Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Resolution 590-99 . . . MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 590-99 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OVERSIZED GARAGE AT 2809 WOODALE DRIVE; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. 552-99 Whereas, Tim Skeate has applied for a conditional use permit to allow a 1,296 square- foot garage on property located at 2809 Woodale Drive, zoned R-l, Single Family Residential, legally described as follows: Lot 12, Except the North 250 Feet, Knollwood Park ('ounty of Ramsey WHEREAS, there is currently an existing 720 square-foot garage on this property and a 400 square-foot home 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 space on one lot; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan d, Location Map e, Staff Report WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings in relation to Section 1125.01 Subdivision. I.e, of the Mounds View Zoning Code, regarding the possible adverse effects of this proposal: . . . Planning Commission Resolution 590-99 August 18, 1999 Page 2 I. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 2809 Woodale Drive, as high-density residential. The existing use is not compatihle with the land use designation, yet this will he corrected with the updated comprehensive plan. Garages and other types of accessory structures--like shedfj and tool huildings--are allowed and even expected in this district, yet a garage that is triple the size of the house would be inconsistent with the second residential goal. which states: "Preserve the identity and improve the quality and appearance of residentialneighhorhoods. ,. A /lowing a garage that is three times as large as the house would create an ohtrusive structural lmhalance and could likely detract from the aesthetic appearances of the neighhorhood. This proposal does cOJ!flict with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. 4. The Geographical Area Involved. The Character of the Surrounding Area /n this area of Mounds View, most of the lots are as large or larger than the suhject property. There is a good mix of architecture present in the neighhorhood, ll'ith some qf the houses heing older and some newer. The su~iect home, hOlvever, is sign?ficantly smaller than those in the immediate area. While many homes in this area have large garages, they do not appear out (~f place hecause the houses are larger as tl'e/l. While a larger garage could he physically accommodated on the suhject property, it tt'ould not he proportionally consistent with the house. 3. Whether such use will tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. It can he generally assumed that adding to the existing garage ll/ould have a positive impact on the value of the su~ject property. /t is not known whether a garage three times larger than the home would have a negative monetary impact upon the neighborhood, even though it may be physically ohtrusive. 5. The demonstrated need for such a use. The eXisting garage--at 720 square feet-- is considered fairly typical hy todc~y 's standards. While it does not have accessfor three vehicles, there is ample work area and supplemental storage .~pace heyond that .~]Jace neededfor the vehicles. However with multi-carfamilies heing the norm rather than the exception, demonstrating the needfor additional garage VJace hecomes less of an issue. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the general criteria of approval for conditional use permits, as stated in Section 1125.01 Subdivision 3.b. of the Mounds View Zoning Code, can not fully be satisfied. These criteria and responses are as follows: 1. The use will not create an excessive burden on existing parks, schools, streets and other public facilities and utilities which serve or are proposed to serve the area. 7. The use will not cause traffic hazards or congestion. . . . Planning Commission Resolution 590-99 August 18, 1999 Page 3 8. Adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and necessary facilities have been or will be provided. Adding on 10 a small garage would not create a greater impact on existing public facilities. parks. schools or services. on utilities or access roads. nor I-I'ould it create an increase in traffic on adjacent streets. 2. The use will be sufficiently compatible or separated by distance or screening from adjacent residentially zoned or used land so that existing homes will not be depreciated in value and there will be no deterrence to development of vacant land. 3. The structure and site shall have an appearance that will not have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. Because the house to the east is set backfurtherfro/11 the street than the house and garage at 2809 Woodale Drive, any expansion to the suNect garage .would he fully visihle to people on hotf1 Woodale Drive and Silver Lake Road 1/1 addition to the ahutting property owners. There would be little if any screening of the proposed 5-1-foot long garage, the appearance ofwJhich would likely have an adverse effect upon adjacent residential properties. 4. The use, in the opinion of the City Council, is reasonably related to the overall needs of the City and to the existing land use. The use is consistent with the purposes of the Zoning Code and the purposes of the zoning district in which the applicant intends to locate the proposed use. The use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. 6. Garages and detached acce.~:wry outbuildings are t}picaluses in residential areas, and allow for the storage of vehicles and yard and garden equipment. A garage expansion in and (~r itself would he consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code, although the Code stipulates that any time a proposed garage or garage expansion hecomes larger than the house, City review ill the for/11 of a conditional use permit is required. The intent of this provision is grounded in the concern that a garage should not excessively dominate the property or create a proportional imhalance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission, after reviewing the documents associated with this proposal, the possible adverse effects and criteria for CUP approval, does hereby recommend denial of the conditional use permit for a 1,296 square-foot garage due to the existence of adverse effects resulting from the expanded garage and the finding that the general criteria for approval cannot be satisfied. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. . . . Planning Commission Resolution 590-99 August 18, 1999 Pagc 4 Adopted this 18th day of August, 1999. ATTEST: (SEAL) r\ :\DA' fA \0 Rot i?S'CO!\! DE VIDE ve ASES\5GG-')'h5')(J-')') PC .RES L ::,.r //7./d:{ J ..r~':!.. ....,...... ~. .-1.'" J,ean Miller, Acting Chairperson 1,/ ~-lu( - ~ Rick Jopke, Com unity Development Director