Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-17-1999 PC PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION 0 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA February 17, 1999 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7:00 p.m., February 17, 1999. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Stevenson, Miller, Johnson, and Kaden, Berke, Braathen, Laube, and Hegland. Members Absent: None. Also Present: Community Development Director Rick Jopke, Planning Associate Jim Ericson, • Council Liaison Roger Stigney, Councilmember Rob Marty and Recorder Beth Johnson. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 546-99, Conditional Use Permit Request, Richard Maki, 3 8100 Long Lake Road Discussion of Planning Commission Bylaws. 5 Discussion of Proposed Ordinance 629, Amending Chapter 401, "The 5 Planning Commission". Staff Reports/Items of Information Presentation by Peg Meyer, regarding cablecasting of Commission 4, 6 Meetings. Review of Previous Council Actions. 3. Introduction of New Planning Commissioners • Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 • Regular Meeting Page 2 Chairperson Peterson welcomed new Planning Commissioners Kaden, Berke, Braathen, Laube, and Hegland. He reported that he addressed the City Council at their last meeting informing them that he had a problem with the process the Mayor used to make the appointments. However, he assured the new commissioners that he did not have a problem with the appointments made. Chairperson Peterson asked what was the next step in appointing the new members. Director Jopke informed the commissioners that they all would need to sign a written statement which would be entered in the record, and it was the consensus of the Commission that instead of doing the oath of office individually that they would be done in mass. Director Jopke also volunteered to be witness for the Swearing in Statements. Chairperson Peterson offered some introductory comments regarding the responsibilities of the Planning Commission. He cautioned the new commissioners that there would be new terminology used regarding planning issues. He also advised the new commissioners that the Planning Commission is actually two separate entities: one that is involved in planning issues and one that acts as a board of adjustment and appeals for variance type issues. He continued to briefly inform the members that the Planning Commission is more of an advisory board and not one of legal authority, except in the case of granting variances. He continued with the procedures • regarding the Planning Commission"packet" and training courses available. The new commissions were also informed that they would receive a copy of the Municipal Code, a revised Comprehensive Plan and a current zoning map. 4. Citizens' requests and comments on the items NOT on the agenda Bruce Brasaemle, 8127 Long Lake Road, addressed the Chairperson and members of the Commission. Because Mr. Brasaemle was not reappointed to serve on the Planning Commission, he wanted to say goodbye to the members of the Commission that he served with for three years. He told those continuing on the Commission that it had been a privilege and honor to serve with them. He added that he believes that they had accomplished a lot in the three years he served on the Commission. He added that he respects each of them, primarily their ability to look past personal interests and their ability to see the"big picture" and to do what is right and best for the City. He thanked the Commissioners for his opportunity to learn and added that it was an honor to serve the City of Mounds View as a planning commissioner. He addressed the new members by welcoming them and he hoped that they would find serving on the commission as challenging and rewarding as he has. He encouraged the group to work together and to always put the City before their own interests. He believes that this is what made the commission that he worked on so good and so constructive over the years. He finished by saying that he would probably"poke his nose" in every now and then to add his two cents. Chairperson Peterson thanked Mr. • Brasaemle for his words to the Commission. Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 3 • 5. Approval of Minutes a. January 6, 1999 Chairperson Peterson informed the new commissioners of the procedures of reviewing and acting on minutes. He noted that there were two minor typographical changes. Stevenson made a motion to approve the minutes as amended. However, since five votes would be needed to approve the minutes, and several of the new commissioners were not comfortable with approving the minutes without reviewing them, Commissioner Stevenson withdrew his motion. After further discussion, Commissioner Stevenson made a new motion to table the minutes until all members had had a chance to review them. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Johnson to table approval of the minutes. Ayes - 9 Nays - 0 Motion carried. 111 6. Planning Case No. 546-99 8100 Long Lake Road Consideration of Resolution No. 571-99, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional use Permit for an Oversized Accessory Building. Applicant: Richard Maki The applicant, Richard Maki, was present. Associate Ericson reviewed this case informing the Commission that this conditional use permit (CUP) request is for a garage expansion. Since the Code currently allows 952 square feet and the request for 980 square feet, a CUP is required. He added that even if the garage were within the allowable square footage, the garage could not be larger than the house without a CUP. Mr. Ericson noted that this type of request is probably the most common CUP request received. He continued by informing the Commission that the property in question is located on Long Lake Road and Sherwood Road and is 13,700 square feet. He noted that the house is 576 square feet and that the garage, at present, is smaller than the house. He expressed that one of the concerns is that the expansion would create a garage about one and a half times as large, close to 70 percent larger than the house. He added that the basis for this request was so that the property • owner could store vehicles inside the garage rather than having them outside. Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 4 • (Because Peg Meyer, Cable Committee Chairperson, was now present, the Commission agreed to hear her presentation regarding broadcasting of Planning Commission meetings on cable television). 8. Staff Reports/Items of Information 8a. Peg Meyer informed the Commission that cablecasting will start on April 1st on Cable Channel 16. She added that cameras will be run in March, but the meetings would not be cable casted live to allow the Commission to get a feel for being on camera. She briefly instructed the Commission on what to do at the meetings. She informed them the new equipment is running smoothly. She asked that if any commissioner would have anything to present that would be out of the ordinary, to please call Pat Toth, Cable Producer, ahead of time to give him a chance to prepare. She added that the Commission may want to take a look at the web site that Staff has developed. Continuation of Item 6: Conditional Use Permit, 8100 Long Lake Road 4110 Planning Associate Ericson continued with the Maki CUP request. He commented that there should be some type of balance between the size of the garage and the size of the house. He added that it is probably not desirable to have a garage dwarfing the house, adding that the house should be the primary structure on the property. He explained that expanding a garage is a very common improvement and, typically, a benefit to the property. Mr. Ericson reviewed a similar CUP approved involving a corner lot, at 2185 Pinewood Drive. In that case the garage being proposed was 52 percent larger than the house. He added that with the current proposal, the garage would be 70 percent larger than the house. He also advised them that the property to the north is screened by a row of pine trees, and is already separated by the garage. The property to the west, separated by lilac bushes, already looks out to the garage. The addition of another 15 feet to the garage may not seem that much. The benefit would be that the vehicles currently parked about the yard would be stored in the proposed garage. Mr. Ericson brought to the Commission's attention one comment he received from the neighbor across the street with regard to the proposal. This neighbor was concerned that there might be some type of business being initiated in the garage. Mr. Ericson indicated that this issue could be addressed with the applicant. Mr. Ericson reminded the Commission that home occupations are allowed as long as certain criteria are met, most importantly that it does not detrimentally impact the neighbors. Mr. Ericson informed the Commission that all the criteria regarding this CUP request have been met and that Staff felt that the benefit outweighs the impact of the proposal. The main concern is the significant size of the proposed garage. Mr. Ericson noted that the proposed resolution recommends approval to the City Council, however, there are stipulations . attached to the resolution. Mr. Ericson addressed the concern regarding a business operating from the garage and assured the Commission that the CUP could be revoked by the City Council in the event this occurred. Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 5 Mr. Maki responded by saying that he agreed with Mr. Ericson's report. Chairperson Peterson commended Mr. Maki on the progress he has made with improving the looks of his property in the past couple of years. Mr. Maki added that he didn't think the garage would detract from the house and that he would be using the same type of roofing for the garage. The Planning Commission continued with minor discussion regarding this proposal. Included in this discussion was the shed that currently exists on the property and whether or not it was included in the total area that was proposed. Mr. Ericson informed the Commission that the total square footage of all accessory buildings would be 1,060, and that the city code allows for 1,400 square feet. It was also clarified that Mr. Maid would have one 16-foot and one 9-foot door. Another issue that was addressed was that the property to the west was not separated by any physical screening. Mr. Maid indicated that he spoke directly to the property owner and explained that there is eight feet from the garage to the fence and the fence is covered by lilac bushes which is acceptable to his neighbor. Commission Laube expressed his concern that is was not clarified in the resolution what the actual • square footage of the garage would be. Mr. Ericson clarified that the conditional use permit would be allowing 980 square feet with an additional 80 square feet for the shed. He indicated that the resolution would be amended to be clear in this regard. Johnson/Braathen to approve Resolution No. 571-99 recommending approval to the City Council of the conditional use permit request of Richard Maid. Ayes - 9 Nays - 0 Motion carried Mr. Ericson informed the applicant that this item would be discussed at the February 22 City Council meeting at which time a public hearing will be held. 7. Discussion of Planning Commission Bylaws. Mr. Ericson reviewed the Planning Commission Bylaws as they had been amended at the last meeting. Mr. Ericson reminded the Commission that the Planning Commission in the past had two kinds of meetings: the agenda session, where items were discussed, and the regular meeting, 41) where items were acted upon. But because of state-mandated time constraints, the number of cases the City Council was actually dealing with, and to accommodate the applicants, the Planning Commission has been calling to order at every meeting. The Bylaws have been revised Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 • Regular Meeting Page 6 to denote that both the first and third Wednesdays of the month will be regular Planning Commission meetings and that special meetings could be held as needed. Chair Peterson addressed the section in the Bylaws which refers to Planning Commission vacancies and expressed his concern with its ambiguity. Commission Miller stated her interpretation as being that upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, with the approval of the City Council, if someone is removed or terminates, or a Commissioner is no longer interested in serving, the new appointment would be for the unexpired term and not for an additional three years. Community Development Director Jopke agreed with this interpretation stating that he believes that to be the intent of the Bylaws. Chairperson Peterson added that he believes the language should be changed to reflect the new nine-member Commission so that all vacancies filled will coincide with term expirations. Review of Bylaws concluded with the Commission briefly discussing the"conflict of interest" element of the Bylaws. Mr. Ericson stated that he would draft the Bylaw changes and provide • them for action at the next meeting. Continuation of Item 8: Staff Reports /Items of Information It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that "Previous Council Actions" should be added to future agendas as a regular feature. Director Jopke circulated a copy of the"Remodeling Planbook". He informed them that the books are available at City Hall for $10 for Mounds View residents or $15 for non-residents. Mr. Jopke also distributed copies of training opportunities that were available. At this time, members of the Commission took an opportunity to introduce themselves to one another. 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner Reports There were no Chairperson or Planning Commissioner reports. • 10. Adjournment Mounds View Planning Commission February 17, 1999 110 Regular Meeting Page 7 The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, jork.s2. Rick Jopke Community Development Director N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\PLANCOMM\PCM N\1999\02-17-99.WPD • S alarming Comm. Mfg February 17, 1999 Please Sign In ! Name Address Phone # Item of Interest: I:j Cue 71.3 sr, .(e.._ 512-7 L << T4 783_sa 3 Cx � C der 7' I- wad 4( `2-3- 75 v L a _assi..61,51kai 93c3).3c, ,,,,o.azlik7scos) gl r c,„ „„,-, pyLer AA ille .-- ?t,5 le L.GA gil- -z- to 6 A- ie„ - �TV S'ea.,1 Icjel I ¢-r 2-925 iUy I_c t 1n2. CDC a- eierleret,,i . • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 571-99 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN OVERSIZED GARAGE AT 8100 LONG LAKE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 546-99 Whereas, Richard Maki has applied for a conditional use permit to expand an existing 400 square-foot garage by an additional 580 square feet on property located at 8100 Long Lake Road, zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally described as followed: The East 133 Feet of the South 162 Feet of the NE Quarter of Section 6, Township 30,Range 23 RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA WHEREAS, there is currently a 400 square-foot garage and an 80 square-foot shed on this lot; and, • WHEREAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code allows, with a conditional use permit,up to 1,400 square feet of garage/accessory building on one lot; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan d. Area Map with Building Footprints WHEREAS,the Planning Commission finds that the dimensional requirements as stated in Chapter 1104 the Zoning Code for this proposal have been met; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission makes the following findings that possible adverse effects have been considered in its recommendation, as required by Section 1125.01 Subd. 1.e.: 1. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as 110 to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 8100 Long Lake Road, as low-density residential. This proposal does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Commission Resolution 571-99 February 17, 1999 • Page 3 6. The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Garages and detached accessory outbuildings are typical uses in residential areas, and allow for the storage of vehicles and yard and garden equipment. Having this expanded shed would allow the property owner to store vehicles currently left outside within a secure and protected structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the conditional use permit to allow for a 980 square-foot garage with the following stipulations: 1. The conditional use permit shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days of City Council approval, and a receipt of such recording shall be provided to the City of Mounds View. 2. The garage shall not be used for living space or other uses not allowed by the district in which it is located or by the Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the permit was granted, the conditional use permit shall become null and void. 3. The garage shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform building • appearance with the house. 4. The driveway leading to the garage expansion shall be improved with a permanent surfacing material of either concrete or asphalt in conjunction with the construction of the garage. If occupancy of the garage is to occur prior to the driveway's improvement,the applicant shall submit a letter of credit or performance bond in an amount equivalent to the valuation of the work yet to be completed, as estimated by the Community Development Director. 5. All vehicles parked at the property shall be parked either upon the driveway's improved surface or within the garage. At no time shall a vehicle be allowed to park upon the grass or off of the improved surface. 6. The existing shed on the lot shall be moved if necessary to maintain a minimum six-foot setback from the garage. 7. The square footage allowed by this Conditional Use Permit shall not exceed 1,060 square feet(980 square feet for the proposed garage, 80 square feet for the existing shed.) BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes.