Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-15-1992• MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 15, 1992 7:30 P.M. AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: July 1, 1992 (Enclosed) 2. Discussion of Conditional Use Permit Request (Dog Kennel) of Lonnie Madison, 5200 Jeffery Drive, Planning Case No. 339-92 NOTE: Planning Commission may call to order to take action regarding this item. 3. Discussion of Conditional Use Permit Request (Oversized Accessory Building) of Robert Stauner, 2454 County Road H2, Planning Case No. 348-92 NOTE: Planning Commission may call to order to take action regarding this item. **************************************************************** APPLICANTS: YOUR AI lENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESIED. PLEASE NOTIFY CITY HALL AT 784-3055 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATIEND. THANK YOU. **************************************************************** 4I) • • fa) PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA UNAPPRO ED Regular Meeting July 1, 1992 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 The Mounds View Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Mountin at 7:31 p.m. on Wednesday, July 1, 1992. MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Burgers, Colleen, Miller, Nelson, Peterson, Stevenson, and Chair Mountin. Commissioner Ruggles had an excused absence. ALSO PRESENT: Planner Harrington, Councilmember Blanchard, and Recording Secretary Asleson. Motion/Second: Stevenson/Miller to approve the minutes Joe July 1, 1992. 7 ayes 0 nays There were no resident requests or comments from the floor. Planner Harrington summarized Planning Case No. 338-92, request for a Con- ditional Use Permit for a Reidntial Dog Kennel at 8261 Red Oak Drive. In order to grant a Conditional Use Permit of this type, an applicant must meet the criteria listed in the Municipal Code. Because many of the factors in a case such as this are visual, the Commiss- ioners had agreed at their last Agenda Session to drive by the site to check it against the criteria in the Code. Chair Mountin asked about the status of the applicant's petition. Planner Harrington indicated that while the petitions are needed to set a Public 1. Call To Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: July 1-, 1992 Motion Carried 4. Resident Requests and Comments from the Floor 5. Consideration of Resolution No. 340-92, Regarding Conditional Use Permit for Residential Dog/Cat Kennel, 8261 Red Oak Drive Mounds View Planning Regular Meeting Page 2 [PROVED July 1, 1992 Hearing date, they are not a consider- ation at Planning Commission level. The applicant, Mary Niezgocki, was present and wished to explain the complaints that were on file with the Police regarding her dogs. She first wanted to clarify that of the four dogs referenced in one of the complaints, two were still puppies at the time, so she wasn't out of compliance with any codes. In regard to the barking complaints, the applicant stated that she had been un- aware that there was a problem until her neighbors called the police. Her neighbors had not told anyone that the dogs were being bothersome. The dogs are now being kept inside; the person who filed the complaint has since signed the applicant's petition for the Kennel. The applicant also wished to address the incident of July 4, 1990. The family was away on vacation and had kenneled the dogs, but the neighbors had given a loud party, which got the dogs upset. Ms. Niezgocki indicated that one of the two offending dogs has since been "de- barked" and that eventually, she would like to put a privacy fence up on the side of their property. They want to be good neighbors and to contribute to the upkeep of the neighborhood. Chair Mountin noted that there have been no complaints regarding these dogs in the past 13 months. Commissioner Colleen asked the applicant about breeding on the site. Ms. Niezgocki indicated she breeds one to two litters of collies per year, although that will probably slow down now since her dogs are getting older. The puppies are kept inside at night. Commissioners Colleen and Miller stated that they had driven by the site and • • 4111 Mounds View Planning Commission July 1, 1992 Regular Meeting Page 3 • were impressed by its well -maintained appearance. Commissioner Burgers asked about the criteria that needed to be considered, specifically the section in the code which mentions screening - is value depreciation the only reason for requiring screening? Commissioner Peterson stated that Chapter 91 ("Animals") also addresses the issue of screening. Planner Harrington stated that the Commission must use the criteria in Chapter 40 ("Zoning") in considering whether to grant a Conditional Use Permit. Chapter 91 is used for enforce- ment once the kennel is established. Chair Mountin suggested that the resolution indicate that the applicant has remedied all past problems and that no complaints have been received on her dogs in the past year. She also sug- gested adding a one year review clause, such as is done with C.U.P.'s for car washes, gas stations, and the like. Commissioner Peterson suggested adding a requirement to provide for an adequate means to restrain the animals on site. Motion/Secon : i er o ee approve Resolution No. 340-92 (with amendments) recommending approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a Residential Dog Kennel at 8261 Red Oak Drive. 7 ayes 0 nays Planner Harrington stated that the next case, Planning Case No. 340-92, is sim- ilar to the one just discussed; the applicant wishes to keep four dogs in a Residential area, which requires a Conditional Use Permit. tyt PROVED Motion Carried mr Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting July 1, 1992 Page 4 Martha Madison, 5200 Jeffery Drive, was present to represent the applicant. She had the following remarks to make in regard to police reports on her dogs: In regard to the woman who was bit on the lip by one of her dogs, Ms. Madison stated that she didn't think that the cut was all that bad. She said that she didn't know who had filed the Police report, so the condition of the woman is her word against that of the Police. Kids have been teasing her dogs and opening the gate to let them out, although it was her husband who left the gate open on the day that the woman was bit on the lip. Someone else's dogs are doing all the barking in her neighborhood. Her dogs are kept inside when no one is at home. Commissioner Stevenson stated that he is concerned about the recent complaints received about the Madison's loose dogs. The Police have received loose dog complaints in October 1991, January 1992, and March 1992. He stated that the dogs are obviously not under control and that this is a concern given all the children that live in the neighborhood. Ms. Madison said that her dogs (3 Boxers and a Lhasa) are not aggressive by nature. Commissioner Colleen asked if the dogs could reach the top of the fence and gate when they are standing. Ms. Madison stated that this was possible. Commissioner Burgers asked if the family bred their dogs for show. Ms. Madison said that the dogs are only family pets. Commissioner Peterson expressed concern over the recent loose dog complaints. He believed that the method being used to restrain the dogs was not working. • 6. Consideration of Resolution No. 341-92, Regarding Conditional Use Permit Request for Residential Dog/Cat Kennel at 5200 Jeffery Drive • 4111 Mounds View Planning Commis Regular Meeting • NAPPB Motion/Second: Burgers/Colleen to table consideration of this case and to con- tinue discussion at the July 15, 1992 Agenda Session. 7 ayes 0 nays Commissioner Burgers asked Ms. Madison if she had made any effort to resolve the complaints about her dogs with her neighbors. Ms. Madison said that she had not done this. She also stated that her dogs weren't the only dogs running in the neighborhood. Chair Mountin asked if the Community Service Officer (CSO) could go to the site to comment on the adequacy of control measures. Commissioner Stevenson also wanted the CSO to address the issue of the size of the yard relative to the number and size of the dogs contained within it. Planner Harrington expressed concern over having the CSO make a value judge- ment on this case. He explained that the CSO is an enforcement official who can only demand that codes be followed. She can, however, go to the site to inspect its physical condition. The final item, Planning Case No. 347- 92, request for Conditional Use Permit for an oversized accessory building at 7074 Knollwood Drive, was reviewed by Planner Harrington. The applicants plan to build a new garage and use the existing 216 foot garage as a shed. The applicants, Patrick and Cathy Stampfle, were present. They indicated that they were aware that they would need to move the existing driveway surface and that they could not store motorized vehicles in the building once it was converted to a shed. 1992 Motion Carried 7. Consideration of Resolution No. 342-92, Regarding Conditional Use Permit Request for Oversized Accessory Building at 7074 Knollwood Drive Mounds View Planning Comm s Regular Meeting PP'' 0 y 1, 1992 e 6 Planner Harrington noted that, contrary to plans seen previously by the Com- mission, the new garage would be built at six feet away from the house, as required by the Uniform Building Code. Motion/Second: Nelson/Burgers to approve Resolution No. 342-92, recom- mending approval of a Conditional Use Permit for oversized accessory building at 7074 Knollwood Drive. A friendly amendment to the resolution was made by Commissioner Stevenson, and accepted by the maker and seconder of the motion, to include a provision for an environmentally safe removal of the existing driveway. 7 ayes 0 nays Staff wished the Commission a safe and 8. Staff Report happy Fourth of July holiday weekend. The attendance at the June 17, 1992 Agenda Session included Commissioners Colleen, Miller, Nelson, Peterson, Ruggles, and Stevenson. Chair Mountin and Commissioner Burgers had excused absences. There being no further business before the Commission, Chair Mountin adjourned the meeting at 8:38 p.m. Motion Carried • 4111 9. Report of Chair 10. Adjournment Respectfully Submitted, Paul Harrington City Planner • z_ • • MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION PAUL HARRINGTON, PLANNER July 10, 1992 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESIDENTIAL DOG KENNEL LONNIE MADISON, PLANNING CASE NO. 339-92 As per Planning Commission direction, staff will be visiting the proposed kennel site with the City of Mounds View Community Service Officer prior to the Wednesday Evening meeting. Results/findings from that visit will be provided Wednesday night. If you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call. • MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION PAUL HARRINGTON, PLANNERVA 1 July 10, 1992 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - OVERSIZED ACCESSORY BLDG. ROBERT STAUNER, PLANNING CASE NO. 348-92 Robert Stauner, 2454 County Road H2, has made application to allow the utilization of an existing 16' x 22' garage as a utility shed following the construction of a new 28' x 30' garage. Mounds View Municipal Code Chapter 40.10 Subdivision D (6) allows for accessory structures exceeding 216 square feet and up to 400 square feet by conditional use permit. Staff has informed the applicant that the accessory structure cannot be utilized for the storage of automobiles. Also, any driveway surface currently leading up the building will need to be removed as part of the approval of the conditional use permit. The applicant has indicated that both of these requirements are acceptable. The applicant has requested that this item be acted upon at the July 15, 1992 meeting. Because of the lateness of the building season, he would like to get started on the project as soon as possible. Staff has included Planning Commission Resolution No. 343-92 for your review and consideration. If you have any questions regarding this request, please do not hesitate to give me a call. • Street Addredi Interest in Prop rty ( ecl p opriate box) Ownerrof Property` Contract for_ Deed:Ownera L see .Operator'Managet Agreement to- - urchase iO h `(eexpplain\/ eneral=Location- a present Use , (check appropr ate box) . Uncle op � ./Yaca SingIFam'1Iy Dwelfng Duplex/Two:= Family: Dweilin .M mil No'" nits`.' .• rc 'y; _�. :Bustness/Comme . -: stablishmen ;Industnat_ Establiishment. -Other(explain) x " [ HEREBY DECLARE THAT;THE ABOVEfSTATEMENT ARE`TRUE �- i 4 . �f ignature ***'A'*'k*****'k'*****************ittC�********************************************* - ... .. -' . ,_ieA�a•4aYVBwsci.�•iw r__ _ -... �. _.-. ,. _. _$200/acre, minimum:$200, ma dmu n.$1,000 %R-t'io R-2 = 1.5;. 1 others $20o R41:19 R-2 - $75. aq others $200 ..$75' $100/a►cre minimum • S75a s250 plus $250 deposit $200 :$5k plus deposit deter hired • y .: $350,_ $150..r TOTAL FEES PAID -DATE. PAID: RECEIPT. NUMBER Date oUsnalaction APPROVED 0 =Y DENIED 0,,� TABLED k0 't 8-:4 owe' yam- Admfn:.Account No:— 3o' x•sri.J6 99 / Zeg / 3v' ems„/ 6 exiS77d Gthert6 rice c-'Ssoe y /3v/vQ / iJ 0.4 4o /3o' fq I.- /-74 'z /"iC'7v't/ C;, 7 //t.,,,,v 7S ' MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 343-92 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY ROBERT STAUNER FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN OVERSIZED ACCESSORY BUILDING ON HIS PROPERTY AT 2454 COUNTY ROAD H2, PLANNING CASE NO. 348-92 WHEREAS the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the request of Robert Stauner for a conditional use permit to allow an oversized accessory building in the rear yard of his property at 2454 County Road H2; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Zoning Code and recognizes that the Code allows up to a 400 square foot accessory building with a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the proposed accessory building is 352 square feet which is within the square footage allowed with a conditional use permit; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends to the City Council approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit contingent upon the following: 1. The Conditional Use Permit is recorded with Ramsey County. 2. The building shall be maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the dwelling unit. 3. The accessory building does not exceed 400 square feet. 4. The only vehicles that may be stored in the accessory building are licensed collector vehicles. 5. The accessory building must conform with sections 40.04, Subd. F and 40.10, Subd. C(2) of the Zoning Code. 6. Should the use for which the permit was granted be changed, the permit shall be subject to reconsideration, revocation or other action as regulated by Chapter 40.25 of this Code. • RESOLUTION NO. 343-92 PAGE TWO BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. ATTEST: (SEAL) Adopted this 15th day of July, 1992. Chairman City Planner