate the neighborhood.
5. The applicants have sufficiently demonstrated that a need exists for the
proposed oversized garage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED thatthe Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permitforthe 1,100 square foot
garage, with conditions as follows:
1. The garage shall not be used for commercial purposes, living space or other
uses not allowed within the R-1 Single -Family Residential district or by the Zoning
Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted; the conditional use
permit shall be considered null and void.
2. The new garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform
appearance with the existing house.
3. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall become null and void if the work for
which the CUP was granted is not completed within one year from the date of
approval unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has
been granted by the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of
the minutes.
Adopted this 16th day of October, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
IU
MoUNns ViE4V
of Mounds View Staff
To:
From:
Item Title/Subject:
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: October 16, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
Planning Commission
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Sign Code Amendment Discussion
The corridor is the City Council's priority this year and the Planning Commission has been
asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate
development along County Road 10.
The Commission has started by focusing on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and
discussing general development ideas to make the Corridor look better. One of those
ideas was changing the style and height allowances of the signage that is along the
Corridor to only allow monument style signs, and to reduce the 15 foot setback amount.
The Commission discussed sign code changes at the last few Planning Commission
meetings and feels that amending the sign code (Chapter 1008) rather than only having
specific requirements for the corridor is a better option. Staff has drafted Resolution 993-
13 with the discussed amendments. The proposed added changes are underlined and
highlighted in blue, and deleted language is stricken and highlighted in red. There is
already language for nonconforming signs, which are signs that don't meet the City Code
after it's amended.
Recommendation
Review the attached resolution with the proposed sign code amendments.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Resolution 993-13
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 993-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE
TITLE 1008 REGULATING SIGNS IN THE CITY;
SPECIAL PLANNING CASE 189-13
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to improve the aesthetics and promote
development of the County Road 10 corridor; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the City Code regarding the
allowed heights and setbacks of ground signs; and;
WHEREAS, City Staff has recommended that the ground sign height limits and
setbacks along County Road 10 be reduced and the construction design be improved to
require masonory; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission agrees with the City Staff
recommendation to reduce the ground sign height allowed in the business, industrial
and conservancy, recreation and preservation zoning districts; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission agrees with the City Staff
recommendation to reduce the ground sign setback requirements for properties with
frontage on County Road 10; and,
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1008.09 of the Mounds View City
Code by deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
Subd. 3. Ground Sign Height, by District: The following table represents the maximum
height allowed for ground signs in each zoning district. (Amended, Ord. 829, 9-3-09)
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
1-1
CRP
PUD
(�)
c+)
8
8
8
20
16
20
16 (3)
35
16 (3)
35
16
35
16 (3)
35
16 (3)
(2)(3)
(1) No ground sign, other than home occupation, campaign, real estate, incidental
and temporary signs shall be allowed in these districts.
(2) Signage requirements within a PUD shall be as indicated by the PUD Narrative
document. If no such document exists, signage shall be as allowed for a B-3
zoning District. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
Resolution 993-13
Page 2
(3) Maximum billboard sign height in some locations is 45 feet. Refer to Section
1008.10, Subdivision 6 of this Code. (Ord. 769, 5-8-06).
WHEREAS, City staff has amended Chapter 1008.10 of the Mounds View City Code by
deleting the stricken language and adding the underlined text as follows:
1008.10: SPECIFIC SIGN TYPE STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS:
Subd. 1. Ground Signs: The following standards shall be maintained for all ground signs,
excluding incidental, temporary, home occupation, campaign, identification and real
estate signs: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
a. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than three feet (3') to any building
unless such sign is placed parallel to the side of the building. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
b. No part of a ground sign shall be nearer than 15 feet (15') to any perimeter lot
line, nor located within a thirty (30) -foot sight triangle on any property abutting two
(2) intersecting street right of ways. However, ground signs on properties that front
County Road 10 may have a five foot (6) setback from the lot line adjacent to
County Road 10 and a ten (10) foot sight triangle. (Refer to the graphic below.)
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
County Road X
Right of Way30�
— — — — — — i — — — — — — — Sight Triangle• =,7.� I w
I Ix
Sign is set back 1 A
15 feet from I I
both front and
side property
lines. Signs may 1
have a 5 foot
setback from 1
Countv Road 10. 1
Property
I
Sign cannot be
located within
o
sight triangle.
I �'
I M <
0
I A
v
1 a
Lines
r �
The sight triangle is formed by connecting the two end points of 30 -foot lines extending in both
directions from the intersection of two property lines abutting a street or highway. The sight
triangle on properties that front County Road 10 may be formed by connecting the two end points
of 10 -toot lines.
Resolution 993-13
Page 3
c. The owner, lessee or occupant of the land on which the ground sign is located
and the owner of the sign shall keep the property on which the sign is located free
of long grass, weeds or other rank growth, rubbish or debris. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
d. All parts of ground signs shall be designed for wind pressure of not less than
thirty (30) pounds per square foot, and ground signs of wood construction shall
have all members which extend into the ground protected from decay by
treatment with a preservative approved by the Building Inspector. (Ord. 679, 5-29-
01)
e. No permit shall be granted for the location of any ground sign having a sign
area of more than forty (40) square feet within one hundred feet (100') of any
single-family residence. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
f. Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision 6 of this Section (1008.10,
subdivision 6), no more than one (1) pole or pylon sign shall be allowed per lot.
However, the ground sign area allowance may be divided between one (1) pole or
pylon sign and a monument sign or between multiple monument signs, subject to
the requirements herein, provided that one (1) or more of the following conditions
are applicable: (Ord. 679, 5-29-01; Ord. 769, 5-8-06; Ord. 816, 1-22-09)
(1) The lot abuts multiple street right-of-ways, in which case a sign may be
located along each frontage. (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(2) There are multiple curb cuts or driveways accessing the property, in
which case a sign may be located near each access point or driveway,
provided the signs are separated by no less than two hundred feet (200').
(Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(3) The width of the lot, as measured along its longest street frontage,
exceeds two hundred and fifty feet (250'), in which case multiple signs may
be located along the long frontage provided such signs are separated by no
less than two hundred feet (200'). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
(4) The property or properties are within an approved Planned Unit
Development (PUD). (Ord. 679, 5-29-01)
g. Ground signs must include masonry construction materials such as stone brick
or stucco.
Resolution 993-13
Page 4
WHEREAS, amending the City Code to reduce ground sign height limits and
setbacks, and require higher quality construction materials would better serve the City's
goal of improving the aesthetics and promoting development along the County Road 10
corridor; and,
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission concurs that an amendment
to the City Code is warranted and justified.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning
Commission recommends approval of amendments to Chapter 1008 of the Mounds
View City Code to add regulations as defined herein.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs
staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.
Adopted this 16th day of October, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
October 2, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for October 2, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Cramblit, Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen,
and Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present:
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
VR2013-005 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in the Front
Yard of a Corner Lot
VR2013-006 Variance Request to Allow a Reduced Driveway Setback
Discuss Proposed Sign Code Amendments
3. Approval of Minutes
August 21, 2013.
Page
1
2
3
4
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve the
Minutes of the August 21, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 2, 2013
Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-005 Variance Request to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in a Front Yard of a
Corner Lot
Applicant: David Farrell
Address: 7700 Bona Road
Planning Associate Heller indicated David Farrell is requesting a variance to install a 6 -foot tall
fence in the "second front yard" of his corner lot located at 7700 Bona Road. She explained the
property is located at the southwest corner of Bona Road and County Road I. Since two streets
border corner lots, they have two front yards. As such, the City Code requirement for front yard
setbacks applies to two sides of the property, which means that corner lots have additional
limitations.
Associate Heller stated the Zoning Code indicates that no fence in front of the front line of a
building in a residential district may exceed four feet in height. The applicant would prefer to
have a 6 -foot tall fence for screening from County Road I and has applied for the variance, after
installing the fence. She reviewed the variance considerations in detail and recommended the
Commission support the variance as requested.
Chair Stevenson questioned why the fence was installed prior to seeking City approval.
David Farrell, 7700 Bona Road, stated he had friends and family lined up to assist with installing
the fence. He was not made aware of the variance requirement until he applied for the building
permit.
Chair Stevenson commented he did not object to the variance request, except for the fact that the
fence was already installed. He stated the work was not completed in the correct order. He
encouraged all residents in Mounds View to speak with the City prior to completing construction
projects.
Commissioner Cramblit questioned when the fence was constructed.
Mr. Farrell explained the fence was constructed the second week of September.
Commissioner Schiltgen indicated the fence was nicely done, but he had concerns with the
manner in which the project was completed.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 2, 2013
Page 3
Mike Winkel, 7701 Bona Road, explained there was a need for the homes along Bona Road and
County Road I to have a fence for privacy purposes. He stated the fence constructed by Mr.
Farrell was very nicely done.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m.
Commissioner Love indicated this variance request was similar to the variance approved in
September. She suggested fence heights allowed in the Code should be addressed by the
Planning Commission for homes along busy roadways.
Chair Stevenson was in favor of continuing to have the Planning Commission review variance
requests for taller fences on a case-by-case basis as it would be difficult for staff to determine
which roads were "busy". In addition, the Commission typically receives only one variance
request for fences per year.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution
989-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance to Allow a 6 -foot Fence in a Front
Yard of a Corner Lot; Planning Case No. VR2013-005.
Ayes — 7
Nays — 0
Motion carried.
B. VR2013-006 Variance Request to Allow a Reduced Driveway Setback
Applicant: Kent Reed
Address: 2833 County Road H
Planning Associate Heller indicated Kent Reed was requesting a variance to allow his driveway
to have a 3 -foot setback for the property at 2833 County Road H. She explained the City Code
requires,a five-foot setback for driveways without a variance. Mr. Reed is going to install a new
driveway and wants it to stay in the same location as the existing gravel driveway with a three-
foot setback. The applicant's house was placed near the west side of the property in 1940, and
the driveway runs next to the house to access the garage in the rear. Since there is a side
entrance with steps on the house, the driveway would be extremely narrow next to the house if it
were to have a five-foot setback. Associate Heller reviewed the variance criteria in detail and
recommended the Commission support the variance request.
Chair Stevenson did not object to the request as the existing driveway was not being widened
and the neighboring garage was 35 feet from the driveway so it wouldn't be affected. He
supported the reduced driveway setback.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:26 p.m.
Commissioner Schiltgen asked if the driveway would remain Class 5.
Kent Reed, 2833 County Road H, explained the entire driveway would be paved with concrete.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:27 p.m.
October 2, 2013
Page 4
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution
990-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Reduced Driveway Setback; Planning Case
No. VR2013-006.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss Proposed Sign Code Amendments
Planning Associate Heller explained the Commission discussed sign code changes at the July 24,
2013 and August 21, 2013 Planning Commission meetings and was in favor of amending the
sign code rather than only having specific requirements for the County Road 10 corridor. The
majority of the commercial signage within the City is along the corridor, but it would make the
most sense to have the sign code be consistent for the entire City. Associate Heller also
suggested that the Commission review the "sight triangle" setback amount as a 30 -foot setback
seems excessive given the amount of right-of-way along County Road 10. She requested the
Commission review the proposed sign code amendment and provide feedback for staff.
Commissioner Cramblit recommended the "sight triangle" setback along the County Road 10
corridor be reduced to 10 feet instead of 30 feet.
Chair Stevenson supported this suggestion for signs along County Highway 10 only. The
Commission agreed.
Chair Stevenson asked if new signs should be required to have masonry construction materials.
Commissioner Carvelli-Yu thought this would be an important requirement to improve the sign
aesthetic quality throughout the City.
Chair Stevenson recommended staff make the recommended changes and report back to the
Commission at a future meeting.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. October 16, 2013
B. November 6, 2013
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
8. Review Minutes:
A. September 18, 2013
The Commission discussed the September 18, 2013 meeting minutes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
October 2, 2013
Page 5
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She stated Coventry was hoping
to have their foundation completed this fall. She explained the Tailco and Robert's buildings had
been torn down. It was noted a consultant would be assisting the City with planning the future
redevelopment of these properties.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Chair Stevenson explained the Lion's would be holding a Spaghetti Dinner on October 15t' from
4:30 to 7:30 p.m. He encouraged all to attend this community event.
11. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:46 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver OffSite Secretarial, Inc.
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
November 6, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes:
October 2, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
A. VR2013-008 Variance Request to Allow Reduced Parking Lot Setbacks
Address: 2832 County Road 10
Applicant: Naoufel Soussi, Tires N' More
B. VR2013-007 Variance Request to Allow an Addition to Encroach into the
Front Yard Setback
Address: 5420 Adams Street
Applicant: Flint Homes, Blaine, MN
6. Other Planning Activity
None
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, November 20, 2013
B. Wednesday, December 4, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. October 16, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
MOUNDS VfEw Item No: 13
Meeting Date: September 6, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance request to allow reduced parking lot
setbacks at Tires N' More, 2832 County Road 10;
Planning Case VR2013-008
Introduction:
The applicant, Naoufel Soussi, owner of Tires N' More at 2832 County Road 10, will be installing
a new parking lot with curbing, and is requesting variances for reduced parking lot setbacks on
three sides of the property.
The previous owners of the building had originally intended to redevelop the property along with
the CVS development and was working with Velmeir (the CVS developer) on improving the
parking lot and sharing the County Road 10 driveway access . The applicant's rear parking lot
was removed by Velmeir in anticipation of reconstruction that would be done with CVS's parking
lot. The previous owner did not sign off on the plans, so Velmeir did not complete the 2832
County Road 10 building's parking lot and it remains uncompleted.
Discussion:
Mr. Soussi purchased the property at 2832 County Road 10 and is using the existing building
that was built in 1965. This property does not have its own access to County Road 10 and must
share access driveways with the adjoining properties. There are driveway and parking
easements in place with both the Simon's building at 2840 County Road 10 and the CVS
Pharmacy property at 2800 County Road 10. The Tires N' More building is not sitting parallel to
County Road 10, so because of this and the angle of the front property line, the front parking lot
is small and not safe to have more than one vehicle maneuvering in the front parking lot at a
time. Instead, the applicant primarily uses the CVS County Road 10 driveway for access to his
business.
The building currently has asphalt only in the front and along the west side of the building, and
both of these areas are paved up to the property line. The applicant has requested a 5 foot
setback for the front parking lot, which would match the 5 foot parking lot setbacks at CVS (they
were granted variances for reduced parking lot setbacks). When Velmeir installed the CVS
parking lot, they also paved and installed curb in the easement area on the southeast side of the
Tires N' More property that CVS is using. Mr. Soussi will be leaving this curb as is.
The required and requested parking lot setbacks for this property are:
Required Requested
Front: 30 feet 5 feet
West: 20 feet* 0 feet (for about half of the lot, then it will be 20 feet).
East: 5 feet 0 feet
Rear: 5 feet Will meet 5 foot setback requirement
*Commercial parking lot setback requirements are larger when abutting residential properties
Tires N' More Parking Lot Variances Report
November 6, 2013
Page 2
For the Planning Commission to act favorably toward this application, there must be a
demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal
interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. This is true for
all variance requests. State statutes require that the governing body review a set of specified
criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. These
criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states
that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The individual criteria, with responses, are
as follows:
a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations.
The zoning code requires driveway and parking setbacks for aesthetics and to provide
separation and some sense of privacy and security between businesses and neighbors.
The zoning code primarily deals with aesthetics and size limitations, not safety. When
older, existing buildings need improvements, such as expansions or parking lots, it is
often difficult to meet current code requirements.
b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
While the Comprehensive Plan does not specify design criteria for properties, it does
support improvements to and the maintenance of properties. The installation of a new
parking lot will be a large improvement to this property.
C. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this
Title or the City Code.
The applicant is asking for the reduced parking lot setbacks in order to be able to access
his property and to limit the traffic in the front parking lot for safety reasons.
Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to otherproperties in the
same zone or vicinity and result from lot size orshape, topography or other circumstances
over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control.
The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
The unique feature of this property is that the north property line is angled, the building
does not sit parallel to County Road 10 and is located closer to the front of the lot, making
the front parking lot very small and difficult to maneuver through. The building does not
have its own access to County Road 10 and must use the two adjoining properties'
access driveways. The building has side setbacks of about 14 feet (west side) and 32
feet (east side), which leave limited room to access the rear parking lot.
The applicant purchased the property as -is and is not responsible for the conditions that
have prompted him to apply for a variance.
Tires N' More Parking Lot Variances Report
Novemher 0, 2013
Page 3
The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The access driveways from the adjoining parcels have been as is for many years, and
there is currently asphalt in the front parking lot up to the property line, so there will be no
change to the existing character of the neighborhood. Instead it will be a big improvement
to this property and the neighborhood.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
The requested variances are the minimum that would be necessary in order for the
applicant to be able to access his property and the rear parking lot.
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a
variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to
reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood,
and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to
and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
1. Tires N' More owners should make all possible efforts to prevent their customers and
employees from using the CVS access to Silver Lake Road. The property owner of
2800 County Road 10 does not give permission for the applicant to use of any more of
their property than what is specified in the easement documents.
2. A sign must be installed at the access drive between Tires N' More and CVS to direct
Tires N' More customers and employees that are leaving the property, to "exit left
only" to direct them towards County Road 10 rather than behind the CVS building.
This sign must be installed either by the completion of the parking lot, or by April 1,
2014, whichever occurs first.
The entire parking lot must be installed by September 1, 2014. The City Council
granted an extension of the original deadline that was stated in the conditional use
permit to operate the business (Resolution 7984).
Public Hearing:
As with any requested variance, a public hearing is required. Staff mailed notices to all property
owners within 350 feet of the applicant's property and a notice was published in the Sun Focus
newspaper.
In September 2012, when Mr. Soussi first applied for this variance, Staff had been in contact
with the attorney representing JK & SK Mn, LLC, the property owner of 2800 County Road 10
(CVS does not own the land). They do not want Tires N' More using any of their property that is
not included in the easement agreements. A letter describing the current request was sent to
the property owner of 2800 County Road 10, along with the public hearing notices mailed. As of
November 1, 2013, staff has not received any comments.
Tires N' More Parking Lot Variances Report
September 5, 2012
Page 4
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commissioners take testimony from staff and the applicant
and open the public hearing.
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and the public, the
Commission may take one of the following actions related to the request:
1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 995-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variance. The Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution of
denial with findings appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before making a
decision or if they decide there is a need for more discussion, the Commission can simply move
to table the request until such information has been provided.
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Site Plan for parking lot
2. Property & building layout
3. Zoning Map
4. Aerial Photos
5. Resolution 995-13
PARKING LOT SITE PLAN
4z%lo `
Front West Side setback request =
0 feet Existing asphalt
X
M
Cn
U
m
z
-A
r
"Rear west side and south
sides will comply with the
required setbacks
Front setback request =
5 feet
0
RTC)RM PC)RIII
TRAFFIC FLOW TO
TIRES N' MORE SITE
0M UID
East Side setback request = 0 feet
Existing curb
that will remain
SME:VI6e 1'
MrA� ed 6/Mtherseln Olson oL.........
nono
p]
surmTaivru dw,urm ilowmr
h
Divo
11.=0
6715 FeaI
�;1
(p
fvwlixVs.a1N9Ya5»:o
.1 xa3ioosy Hq'wy m PROP9SED PAR(MG
.Savage, MN ssws
tin.
TIYP4 N Antra LAYOUT
Phone: (612) 751 7595
r romt o _r or
'1^t$ J
ZONING MAP
L 78500
7860F7771
1
00 00
N N
--T8-
80801
06 N N rip
N
W
N
n
Ih
N
7759
7749
7739
77707748
7768
8084
eoa
8
(Ox
7729
8060
8065
7728
8064
7729
--
7719
7718
`1
7709
7710
8075
6-3
8040
8045
8046
8045
R-4
8030
8036
8025
8020
8025
8026
8015
' Y
8016
N
8000
8005
7980
8005
7990
7985
B Z
798
7975
n
N
7960
7965
N
�Ly
7950
7955
I
pN
j
Co
N
v
N
7934
7933
00
ABC Liquor
7932
.
'IR—
FC
4 Q
/vacant
¢
R-3
7�
LO
NCS
—
N
791
00
N
R-4
7750
I CVS I
80281.y -
80716
02a a
0
8016
80041 7970
7950
d'
N 7900
W
w
J
V)
Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
LTJ
L 78500
7860F7771
1
00 00
N N
80N
7
W
0 D DR
00 77887768p
7769
7787758
7759
7749
7739
77707748
7768
7738
7728:2:
7718'0
—Z-
7710
8
(Ox
7729
7728
7723
7715
7729
--
7719
7718
`1
7709
7710
7711
R-4
7750
I CVS I
80281.y -
80716
02a a
0
8016
80041 7970
7950
d'
N 7900
W
w
J
V)
Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
LTJ
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 995-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR REDUCED PARKING LOT SETBACKS
AT TIRES N' MORE, 2832 COUNTY ROAD 10;
PLANNING CASE VR2013-008
WHEREAS, the applicant, Naoufel Soussi, owner of Tires N' More, 2832 County Road
10, has applied for a variance to allow the parking lot to have reduced setbacks from the
north, east and west property lines; and,
WHEREAS, 2832 County Road 10 is zoned B-3, Highway Business, and is legally
described as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1, Velmeir CVS Addition
PIN: 06-30-23-34-0086 and 06-30-23-34-0089
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following
documents regarding this proposal:
1. Site Plan
2. Zoning Map
3. Aerial View
4. Staff Report
5. Photographic Documentation
WHEREAS, Section 1104.01 Subd. 4c(2a and 2b) of the Mounds View Zoning Code
indicates that parking lots in B-3 zoned districts shall be set back thirty (30) feet from the front,
and five feet (5) from the side and rear, except where a non-residential use abuts a property
in a residential district the setback is twenty (20) feet; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a variance to allow the parking lot to have a
five foot (5') setback on the front, zero (0) setback on the east side, and zero (0) setback on
the north half of the west side; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to
property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a
hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought
about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the
property owner's control; and,
Resolution 995-13
Page 2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding this
request on November 6, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which all
must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds
that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard to the property
located at 2832 County Road 10, and makes the following findings of fact related to its
decision:
The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding setbacks is to create physical
separation between buildings and parking areas for aesthetics and a sense of privacy
for the property owners. The requested reduced setbacks are very similar to what has
existed for many years on this property.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is
improving the property.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because of the way the building is sitting on
the property and the lack of access which forces this property to share adjoining
properties access drives.
4. The unique feature of this property is that the north property line is angled, the building
does not sit parallel to County Road 10 and is located closer to the front of the lot,
making the front parking lot very small and difficult to maneuver through. The building
does not have its own access to County Road 10 and must use the adjoining
properties' access driveways. The building has side setbacks of about 14 feet (west
side) and 32 feet (east side), which leave limited room to access the rear parking lot.
5. The new parking lot will have similar or larger setbacks than the previous parking lot
did, so there will be no change to the existing character of the neighborhood.
6. The variances requested are the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant's
practical difficulty since that is what the zoning code requires for parking lot setbacks.
The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be
necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance
upon other properties in the neighborhood.
Resolution 995-13
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Naoufel
Soussi, owner of Tires N' More, at 2832 County Road 10, to allow the parking lot to have a
five foot (6) setback on the front, a zero (0) setback on the east side, and a zero (0) setback
on the north half of the west side.
Adopted this 6th day of November, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
MO7 TNDI j%rL W Item No: 5B
1J1V1JJ ♦ 1LYV Meeting Date: November 6, 2013
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Variance Request to allow Reduced Front Yard Setback at 5420
Adams Street; Planning Case VR2013-007
Introduction:
The property owner, Flint Homes, represented by Justin and Marina Flint, are requesting a variance
to permit an addition to their house at 5420 Adams Street to encroach eight feet into the prevailing
40 -foot front yard setback. The Flints want to build a 10' wide x 8' deep entry on the front of their
house in order to install an interior staircase. The City Code requires houses and garages to have
a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet or the prevailing setback on the block, which is 40 -feet on
the Adams Street block.
Discussion:
5420 Adams Street was originally a 768 square foot, one-story house with no basement, built in
1949. In 2006, the previous property owners raised the house and installed a daylight basement
(partially below grade), but did not build stairs inside the house. The only way to access the
basement is through an exterior door on the back of the house, and access to the upstairs is from
decks on the front and rear of the home that are approximately 7 feet off the ground. The
remodeling was never completed and the house was eventually vacated. The house was recently
purchased by Flint Homes, who will be finishing the construction started by the previous owners
several years ago.
The Flints want to add a small entry to the front of the home that is 10 feet wide by 8 feet deep in
order to lower the front door several feet, and to make space inside the house to add a staircase (it
would become a "split -entry" style house). This entry would be the about the same size as the deck
that is currently on the front of the house.
Variance Criteria Review:
As with any variance application, for the Planning Commission to act favorably, there must be a
demonstrated practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of
the Code overly burdensome or restrictive to a property owner. State statutes require that the
governing body review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in
accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the
City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The
individual criteria, with responses, are as follows:
The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations.
The zoning code requires minimum building setbacks for aesthetics and to provide
separation and some sense of privacy between neighbors. Front minimum setbacks also
create symmetry along the streetscape when all the homes are setback the same. The
5420 Adams Variance Request
November 6, 2013 Staff Report
Page 2
City Code does not require houses to have the same setback as the other homes; it just
cannot be closer to the street, so most the streets do end up having varying front setbacks.
This entry addition would give the house a 32 foot front setback, which is still more than the
minimum 30 foot front setback.
The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan supports improvements to properties, and certainly encourages
home improvements and making houses more livable.
c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable mannernot permitted by this
Title or the City Code.
The applicants want to add a front entry to the house in order to add an interior staircase so
the basement can be accessed inside like a typical home. This improvement will also bring
the front door much closer to the ground so it looks normal.
d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the
same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances
over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control.
The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant.
The unique circumstances which apply to this property are that a basement was added to
the home but no interior stairs constructed. The house is small, so adding stairs inside the
house without the extra front entry space would reduce the livability of the home. The
applicants purchased the home as -is, and did not create the problem.
e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
The 8 -foot front setback variance requested is the minimum that would be necessary in
order to add the desired front entry space and interior staircase and make the exterior
house style more aesthetically pleasing. The existing deck extends out 8 feet so the small
entry would not be much different than what is already there. And it would improve the
exterior appearance of the house since it looks odd with the front door so high off the
ground.
The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical
difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties.
In order to have enough square footage for the intent of the entry addition, the 8 -foot front
yard setback variance is the minimum variance needed.
5420 Adarns Variance Request
November 6, 2013 Staff Report
Page 3
g. The Planning Commission may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a
variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to
reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon otherproperties in the neighborhood,
and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to
and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance.
The applicant must apply for all required building permits for the remodeling of this house.
Public Hearing:
As with any variance application, a public hearing is required. Notices were mailed to all property
owners within 350 feet of the applicant's properties. As of November 1, 2013, Staff has not
received any comments.
Recommendation:
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and affected
neighbors, the Commission may take one of the following actions related to the request:
Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 994-13 is attached for action if the
Commission so chooses.
2. Deny the requested variance. The Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution of
denial with findings appropriate to support the denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if
more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such
information has been provided.
Respectfully Submitted By,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Zoning Map
2. Aerial Photo
3. Proposed Layout Plan
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Resolution 994-13
ZONING MAP
u
5480
5479
5474
5473
5468
5467
5462
5463
5454
5455
5446
5447,
5440
5441
5434
5433
5426
5425
5420
5421
5414
5415
5406
5405
5472
5511
5503
5493
5485
5475
5464 1 5463
544Cc
O� S
543 �L\�'��Srr R`SO
se_
5512
5504
5494
5486
5478
5466
5511
5505
5499
5493
5485
5475
5467
5459
5453
5447
5439
H
"Y2 Tr
5425
-�
o
N b'
542 8
5419
IN1
N
N
N
_ MMN
O o
5413
F4c,4i
M
N5408
N
N
N
N
N N
54OS
N
N
N
N
N
.14 ivA 0111111111
�! Warmll lqvtr7111.7!A�
* Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential
t
i
ntry would forward thedistance asisting deck
590
Existing upstairs layout of home with new front entry and staircase
N
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 994-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A FRONT ENTRY ADDITION TO
ENCROACH 8 -FEET INTO THE PREVAILING 40 -FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK AT
5420 ADAMS STREET; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2013-007
WHEREAS, property owner, Flint Homes, has applied for a variance to allow a front entry
addition to encroach 8 feet into the prevailing 40 -foot front yard setback at 5420 Adams Street;
and,
WHEREAS, 5420 Adams Street is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and legally
described as follows:
Spring Lake Park Highlands, Except the South 10 feet and Except the Northerly 50 feet of Lot
16, Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota
PIN: 08-30-23-12-0026
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
1. Proposed Site and Addition Plans
2. Zoning Map
3. Aerial Views
4. Photographic Documentation
5. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to
property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship
thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by
unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's
control; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding this
request on November 6, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which all must be
satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that
the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code are
satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard to the property located at
5420 Adams Street, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision:
Res. 979-13
Page 2
1. The general intent of the Zoning Code regarding setbacks is to create physical separation
between homes for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property owners. The
requested reduced front yard setback will still be largerthan the minimum 30 foot setback.
2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is improving
the property and making it a more livable house.
3. The applicant is requesting this variance because of the lack of an interior staircase, and in
order to make the home livable, there should be interior access to the basement.
4. The unique feature of this property is that there is an added a basement without an interior
staircase, and the existing layout and size of the home makes it difficult to add a staircase
inside the home.
5. The current house has a deck leading to the front door that extends 8 feet out from the
house and is at least 10 feet wide. The new entrance addition would be about the same
size, so there will be very little change to the existing character of the neighborhood.
6. The 8 -foot front yard setback variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the
applicant's practical difficulty and give enough interior space to add a staircase.
7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as maybe necessary
to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance upon other
properties in the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning
Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Flint Homes, to
allow an 8 -foot encroachment into the prevailing 40 -foot front yard setback at 5420 Adams Street
subject to the following:
If within one year after granting the variance, the work as permitted by the variance has not
been completed, then such variance shall be come null and void unless an extension of
time has been requested by the applicant and granted by the Planning Commission. Such
extension shall be requested by the applicant in writing, and submitted to the City at least
30 days before the expiration of the original variance.
Adopted this 6th day of November, 2013.
Gary Stevenson, Chair
ATTEST:
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
October 16, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for October 16, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Cramblit, Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen, and
Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
I
Index to Minutes
Approval of Minutes
MI2013-001 Minor Subdivision to Adjust a Common Lot Line
CU2013-005 Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage
Proposed Sign Code Amendments
3. Approval of Minutes
September 18, 2013.
Page
1
2
2
3
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Love. To approve the Minutes of
the September 18, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as presented.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 16, 2013
Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
A. MI2013-001 Minor Subdivision to Adjust a Common Lot Line
Applicant: John Engberg
Address: 3030 & 3032 County Road J
Planning Associate Heller indicated John Engberg, owner of 3030 County Road J, has applied
for a minor subdivision to adjust the lot line between his property and his late mother's property
next door at 3032 County Road J. The lot line change is not for development purposes or to
create any additional lots, but simply an extra 1,020 square feet of backyard area for the
applicant. The applicant has submitted a Certificate of Survey that shows the property line
change. The property at 3032 County Road J is now owned by the children of Mary Engberg
and they have agreed to this subdivision. She reviewed a proposed easement as well.
Associate Heller reviewed the request in further detail. She noted the City Attorney was
reviewing the survey and staff recommended the Planning Commission approve the minor
subdivision.
Chair Stevenson requested further information on the proposed easement.
Associate Heller stated the easement would allow Mr. Engberg continued access the
underground pipes he installed in the rear of the 3032 County Road J property after it is sold.
John Engberg, 3030 County Road J, explained the water pipes assist with the water runoff in his
backyard and the 3032 County Road J yard.
Commissioner Schiltgen asked if the 3032 County Road J property would be sold.
Mr. Engberg explained the property was being prepared to be put on the market.
MOTION/SECOND: Chair Stevenson/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution 991-13, a
Resolution Approving the Minor Subdivision of 3030 County Road J, owned by John Engberg,
and 3032 County Road J, owned by the Family of Mary Engberg; Planning Case No. MI2013-
001.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 16, 2013
Page 3
B. CU2013-005 Conditional Use Permit for an Oversize Garage
Applicant: Ryan Carlisle & Sarah Lange
Address: 8280 Eastwood Road
Planning Associate Heller indicated the applicants, property owner Sarah Lange and Ryan
Carlisle, are requesting approval of a conditional use permit to construct an oversize attached
garage on their property at 8280 Eastwood Road. The applicants want to demolish the existing
22' x 2P-8" (476 square feet) garage and build a new 22' x 50' attached garage (1,100 square
feet).
Associate Heller explained the applicants have submitted plans for a garage larger than what the
City Code allows without a planning action. The City limits the size of accessory buildings,
whether attached or detached from the house, to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any building
larger than 952 square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The applicants
indicated that they want the extra space to store a boat and classic cars, among other things.
Associate Heller reviewed the conditional use permit considerations with the Planning
Commission in detail. Staff recommended the Commission approve the CUP as requested.
Commissioner Schiltgen questioned why the applicant was requesting an expanded garage.
Ryan Carlisle, 8280 Eastwood Road, explained the current garage was added after the home was
built and is in poor condition. The roofline is very low so some vehicles don't fit inside now.
He commented the new garage would be raised to match the house's roofline.
Chair Stevenson indicated the tree in the rear yard would screen the garage from the neighbors.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution
992-13, a Resolution Approving a Conditional Use Permit for an Oversized Garage at 8280
Eastwood Road; Planning Case No. CU2013-005.
Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Review Proposed Sign Code Amendments
Planning Associate Heller stated the Commission has started focusing on creating a PUD
Overlay District for the Highway 10 corridor. This has involved discussions on the general
development to enhance the visual appeal of the corridor. One idea has been to change the style
and height allowances of the signage in the corridor to monument style sings, and to reduce the
15 foot setback amount.
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 16, 2013
Page 4
Associate Heller explained the Commission discussed the sign code changes at the last few
meetings and was in favor of amending the sign code rather than only having specific
requirements for the corridor. Staff reviewed the proposed sign code amendments in detail and
recommended the Commission discuss and approve the code amendment.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Cramblit. To approve Resolution
993-13, a Resolution Amending the Sign Code.
Ayes — 6
Nays — 0
Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. November 6, 2013
B. November 20, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. October 2, 2013
The Commission discussed the October 2, 2013 meeting minutes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Motion carried.
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. She noted the Robert's and
Taiko's lots were seeded and the silt fences would be coming down once the grass was
established. She noted Area G of the Street Improvement Project would begin next spring and
the planning was beginning this fall. She explained there were five new homes built in Mounds
View this year. She was pleased to report that Apple Tree Dental closed on their property today
and would begin renovations on their building soon.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
Chair Stevenson questioned how many foreclosures the City had at this time. Associate Heller
explained that foreclosures were decreasing in the Mounds View which was a great sign as
homes were turning around more quickly and less were going into foreclosure at all.
11. Adjournment
Mounds View Planning Commission
Regular Meeting
October 16, 2013
Page 5
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:34 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
UV I m)lil
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
December 4, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M.
1. Call to Order
f#7.71[1111
3. Approval of Minutes:
October 16, 2013
4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not
Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.)
5. Planning Cases
None
6. Other Planning Activity
A. Discuss Possible Code Amendment in Chapter 1010, Wetlands
B. Review Commissioner Applications for 1 Expiring Seat
C. Set 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Schedule
7. Next Planning Commission Meetings:
A. Wednesday, December 18, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. November 6, 2013
9. Staff Reports
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner's Reports
11. Meeting Conclusion
Item No: 6A
Meeting Date: December 4, 2613
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Discuss Proposed Code Amendment for Wetlands
Discussion:
Community Development staff was recently made aware of a detail in the City Code relating
to wetlands. Like most City Code chapters, the wetlands chapter includes language for
nonconforming buildings and parcels, and states that a variance is required if someone were
to build or rebuild on either a nonconforming parcel or building. A variance should be
required if a nonconforming building were to be expanded or rebuilt, but in this case, staff
feels that it is not necessary to require a variance to building on a nonconforming "parcel."
There are other requirements and approvals needed when building in wetlands or wetland
buffer areas, so also requiring a variance seems unnecessary.
Staff recommends simply adding language to clarifythat a variance would be required ONLY
for nonconforming buildings.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and discuss the information, and
provide staff with direction about the proposed amendment.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. City Code Chapter 1010.07, Subd. 4: Nonconforming Buildings and Parcels in
Wetlands
Existing Zoning Code regulations
E[IINZ1y
1010.08 (Rev. 8/97)
Subd. 4. Existing Nonconforming Buildings and Parcels: Any building or structure situated on an
existing parcel of record, as of the original date of enactment of this Chapter, that does not meet
the requirements of this Chapter shall be considered nonconforming pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 1123 of this Code and will require a variance from the Council to build or rebuild.
a. Nonconforming Parcels: A nonconforming parcel shall exist:
(1) Where any portion of the parcel is contained in a wetlands district; or
(2) Where twenty percent (20%) of a parcel or at least two thousand (2,000) square feet
of the parcel, whichever is less, shall be contained within the wetland buffer area.
b. Nonconforming Buildings: A nonconforming building shall exist:
(1) Where it does not meet building or structure setback requirements.
(2) Where it does not meet floor elevation requirements. (Ord. 505, 4-27-92)
Item No: 613
/� Meeting Date: December 4, 2013
V S I Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
City Of Mounds Vlew .Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Planning Commission Term Expiration and New
Applications Review
The term of one Planning Commission member— Gary Rundle - expires at the end of the
year. The City advertised the vacancies, with applications due on November 22, 2013.
Staff received applications from the current Commissioner for another term, and one other
application for the Planning Commission were received by the City.
The Planning Commission will review the applications at the December 4, 2013 meeting,
and the City Council will make the official appointments on December 9, 2013.
Sincerely,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Application from Gary Rundle
2. Planning Commission Application from Jessica Birken
Oct.25. 2013 2:46PMI Xcel Energy Edina Construction
City of Mounds View
2401 County Highway •10
Mounds View, MN 55112
760-717-4000
•��lio. 1863'%/?. I'
Application for Advimy commissions and Commiffees
Groups) applied for:
Full Name (Please Pri
Wort( Phone: �5�@ o5 -,2j,3
Address:
Work/Cell Phone: ✓� `
Years at this address: ( Years you have lived in Mounds View:
E-mail Address: � �° r Z- r— t-�"v a-(
EExaarlence and C2uallficationo
Skills and Interests:
Employment, Occupation or Other Relevant Experience:
Memberships, Accomplishments or Other Qualifioations:
Please state your reason for wan Ing to s,rveey_ywwit�thhh this group:
Date:
(your re 'f aps��any c�FM; above inquiries may be continued on the back of this form and you
play ettac t other information that you would like the City Council to consider)
The City of 49ounds View Is eommilled to tha policy (hat all persons •shall have 1WOSS (o its programs,
facifitios and employment Without regardforrsce, uth1710113; NO, age orphysical ahili(Am.
City of Mounds View
2401 County Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
763-717-4000
Application for Advisory Commissions and Committees
Group(s) applied for: Mounds View Planning Commission, Economic Development Commission
Full Name (Please Print): Jessica Birken
Work Phone: 612-264-6441 (office)
Address: 8391 Pleasant View Drive
Years at this address: 9
E-mail Address: fess@urban-law-group.com
Work/Cell Phone: 651-274-3255 (cell)
Years you have lived in Mounds View: 9
Experience and Qualifications
Skills and Interests:
I'm a licensed attorney with real estate experience including issues regarding appraisals, boundaries, easements or
other restrictions on use, etc. I'm interested in urban land use planning and contributing to my community.
Employment, Occupation or Other Relevant Experience:
(Please see my attached resume)
My experience includes drafting legal opinions for many civil land use cases in Pine County as a Judicial Law Clerk,
as well as the oversight and management of many conservation real estate transactions with Pheasants Forever.
Memberships, Accomplishments or Other Qualifications:
- Qualified mediator
Member of MN State Bar Assoc.
- Licensed notary public
Please state your reason for wanting to serve with this group:
I'd like to give back to my community through public service. My background knowledge and personal strengths will
be assets to the Commission. I'm grateful for the opportunity to gain experience in public administration and civic
engagement.
Signature: Gv'v Date: 11-21-2013
(Your response to any of the above inquiries may be continued on the back of this form and you
may attach other information that you would like the City Council to consider.)
The City of Mounds View is committed to the policy that all persons shall have access to its programs,
facilities and employment without regard for race, ethnicity, sex, age or physical abilities.
Item No: 6C
,STA
MEWTT Meeting Date: December 4, 2013
Type of Business: Other Planning Activity
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate
Subject: Consideration of Resolution 996-13, Establishing the Planning
Commission's 2014 Meeting Schedule.
Introduction:
The Planning Commission establishes its meeting schedule each year by resolution.
Discussion:
The meeting schedule proposed for 2013 represents the usual first and third Wednesday of every
month. There is a conflict with January dates since the first Wednesday is January 1. There are a
few options:
Since there are five Wednesdays in January, we could push both meetings back a week,
BUT, if we were to have the meeting on Wednesday, January 8, it would have to be an
8:OOpm start. The Charter Commission meets that day but is willing to adjust their meeting
time in order for the Planning Commission to also hold a meeting that night.
2. Change the first meeting to Thursday, January 2, 2013 and keep the other meeting on the
regular day and week, January 15.
Change the first meeting to either Tuesday, January 7 or Thursday, January 9 (during the
second week of January) and then either keep the meeting during the third week on
Wednesday, January 15, or move it to the fourth week, Wednesday, January 22 so we don't
have meetings two weeks in a row.
In addition, the first July and September meetings are two days from the holiday days. If the
Commission chooses, alternative meeting dates can be discussed for those months also.
Recommendation:
Discuss the meeting dates and adjust the schedule. Approve Resolution 996-13, establishing the
2014 meeting schedule of the Planning Commission.
Respectfully submitted,
UhLl
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION 996-13
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE 2014 MEETING SCHEDULE OF THE
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission intends to hold two regular
meetings per month during the year 2014; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission will meet on the first and third Wednesdays
of each month, or as amended; and,
WHEREAS, the schedule of meeting dates shall be established and posted to
provide an orderly system for use by the Planning Commission, staff and general public.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Exhibit 1, attached hereto, is the
Planning Commission's official meeting schedule for the year 2014.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that if the Planning Commission is required to or
desires to hold special or emergency meetings, such meetings will be held in accordance
with State law, Code requirements and Commission Bylaws.
Adopted this 4th day of December, 2013
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST
James Ericson, City Administrator
(SEAL)
1
January
January 15 or 22
February 5
February 19
March 5
March 19
April 2
April 16
May 7
May 21
June 4
June 18
July 2
July 16
August 6
August 20
September 3
September 17
October 1
October 15
November 5
November 19
December 3
December 17
PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
Regular Meeting
November 6, 2013
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for November 6, 2013.
2. Roll Call
Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Cramblit, Elofson, Love, Rundle, Schiltgen,
and Stevenson.
Absent and Excused: None.
Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller.
Index to Minutes Page
Approval of Minutes 1
VR2013-007 Variance Request to Allow an Addition to Encroach into the 2
Front Yard Setback
VR2013-008 Variance Request to Allow Reduced Parking Lot Setbacks 2
3. Approval of Minutes
October 2, 2013.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Elofson. To approve the Minutes
of the October 2, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as presented.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 2
4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda
None.
5. Planning Cases
B. VR2013-007 Variance Request to Allow an Addition to Encroach into the
Front Yard Setback
Applicant: Flint Homes, Blaine, MN
Address: 5420 Adams Street
Planning Associate Heller indicated Flint Homes, represented by Justin and Marina Flint, are
requesting a variance to permit an addition to their house at 5420 Adams Street to encroach eight
feet into the prevailing 40 -foot front yard setback. The Flints want to build a 10' wide x 8' deep
entry on the front of their house in order to install an interior staircase. The City Code requires
houses and garages to have a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet or the prevailing setback on
the block, which is 40 -feet on the Adams Street block.
Associate Heller stated that this home originally did not have a basement. The previous owners
lifted the house and built a daylight basement, but did not install an interior staircase. Since the
house was small, it would greatly reduce the livability of the home if an interior staircase was
installed without the entry addition. She reviewed the variance criteria with the Commission and
recommended approval of the request.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.
Commissioner Cramblit questioned if the new entryway plans included a closet.
Justin Flint, 499 98°i Avenue in Blaine, explained the entryway would have no closet. The
addition would have been too wide if a closet was included and interfered with the existing
windows on the front of the house. Mr. Flint discussed the proposed improvements for the home
and thanked the Commission for considering his request. He noted the proposed entryway
would greatly enhance the exterior appeal of the home.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Love. To approve Resolution 994-
13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance to Allow an Addition to Encroach into
the Front Yard Setback; Planning Case No. VR2013-007.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 3
A. VR2013-008 Variance Request to Allow Reduced Parking Lot Setbacks
Applicant: Naoufel Soussi, Tires N' More
Address: 2832 County Road 10
Planning Associate Heller indicated Naoufel Soussi, owner of Tires N' More at 2832 County
Road 10, will be installing a new parking lot with curbing, and is requesting variances for
reduced parking lot setbacks on three sides of the property.
Associate Heller explained the previous owners of the building had originally intended to
redevelop the property along with the CVS development and was working with Velmeir (the
CVS developer) on improving the parking lot and sharing the County Road 10 driveway access.
The applicant's rear parking lot was removed by Velmeir in anticipation of reconstruction that
would be done with CVS's parking lot. The previous owner did not sign off on the plans, so
Velmeir did not complete the 2832 County Road 10 building's parking lot and it remains
uncompleted.
Associate Heller reviewed the circumstances behind the request, along with the variance criteria
with the Commission and recommended approval of the request.
Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:25 p.m.
Commissioner Schiltgen asked how deliveries were made to CVS and if the entrance to Tires N'
More was being blocked.
Associate Heller reviewed the traffic pattern for delivery trucks and noted the entrance to Tires
N' More was not being blocked.
Commissioner Love questioned how the curb would be handled with the new driveway.
Associate Heller described how the contractor would be completing the driveway between CVS
and Tires N' More.
Naoufel Soussi, owner of Tires N' More, explained the grade differences between the two
properties were taken into consideration by the contractor.
Chair Stevenson requested the applicant cooperate with the City and work to keep their property
clean.
Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:32 p.m.
MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution
995-13, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Variance to Allow Reduced Parking Lot
Setbacks; Planning Case No. VR2013-008.
Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried.
Mounds View Planning Commission November 6, 2013
Regular Meeting Page 4
6. Other Planning Activity
None.
7. Next Planning Commission Meeting:
A. November 20, 2013
B. December 4, 2013
8. Review Minutes:
A. October 16, 2013
The Commission discussed the October 16, 2013 meeting minutes.
9. Staff Updates
A. Upcoming Planning Cases
Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases.
10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports
None.
11. Adjournment
There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the
meeting at 7:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Heller
Planning Associate
Transcribed by:
Heidi Guenther
Thne.S'aver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.