The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003 Planning Commission Packets� Jl�'.��V1�d�� "Y ��.�i`Yt��lW�Ur �:��I��,�1�� . '.�,� January 8, 2003 -- %:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING �iGEND�A 1. Call to Order � � Z, Ro�l CaU 3, Approve Minutes: December 4, 2002 4. Citizens Requests and Camments an Items Not on'the Agenda ^, ' •-. � } � � � � �� ,� . �.�- i- ., 5. Election o� Officers �. Cansiderai�on of a Request to Restrict Paxlcing Alon� the East Side of Crr��ield Ave��e, South of County Road I :, . �:.) 7. 8. 1. 2, 3. � APPLfC,4NTS: YC�Ui� ATTEN�,4N�� 7' iFilS MEET'iNC I� REQUEST'ED. PL�F.S� N�TI�Y 7W� C�MMUf�tTY ��V�LCJPMENT DEPAF2iM�N�' A`C 763-i't7-4020 iF Y�U ,4RE UlVABLE TC) AiTFN�. Ne�tt �lanning Comtnission NJ[eeting: Januaty 22, 2003 .A.djou�.vnent to Agenda Session AGENDA. SESSIUI�I� Rev�e�w Minutes �ram December 18, 2002 Pla.nniiag Commission Meeting �taffReports . Chairpexsan and Pia.ru�itig Cornta�.issioners' Reparts N:IBA�'AtGROi1PS1COM�EV1Planni^�CommissiontiPCAgendas12UO3\Q1-�8-03PCAgenda.doc ' Item # 5 ?,;;,, ,.. , � � � -..... ._�. ,, ..,. „��, _ ,. ..k. ,T .. . ..._ti ,.... _�_ , ......�.;. ,.,,,::. , �.,_��_.,, ,.,,r _ ,_�,: ,,,.,. ..,. � I I I ' !: ' ' i `,1 � _ �''!1 Meeting Date: January 8, 2003 7`ztle: ELECTIDIV �F" O�FIC�RS' ,lnt�oductaono The Planning Co�nmission Bylaws and City Code require that the Planning Commission eiect officers annually at the first meeting of the year. The Commission has two "Officers"—the Chairperson and the Vice Chairperson, wha acts as the Chair in the event the Chair is unable to attend a meeting. The process is defined below. I)z,�cus�aon e The chairperson shall invite nozninations from Planning Commission meznbers. After naminations have been received, the chairperson shall entertain a motion to close nominations. If such motion is made and passed, and more than one namination has been made, the chairperson shall distribute balio�s to the Commission merrzbers and each member shall wriie his or her selection on the baltot. The recozding secretary shall tally the ballots a.nd announce the nominee receiving the most votes. In the event of a tie, the recordi�g secretary shall announce the nominees tied in the voiing and balloting shail be repeated until an election occurs. If only one nomination has been received, the chairperson may conduct the voting by voice vote. If a majority of the members present vote in the affirmative for the nominee, the nominee shall be elected, The process shall be repeated for the Vice Chair. Ite�o�nr�endatio�a: As required by Code and Commission Bylaws, nominate and vote for the Chair and Vice Chair. ,, , . , Jarnes Ericson Community I�evelopment Direciar N:�DATAIGROUPSICOMDEV1Planning CommissionlPC Memos & Reports�2003 ${ection of Officers.doe Item # 6 ; Cit,y of MoujZCls View ��. 1 � 1SSl�ll � OY°� Meeting Date: Januc�Yy �, 2003 , ,�; ..,... ,r �._..,: .. .. .: , � ...,- � ._._ . ,; , ,., � �t°. • , ►�; .� ; �, ,�, ; .: !, . ; , .�, . �: �, ;: , . �: . :�; �: , , ,. I�ta�oduction: Significant discussion occurred at the last P�anning Camrr�ission meeting, as the minutes included with ihis pacicet will attest. Direction was given to have the property owner of 2402 County Road I wark with staff to come up with a suitable resolution to the parls.ing issue. Discu,�sion: Mr. Farrell has contacted my office and I have left a voice n�ai1 message for Mr. Farrell, but due to the holidays (Christmas and New Years) there has been little time to accomplish anything regarding this issue. We did send our temporary inspector to the fornner Tom Thumb site ta assess the existing parking situation to determine zf there was a surplus of surface parking. There are 19 stalls, which is either noi enough or just enough to satisfy the requirements for the convenience store and Laundromat. (The ambiguity i§ due to the fact that the Zoning Code does not have a parking requirement for Laurzdromats.) Thus, there is no surplus of stalls availabie fram which io lease. Further, the owner of Sam's Tobacco is evidently NOT the property owner, and the property owner has indicated he would be unwi3ling to make spots available for lease on the site. ,�eco�nnaendation: Because of the holiday ii�terrupiions, staf�recommends doing nothing at this time, letting the issue sit on the iable until the meeting on January 22, at which time staff will have a resolution drafted to recommend posing the Greenfiald Avenue as "No Parking" uniess some other suitable arrangements can be achieved in the meantime, V Gu�.� ��ua-e�. 3ames Ericson Comm�znity Development 1Jirector N:�DATA\GROUPS1COIvIDEV�Pianning Cosnmission�PC Memos & Reports120031Greenfield Parking - Jan 8, 2003.doc � , ;y; , ;�: � �, � _,_ � ; ; .. �, : � ` °� �� 1 � � �� i1� � ��- �" � � �� `� i �. � � � ` �`��: `: ` � : 1° 1 ;1 '� `. • .: �� , �; � i•; ��. _, �; r �401 Hi��ay 10, __ _ ._ la C�II t� Order ,;:�';:;> . ,,,,;> The meeii�xg was called io order by Chair Stevenson at 7: t?'Q' p. m., 2. iZoll Cal1 Members Present: Commissioners Mem6ers Absent: Commissioner,� �;�� , � «�. �,:�;:;; Also Present: Commurut��.�� 1 Plat�a�ix�� ` Location: Applicant: 006 3. �,,��%'Appr�o�ve I1/Iir�� '. -��: � ` � � a. Nove�xb�� 20, 2002 .+. ir�ctor Ii�Ie�ting � �, 2002 -�,�� atl � sja 112 2002. and Johnson Page 2 ;4�tC)TION/SECON�3: ��Iiller/Zwizn: To Approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission for i4'i�� znber 20, 24�f�� as Presented. ✓i-� .�� .i,, ��<-�`w `f�� Motion carried. . Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 4. C�tizens lt�quests anc� Co�ame�t� m� Ite�� ,Noi oaa t�ac Age�rda None. �our�ds �jiew Plana�ing Cornm�ssion Reguiar 1l�Ieeging �. Platt�ting Ca�e ZCO2-006 I)ece�atbe� 1�, 2002 Page 2 Commur�ity I3evelopment Director Ericson explained that the applicant had applied to property from R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential, to R-3, Medium Densi�_Resic He then noted that ihe applicant had improved the lower level o£the structtjr� ic� alla� used as a dwelling unit. He further noted that the maximum numb�;�� .of du�cllit��; urriis .��;,. an R-2 zoning district is two units whereas the maximum numb�� IT�wed tn ��j 1��3 zr dzstrici is six dwelling units. .,,,;,'i;�'" „ Director Ericsan indicated that to rezone the property the € requested zoning designation wouid be consistent with the would not be detrimentai to the neighborhood or adversely Direcior Ericson indicated that the requested zaning Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, which it According to �he Camp Plan, a two and three-unit b� residential. � Direcior Ericson remarked that rezoning ihi bock requesting similar rezoning. ,�� Director Ericson indicated that this basis. z� Direcior would 11E Director E briefly rev� Dak Drive a indicated matter at;r ci af that ri on the block ot an 27, 2 � co her to be fwed in issro�ary **ust find that'tE�� r��rzprehensive Plan and �t�,y t�ci,joining praperties. e consid t�e City's " land use. `;y;,:. t:t7u�'i density properties on the add as �y as 20 vehicle trips on a daily �ring and said that the City Council anyone natified for this meeting, he had i-�c�i�r�c� several letters in opposition to the rezoning and u�ith the Coir��ssion. He ther� read an e-�nail from a resident on Red �ned �hai alic�vv'ing this rezoning would open the door to the other �� r��oned. "He also read another letter from a resident on Red Qak �v,��;t �-' rezoning would create a slippery slope where by ali tkze ulc� �,�k for a rezone. Ericson indica�''° that Stafffeels ihat ihe request is consistent with the City's �ensive Plan .: the only inconsistent issue, looking strictly at the Code, is parking. He that the ,,, ;:� r issue is what the impact would be to the community, which is something �zot �.det�u�:tely ex,press io the Cornmission and asked ihe residents in attendance #o _ _ Comtnissioner Hegland asked whether it was the intent of the property owner io title the units separately and sell them, Director Ericson indicated that tlus was not a zero lot line request so it would appear ihat someone would be renting the other units. i `; 1Vlound� View Plar�ning Commission Regular I�eeting Decerr�ber 1�, 2002 Page 3 Conannissioner Miller commented there was only enough garage space for one unit, Director Ericson indicated that the garage space currently meets the Code the City were to rezone the property, �here would need to be tl�ree garage requires. :<� ,%;� Commissioner Johnson commented that the property is on could iead to a new owner turning it into a six plex. Direetor Ericson indicated he had not researched whether but said the maximum nuinber allowed by the City's Code Comnussioner Johnson asked whether the property was parking and garages right now. Director Ericson indicated the property was to approve the rezoning contingent upon ad Comzmissioner Johnson commented that neighborhood by increasing ihe density � issues. Cynthia Thunstrom, the property� purchased t�e property and;��snvi her sister, �rn� for her, and �ne �t� tken sa,id: �}�� ;,no lon��r�=n�e�i: but, becaus�; it xs ��t�nconform��,; the rezanzn�. %uld t` due to ket and :,5;%�`lit, i� . �„ �'�e s �rc��erty � would support a si� ��a� z�. _ ; ;:; �h The �;itv's Code for ,oned, th� �ity would need ice. ;:��< ,,::�� ;;� verse impact to the zial vehicles and parking er, addresseci tli� �o�ission and indicated that she had it to sp��t; Cl�� c��l�i accommodate three units. One for ir mother ��r�p ��ded 24-hour supervision and care. She pro�erty fc�r ihat purpose and has been atiempting to sell it �as been unable to sell it and that is why she is requesting _ __ ____ _ _ Bob Humzn�g�rd, �0�� ur�nyside IZc�ati; indicafied he has lived there since 1967 and said he did � ^,,... . . . some m,��and it i� p�a��tbie,�� the uriit could generate 49 vehicie trips. He then said the ��, prop��'y`is located on a hxlr �c� ��there is not enough room on the property to parlc the vehicles sa��s concerned vvher� �.,1��t �x�any vehicles would park. Hummelgard said h��s against the rezoning because he does not think the property can �ort the number�;��`eople and vehicles ihat could poteniia.11y happen if someone turned it into plsx. He then��d that he feeis thzs would be like opening Pandora's box because atl the �e�`i.iPS u�oz�;l��e` asking for the same thing. �`a�r �a��rzso��; 5092 Sunnyside, indicated her main concern is with 3unnyside Elementary and the nurmber of exira vehicles and vehicle trips that could be added. She then said ihat the property owner knew it was a duplex when it was purchased and it should remain that way. She further commented thai if the City rezones this properiy the City couid expect other properties on the block to request similar rezonings. 5he also coznmented that the property owner is rzot planning IVIounds Vie�v Plan�ui� C`or�►r�rissio� 12egupar IVIe�Yi�g I�ecember 1S, 2002 Page 4 on siaying and asked �he Commission to consider those residents that will have to live with what happens at the property. Richard Sonterre, 5�60 Red Oak Drive, addressed the Commission and refe to Mr. Ericson, He then said he is spealcing in opposition to the rezoning as a precedent for the other properties on the block to request a s�m�� rezanir has concerns in terms of how this would adversely affect hous��2��ues in e �< that the transien� nature of renters in that area have left conc��aboui secu adding more persons would add to those concerns. :�'�`� �.�_ �,��.... Mr. Sonterre indicated that the applicant intends to sell the pr� the sale priee for two praperties sold in the area and simplc tn� owner occupied properiy based on the rates for a 30-year con} get in excess of $1,d00 out of both units to ma.ke it financiall� ,,,� math indicates to him that the new property owner would �`�ec to reco�zp the investment. , , „ Ms. Thunstrom indicated she had not had a request and is surprised at the apposition to cause a lot of trouble or disharmony with h� her request. . , Director Ericson asked Ms. withdrawal in writing. The Com�i��on recesse�i "� b. C;�gi�i��r��ci'� �f a , Avey�� c��.�'h t��';�_ � s � Comm��Developtr�er�t � �,, � park' ,�; ron Greer�field a� �ts re�;� for review. _ _. t�:�:� ��,rr�., €�a��i� so 5:;� �. io his �,e��er sent ��ls iti �vould set �� al�o said he an amount in exc�� c�f ' es that it could not be a�� r�e��-t�,a�e and the need to eas�yble. T-�� hei� said that #he to turn �� tc� a��i,�. plex in order .h� nei�hbars cancernin� her 40 p. m. ie does not want to respecifully withdraw City could obtai� her Parking Ellong ihe East Side of G�°ee�afreld Ericson indicated the Commission had discussed restricting �ting and Staffhad researched the matter and provided a Staff ctor Ericson indica�� the original developer, Mr. Mezzenga, was before the City a couple of s ago and had ind��ted that the building he intended to construct did not need all the parl�ing � s� ired by th� Cit��'Code and was granted a variance from the parl�ing requirement of 20 es cio�r� ta X�'ypaces. He then indicated that Stafihad asked the Police Department ta ��c�� it�#`c�z�z�xitfion on any parlting issues on thai side of the street. Dir�ctor Ericson indieated the �ommission needed to consider whether there is good reason to recommend to Cou�cil that parking be restricted on the east side of Greenfield as it is legai to p�rk there and restricting parkiiig in that area forces the parking issue further dovvn the block. He then indicaied he received a. call fi-om the manager at Crreenf°ield Estates who believes there have been vehicles overflowing from the pi•operty into the Greenfield Estates parking lot. He , , 1 I Mouncis 'Vie� Planniteg �o�rnis�imn Reguiar iVleetfng 1➢eee�nbca° 18, 2002 Page 5 further comnnented that there is parking where the City did not anticipate parking but the Connmzssion granted a variance and, in hindsight, took the developer too much at his word. Director Ericson asked for direction from the Commission as to whether the e�st side c�� V` , ;,. Gree�Ifield should be posted as no parlcing. He then indicated he had asked Qtiic�r T��ry Broos to speak to the Commission concerning parking in the area. ,,� ;, Chair �tevensan asked whether it would be possible to re- order to get the 20 stalls as required by Code. Direcior Ericson indicated the only way to do so would be t Greenfield Avenue, yet only two statls could be gained in so revisiting the previously granted variance concerning the loc Commissioner Zwirn asked whether there was a desi Director Erzcson indicated there was. Commissioner Zwirn asked whe�her ihe manager of Greenfieid Esiaies. Director Erzcson indicated that about ihe parking. Officer BroQs indicated to 4;15 p �n �n several that t1�� r�7ert; �ree or a.fter his'a.rzz��a� �e the parking her� i�i �ar��x;;a vision obstruc��t��. Cha�r St��e�son ask�'c� �1"�l i O �r Broos indicated Y�;� ,�i� :;�� ti��missioner Milter a� -�� '7: � called on ^{� �. �,e�pand ��ie �arking out tawar� j dain�;��, alid it wouid require �� iica�� c;�ftl�� ar�)cin; lot. �` for handiva}��aetl �p�ces. i, �, l: : �x��air� <�t�au��;��e parking besides __ ::__ _ i ;e��eld had called complairung �r ChiefBrei�t��n i��d ��k'ed hinn to sit out there fram 3;45 p.m. �nd he did �t��t ��r� ��> major �raf�'ic �roblems. He then said es and, at orie titrie, there were five but the vehicle ieft shortly hi, r�commendation would be to add a sign stating no ;t �'rotn the corner in order to keep the intersection free from bus that stops in the area. see any school buses while he was monitoring the location, what the process was for obtaining the "No parking here to corner" that the police department and maintenance could worlc together io have Commissioner �cotch commented there was nothing in the area to accotnmodaie overflow parking. Officer Broos indicated allor�ving parking on the east side and lceeping ii back from the in�ersection would be his recommendation. 1VIo��ds V�ew Pl�ns�ing Commission I.tegular 1Vleeting I)eeetnb�a° ��, 2002 Page 6 Commissioner Scotch asked what type of businesses had moved into the building. Steve Farrell, owner of the building at 2402 County Road I, indicated his m occupies the upper flower and the lower side acconimadates a title company agent. :!'; ;;,��. Commissioner Johnson asked whether there was also an Mr. Farrell confirmed that the �tate Farm agent subleases s that he was not made aware of any issues with this building street would not be allowed because, when he bought the p enough parking and planned on using on-sireet parking to � commented that ke has 16 employees and restricting on-st�� him to hire employees as they will not be willing to walk bIi his business. Commissioi�er Johnson asked how many busi custamer parking on site and use on-street p� I�irector Ericson said he could think o# Sti�et. rti � �`%% <�;/ %�/ /ii�� Commissioner Johnson asked wh��e Director;�`�G�,Qn indicated �:�a�t �� it} allevr �'� �.r1�i zssues_ � � ��,� � Commission�� Jc��Q�,cammer�#�;d t�a responded by ��tir��; t�e east sid� c�f i to to � toid that parking t��i th� ' cnew there was ��ot ' e!his business. He further hri�uld rnal�e it difficult for �, wbx�1�' ��rould damage zi�u �'�cw do zio� cantain their own �� ,\� 0'''3�other px�p�"erty wher'�.,t��i clientele overflows onto the r � >Y , �' �� , City docs u�ith tha e. has �>t�r�er� �� • hard with the property owner to ��.�berts off 10 caused similar problems and the City ��waod "No Parking". i�s�,��er Johns�rr� 3ntiit'�4�r1 �iP feels for �he property owner but almost every business '�eets the parl�n� r��u�t c,a-riiynts for their business so he has an issue with a business owner ig on using an-stre�� par��n�; �ta accommodate clients and employees. He further ,nted that there ar��iu��ness owners that have spent a lot of money acquiring additional ; �i�d commented that when this building was presented to t4�e Commission i� t ihere would be 15 employees. r�vhat the intent was. Commissioner Johnson ind'icated the Commission was told this was to be a low intensity office building with one or iwo tenants. l�/Ii-. Farreil indicated that it is plainly evident that the building was designed for four businesses. � �i + �� -) IVlounc�s View Plan�'ia�g Co�n�xeassao�a Regt�i�r Ii�Ieetin� I)ecerr'ber �S, 2002 Page 7 Mr. Farrell further indicated it was never brought to his atten�ion that up were any conditions set with the buildin�. He then asked if ii stated in the resolution the number of employees or�� number of businesses allowed in the building. , ze'>. ��'�` Commissioner Zwirn indicated that Mr. Mezzenga had Commission. in�,'�iz�'er��it to the Mr. Farrell commented that he knew there would not be enait�h parlctng,.��`kne��v i�,��-� overflow parking on the street. Commissioner Hegiand indicated it was not right to assunlc th�.t c�n�s��et parking is for from the business. •: �.,� Mr. Farrell indicated that there is parlcing that is not generat�d hy his bt�si�� sti siaci� as parking from the apartments. �� Connmissioner Zwirn handed out pictures with r�s��ct tc� situatia�� on par��ing an Greenfieid. He then said there were five cars parked fro�l�6�58 Greezliiel� c�c�tnfn �a th�`corner and, looking up Greeniield, there vvere another four. H�-�Iso note ;„��at th�� i�,tur�� vere from two differe�xt dates. �" Chair Stevenson asked how many Director Ericson indicated th possible,�p ��ci oz�ly two at��: variar�� C��aa� as it t�cr��l Chair �tevensr�� d��.ted he ,parking capacii� c�ft�i� s�te, Commz��er He�=Ia�id 4nc�ic, {��A maxz��ze parki��g on th� 5zfie,! �'9� �'i��nmissioner Miller indicate l�r��cing at tl n��; parking � `urf.k�er encro be add��to the site. ��1"the area available, it would be �gain that would necessitate amending the the setback. that as he wants to maximize the off-street he would like 5ta.ff to go and see what can be done to the no parking from here to corner wouid help. ,.� �- iissioner Scotch��tiicated that while �here are no safety issues present now, there would be in the wintexi!f?S��h snow accumulations. ��indicated he waz�ted �o get the engineer out there to see if there was any way to a few more stalls due to the change in use. Director Ericsozx clarified that �taff does noi feel the use has changed at ail but how the building was portra.yed to the Coznmission was differer�t. He then indicated that there are not �ny ' res�rictions in the Resolution but it was conveyed to the Commission that there would be approximately eight employees and five or six visiiors. I�oune�s �Iiew 1'lanning Cornmission l�e��dar I�Vieet�ng Dece�i�er� ��, 2002 �'age 8 Director Ericson asked Mr. Farreil if he would be agreeable to addir�g ihe two stalls as suggest� by the Planning Commission, indicating tl�at he wasn't sure the Ciiy could force the prope�;� owner to make the improvements when the� are satisfying what was approved ;,, �� Mr. Farrell indicated it would be a cost issue to him--he feels it vu�ii��d be tac� ��era��vc ta only ,�:�� , gain two spots. �;,��;_�-� � � i;v� �� Chair Stevenson co�nmented that the usage requires 20 space� and the C��'��an arnerac� t�� „�,;�� . variance a�d force the issue. %,::• Commissioner Johnson aslced Direcior Ericson whether the require that the parking be changed if parking became an is; Direcior Ericson responded that the resolution was silent Commissioner Scotch recommended that Mr. of en�ployee vehicles on site. Mr. Farrell agreed that that was a good hours and requires travel to meet with schedules to aItow for car oolin . � p g <:,.<.;.; ,;<,:.�:: Chair Stevenson indicated he w there is no ,�.dequaie parking. ��,� Direcxt�� 'i��t�rz z�emindett ikz� � use has"ri�t c.k�an�;ec�;, it was pra number of enj�l��c��' ,I-Ie then Council car� fo�� :h�! bt;ilt�in� c ��ir�s.:,,,'��, . Chair S �; "�i`ison inai�' �� see i�� Commission ctor Ericson i s the buitding ;ated to be in<. so it v�`iild be to that the Coznnnissiori to :;; , rc.�dtroe ihe number �ge industry has varied to coordinate parking on the site as it appears ssion tha� �h� building is a legal conforming use and the �s an office use and it is ae� office use regardless ofthe : tiQes; not believe the Planning Coznmission or the City ct add �nore parking. like to review the aziginal agreement with Mr, Mezzenga to y to increase parking if parking becazne an issue. here was no develapinent agreement and nathing in the resolution any requirement that would force them to increase the parking if it is He then said that the City is doing ihat now for all projects. �c�m.t�i�sxorzca ;��r�i stated, for the record, ihat he made representatians with respect to this ��1�� ia ih�!�'ommission and the Council and representations were made back io him by �c��.Y�rci1 `icniber Thomas and Mayor Sonterre that when these issues came back they would be dealt v,�i�h and the City Attorney said they could be dealt with but now he is being told that the City cannoi force the owner to expand the parking. He then suggested putting no parking signs along the east 5ide of Greenfield to alieviate the parking issues and let the ownar deal with accommodating his business parlcing. � `>i iVlound� Vieen� Plannin� Coartc�ayssiot� Regul�r° l�ee�it�� I)eceniber 1�, �002 Page 9 Commissioner Johnson indicated that would be what he would recommend regardless of how far Mr. Farrell's employees would have to waIk io work. Director Ericson indicated it would also penalize others that would like to Commissioner Johnson indicated then he would like to recc Avenue from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mr. Farrell asked why the Commission wanted to punish bt Commissioner Jahn�on suggested tabling the mattar to aIIc� Commission to discuss a reasonable solution to the parkin�� Chair 5tevenson indicated the Commission was willing to � address tl�e parlcing issues. -,,, Commissioner Hegland suggested securing NIr. Farrell aslced for information on the Chair �tevenson commented that he on resolving this issue. Mr. Farrell said he was willing 7. a� _ __ _ Com�nunity Deu�lt�pin� 2075 Hillvi�v�,�.s�� c� the Co � �< � �, . � three i�su issu : '��iat the City ad d �� gs a conditionai �� u��i;�ther the expansion ��cond issu� is with ref ses Par�� the a;r��=�' C7reenfield ;ant tizne to comc t c� tl�r� ? ii ��r.;.Iiarrell does not � �rc�rr� a�otl�el- buildizi� , the buildin� nex� t� h�s: 7U�/%� to;:�vdrk with ths� C��y on �;;-, , r 1 :,��s' �zrv��:;: t�� Fo�� ,� parking. aite��3t to work with the Commission ISSIIe. at 2075 �il[eiee�v Road to a Six- )irector �;ricst�� izidicated that Staffhad received a request to expand ��lex. H� �hen indicated that a six-plex would be permitted under ��;i�fi`to bring this #o the Commission for consideration. The first ��i an o��3inance allowing townhomes and making multifamily �tl��ng this property a legal noncof�forming use and Staff questions Id>�equire this go through the conditional use perznit process. The to parking on the site. indicated that this matter jusi came up with the twinhome case and he able to differentiate based on use, owner occupiad or rental, �it�c�c��° �r�i�son indicated the Ciiy canno� separate rental versus owned as the ownership status has no bearing on the use. Com.missioner Hegiand said he %els it should be a special use to go from owner occupied to rental. l�o�nds Viewr Pla�ning Coas�mtissio,i I)ecerriber 1�, 2002 , I2egular 1Vleeting Page 10 Director Ericsan indicated the City cannot do ihat, Commissioner Hegland said he thir�ks the Ci�y should change its requirements so that it so. ,:::. Comrnissioner Johnson indicated the use of the buildiag, not the the City. ;'; Commissioner Hegland indicated he feels there should be a��u �or rental. Director Ericson indicated he respected the opinion but doc5 zlni differentiate between owner occupied and rentai ui�ii�. Director Ericson indicated the request is to finish th� and the zoning code would permit it but it does nece� Director Ericson indicated the praperty daes no� ��av than needed. ,�°�>% Commissioner 5cotch asked whether Director Ericson indicated there w�t�� not be. Director The Cammi= variance pro regarding th� indicated Code, �x t this �s � �. ��_��" Iteview l�Ierr�o that t� �� the the evel to �Lljz��r�,�� zitrolied by A `� j. , �,,, / k/� ca,�; �``lspecial tis� ��z� e City can legally tutv ��t�re apartments u�e pe��a��': >ut,�as more parlcing >,s�, :; 1'iot�al �arage requirement. issue is "t��?es fhi� r��,�'re a development review?" c defined a� adt�ira� Y� the building foatprint so it is 5ta#is ��nsioz� and i��u1d not necessitate a development review. ��est sllc�uld come before the Commission through the kng sit�aation which would then require a public notification Va�°ianGe I�eneals and f1�p�a6s Ericson indica�� that the Code currently does not specify how much time a person has s��.� '. the denial o.��Zvariance. He further indicated that 5taffcould put something together omznissio��s review and then asked for a recomm�ndation on a timeframe far the C��nia�is:��c�ner �cotch suggested 20 days. Commissioner Johnson suggested 60 days. Chair S�evenson recommended 3 0 days. , � :�, IVIou�tds V�ew Plann'rng Cotn�i��a Regul�r� l�eetin� �ecert►ber 1�, 2002 Page 11 _,. , Director Ericson indicaied he would draft an ordinance tnat sets a requiremeni to appeal within 30 days, and once the appeal is submiited the 60 day clock begins. 9. I�Iex� Planning Coenmission IVIeeting. Janua� �, 10. A,dJourr�ernent to Ag��ada Sessian There being no furiher business before the Planning Commi meeting at 8:45 p.m. (The meeting imrnediateiy adjourned to,� ,; Respectfizlly submitted, , ;'; %. Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: ^�� tevenson adj ,itsn) �� January 22, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR IvIEETIN AGENDA 1, Call to Order 2. Roll Ca11 3. Approve Minutes: December 18, 2002 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda 5 ': ; _ 6. 7. 1. 2. 3. _ _.. :. �_ . �,.: - ., ; � � .�� a ; % �� : �� i w� �� • - Continued Discussion Regarding Request to Restrict Parking Along the East Side of Greenfield Avenue, South of CountyRoad I �. . . � . . s . � __.. � ,_ � _ r . � � � ,� ��. _ � � . � ... , , �.., �, ,, � � _ � �!. 1 i. i-` a: �. j Next Pla�ming Commission Meeting: February 5, 2003 Adjourninent to Agenda Session 1�GENDA SESSIOI� Revzew Mznutes from January 8, 2003 Plauning Commission Meeting Staff Reports Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports i �l Item # 5 Ci�-y of Mounds View 1 l�Sl Meeting Dcrte: Janua�°y 22, 2003 , � f . ,. , , � , � ;., . �: ,, ` . ' "'` I=,,. '/" ` ''`�1r / .,:. Ia�t�odr�ction: This issue was discussed at the Planning Commission's meeting on January 8, 2003 and at meetings previous to that in 2002. Direction had been given to have the property owner of 2402 County Road I work with staff to came up wiih a suztable resalution to the parking issue. Prior to the meeting on January 8, Mr. Farrell contacted staff and indicated he would be willing to expand the parlcing lot by an additional four stalls toward Greenfield Avenue, although this would result in the loss of green-space and would necessitate a revision to the variance approved for the site. Furihermore, if expanded by an additianal four stalls, the parking lot wouid encroach onto the Greenfield riglrt of way, necessitati�g approval of a Li�nited Use Agreerzaent. ; Di.�cussao►�: As was diseussed at yaur last meeiing, the sharing or leasing of parking stalls from Tom Thumb {Now Sam's Tobacco) has been eliminated as an optian. The site, which supports the convenience stoxe and a Laundromat, has barely enough parking to serve its own needs. Further, the owner of �am's Tobacco has indicated he wouid be unwiiling to make spots available for lease on the site. Regarding the e�ansion of the parlting lot, Mr. Farrell indicated that because the asphalt company v,rould be coming out in the spring to lay the second layer of asphalt on his parking lot, it wouid noi be cost-prohibitive to expand the lot at ihe same time. To e�and the lot to accommodate four additional stalls, the lot would be extended 18 more feet toward Cnreenfield Avenue. There is currently 28 feet of green-space between the Jot and the street; fihe expansion ��vould reduce the green-space to 10 feet. It appears as though the parking lot is currently 11 feet offthe property line. With the expansion, the lot would encroach 7 feet into the right of way. To allow for this expansion, three things wouid need to occur: First, the original resolution approving the setback variance wouid need to be amended to allow for a zero-foot parlcing lot setbacl�. Secand, Mr. Farrell wouid need to execute a timited use agreement which would allow him the "limited" use of the right of way. The agreeinent wouid also indicate that the City would no� be liable for any damage to the parking lot in ihe event of a utility or street repair. Last, as discussed by the Planning Commission, Mr. Farrell would need to execute a development agreement regarding the expansion which woutd also contain language as to the building, its -- maintenance and operation. Greenfield Ave Report Jan 22, 2003 ��_ Page 2 The drawbacks of such an expansion are two-fold. From an aesthetic perspective, ane could argue that the reduction of green-space and the encroachment of the parking lot toward Greenfield would amount to a degradation of the physical appearance of this site. (I was not able to manipulate photos to show what an expanded parking 1ot mighi look 1ike.) The other drawback regarding �his potential expansion is that ihe City would be deviating from its rules to grant a further expansion of the variance. The property owner caused the hardship in that he bought the property lcnowing full well the parking limitations. Idecornrr�endutaon: The Pianning Commission needs to first determine if the on-street parking problez�ns z-ise to the level whereby posting the street `No Parking" would be appropriate. Second, assuming that overflow parking will occur regardless, the Planning Commission needs to deternline if an expansion of the parking lot would be warranted, given ihe above considerations. �1Vhile an expansion has been shown to be physically possible, that does not mean it's appropriate. The Planning Gommission must address, weigh and balance the various interests of the residential property owners, the multiple-family residents and owners, the business owner (Mr. Farrell) and the safety of the generat public using the street. Keep in mind that a recommendation to past the street or portion �hereof as "No Parking" is just that—a recommendation. The City Council "'�y makes the final determination. If reducing ihe number of vehicles parked on the street is the `' ultimafe goal, then considering a variance to expand the parking lot would be one way to accomplish this; however staff would recommend that any variance be applied far by t�e property owner through the normal process—it should not be initiated by the Planning Commission. Given all thai, the Pianning Commission may choose to act on the attached resolution, Resolution 71 �-03, recommending posting the east side of Greenfield Avenue north of the apartment complex driveway as "No Parking from Here to Corner." � Gt,vN.Q.d ��.�.cli-B�t+�, James Ericson Community Deveiopment Director Attachments: 1. Resolution 718-03 ', � �; , �_,. -� : � `_�� .� -a � �: , . -�: f � ; - ;.f: ��.� .: ,�; �; . �: ;.� �., ,.��:� : � � ,�'� i� ` , '1, _,, ��- � � ��. i; �. : ��. _ �, : �: � , �� : � F., �� - � � `� �� • � : .� . � �,. _� �. ; �, � ; , � ;. �, ., � , .�, ,. ;. , � . ,�. , . �� . ;,. . ,�. �, ;,. -., ,; f ; �: , i� , � � • � , � ,� �. �, ; p; -., �, ',. � . .- ;�. ., ;�; .: . � �. �: „ . 1, ;�; • � , , ,- ,�. � . ��E1t�A�, the Mounds View :Planning Commission has reviewed the par�Cing situation on Greenfield Avenue between County Road I and Bronson Drive in response to complaints from residents in this area; and, �liE�2EA�, the business located at 2402 County Road I consistentiy and regularly overflows its parlcing lot resulting in employees and customers parking on Greenfield Avenue; and, WFIE1t�AS, ihe west side of Greenfield Avenue has already been posted as No Parlcing to control and restrict on-street parking on this block. I�O�, 'I'HEI�FOIB�, ��+ IT RES�L�Ii that the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds View, finding there to he sufficient cause and in the interest of public safety, recommends that a"No Parking from Here to Corner" sign be instalied on the east side of Greenfield Avenue just north of the northernmost driveway access to the Greenfield Estates apartmei�t complex. �E IT FII�TAL,L�' R�50Li�13 that the Planning Coznmission directs staffto forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted tl�is 22nd day of January, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST James Ericson, Community Development Director ,,i (SEAL) � P�tOCE�I)II�G� OF 'I'HE I'�IO�J1�IIi� VI�+ W PI.AI�I�I1�1G C`O1VIlo/I�S�I�I�T CI'I'Y O� IVi0i7I�tD� VIEW ��X `l.�V,l'Y��y tVAAl`ilV.Ul�'�d1'R �. Itegnla� I�eeting .�anuary �, 2003 Il�ou�ds View C�ty I�a11 2401 I�igi�w�y 10y 1W1QUII�S V�eV{�9 1V11V �J11G � . �:�1� �O �I'C1�I' The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., Jai�uai-y 8, 2003. 2a IgoIl Cail Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Index ta'I!'Ii►atites Electioa� of Office Considera�ion' of the Easi"Side of ( Commissioners Stevenson, Scotcli, Zwirn,lVliller; Hegland, Johnson and Song. None. ev `iet Parking Along �outh af �o�nty Itoad I Page � � 3.-'` Approve I'Yiinutes a. I)ecember 4, 2002 MOTION%�ECOND: Miller/Zwirn. To Approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission for Decen3ber 4, 2002 as Presented. Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion camied. IVioundls 'View Plan�ing Co�nmi�sro� Ja�uary �, 2003 Rega�lar l�Ieeting Pa�e 2 4. Citize�s 12eques�� a�.d Comrnents on Iterns li�ot on the A�encla None. 5. Electio� of Of�cers Coirununity Developiner�t Director Ericsoz7 indicated ihat according to the bylaws of tlie' ;. Co�nlnission, the Chaizpersoi� is to requ�st nominaiions for cliair aild vice chair. MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Scotch. To Nozninate Gaiy Steverlson as Chair of tl�e Planning Comtnission. Ayes — 7 Nays — Q Motion carried. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Stevenson. To Nominate 3ean Miller as'Vice Chair of the Planning Coinmission. Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 ` Motion carried. b. Comm Considel•atron oi a Requ ��et�ue �ouih of County concerning tlie parking issue � thai would require a revision t way to gaui.the additional spo development agreement and a to be drafted and<executed. the East Side of Gt-eenfielcl ;:: , - :� n i�dicated that'he had spolcen to Mr. Farrell e11 has offe're� to add four additional spaces on site but ce to` allow encroachnr�ent into the Greenfield right-of indicated that revision of the variance alolig with a agreement far parlcing in the right of way would need Direcior:Ericson indicated that Staff loolced at the parking at Sarr�'s and 5am's is either short of parking'or at the rninimum so there is not an option to lease spaces from thexn.. Additionally, the property owner was not interested in leasing parking. ector Ericson indicated that Mr. Farreil has indicated he would add four stalls to bring him up he 19 that vvould have been required but would like the Commission to agree not to �ost no king signs on the street if he adds the parking stalls. He then said that the City vvould enter > a develo�ment agreement with Mr. Farrell binding him to providing the four spots when the Commissioners agreed that it was worth cliecking into the logistics of adding fhe four statls to the site. �/Iau�ds Veew� �'lannang C�rnmissiou Reg�lar I`/iee�in� �Ta�u�ry �, 2003 Page 3 Director Ericsoi3 indicated he would coi�sult fihe City's e�zgineer as well as public wo��lcs to see if ti1e�•e are a��y issues to be aware of with utilities. Co�nmissioner Zwinl indicated he was not willing to give up the right to deny parl�ing on the east side of Greenfield as l�e Iives next door to the property and is not sure how the property owner could get the extra stalls without complete]y ]osing tile green space, Director Ericson agreed tl�at bringing the paricing iot all the way out to the street would inalce it Iooic a little overwhelming. Comanissioner Johnson suggested utilizing the reeommendanon of the police from the last ; meeting to post a certazn nuznber of feet from the stop sign. He fU;en said he has az� zssue with a propez-iy owner who purchases a building ki�owing he has 16 emplayees.'as well as an intention to rent out to other businesses. It sl�ould have been apparent that thexe would be an issue with parlcing and he siiould not have assumed that his business parlcing could ba accoxnmodated on the street, Director Ericson indzcated Staff would go out ta the "s'rt� feasible to add the stalls. He then said that there would green space to make it worlc. He further indicated that : docurnentation for Commission review at the nexi meei ��d do the rneasurements ta see if it is ed to be' a minimum of i 8 feet plus �ff would pro�icle the necessary g• Commissioner Hegland indicated he vvould like ta` see a plan before voting on the matter. Director Ericson indicated he w Commission could visualize the Commis`siorier Hegland corrime; and he is not sitre tlie :City shoul additional parki�g Commissxoner Johnson commez spaces he would need based' on � Director Ericson asiced for clarij arriendin� the variance . ` proposed stalls so tha� �he he thinks the property owner is over utilizing the space liai io continue by amending the variance and allowing �ted that the business owner should have lcnown how many iis intentions for the building. of Commissioner Hegland's comments concerning i�ot it would like to see the proposal for the solution before deciding arnendment to the variance. Cortunissioner Johnson indicated he was not pleased with the comments of tl�e property owner at the last meeting indicating that the City was trying to run new businesses out of Mouaids View. He further commented that he is one Commissioner who does a lot for businesses in Mounds View and he takes exception to that comment. Ii�Io��ds V�ew Planning Cornmission 3anuary S9 2003 Regula� I�Ceeting Page 4 Cominissioner Zwirn indicated he had noi said much during the discussions because he has other issues with Mr. Fa�-reli. He then said that Mr. Farrell has a lot of floweiy thi�lgs to say about worl�ing with the City but he has found that not to be true. He further commented that there are other issues such as the building not being maultained and those issues are not addressed though ihe property owner malces representations that he will resolve t11e issues. Comrx�issioner rohnson indicated that is why he wants the development agreemeni and resolution for no parking if the add'ztional spots do iiat work. Comn�issioner Zwirn indicated tlie State Farm office has two vehicles, the title company utilizes ' two or three spots and the property owner drives separately frorii his r�ife using two stalls and his business has sixteen e��iployees. He then said that parlcing on the street is detrimental to hiin erltering and exiting his driveway duriz�g the day as traffic flow has to stop because two cars caxznot gei through if there are vel�icles parked on the east side of Greenfield. He furtlier indicated that the neighbor to the south has issues getting in and out o�the driveway as well, Coznmissioner Miller asked if any of the traffic cauld be attributed to the apartments, Commissioner Zwirn indicated that the vast majority of the` business property. He then said that rarely oi1 weekends the but the police usually tag the vehicles Comrnissioner Hegland said he limiting the number of employe solutions from the Director Ericson::c farced to be rnore '° Coznmissioner'�oY before Counczl:foi of situation would their lled ; other any or les are,people going into the � vehicles that parlc on the s�reet 'weekends. `;1 xzs to the siivation such as _ and he has not heard any other eliminated, the property owner would be a solution. years business owners were required to come and, if that practice were still in effect, this type I�ext Planning Commission l►/.[eeting: ,Tanuary 22, 2403 8.; AdjQUrt�rnei Tliere being no furth meeting at '7`22 p.m. to Agencl� Sessio�a business before the Plaru�ing Cominission, Cha.ir Stevenson adjourned the (The n�eeting immediately adjaurned to the Agenda Session) Respectfiilly submitted, ° �' i l l�ounds View Planning Comznassion i�eg�lar I�eeting Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeiei- TimeSaveY Off Site Secretarial, Inc. .�a�r�ar�� , 2003 Page 5 I�LO � VIE� PL II�G C�Ii�I�II�SIOI�i � February 5, 2003 -- 7:00 P.IV1. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA l. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: January 8, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda _ � ., . . � r -. �. r .. . .�. � � � :i�. � � . - -� � -. ` � � � �, l. � '. i�. � .. . � . ; - � r � ,':� � ..: _ �. �� . .,.. :.. 5. Continued Discussion Regarding Requesi to Restrict Parl�ing Along the �ast Side of Greenfield Avenue, South of Couniy Road I 6. Pfa�x�ing Cases �TR.03-001 Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Reduction in the Number of Parkir�g Spaces Required for a Six-Unit Multiple Dwelling Ref�tal Property Location: 2075 I�tiilview Road Applicant: Thuy Thi Bui . . ., , , ! � , # ; � „ � �: . , � � �: �. , .,. , ; ;:� i • �- y� � , R 7. Review and Discussion of Planning Commissian Bylaws S. Nea�t Planning Comu�nission Meeting: February 19, 2�03 9. Adjournment io Agenda 5essiQn AGENDA SIESSION 1. StaffRepor�s 2, Chauperson and Planning Cornmissioners' Reports `� �� i - t Item # 5 �.11� O, f �OZdBZC�S �Z2W � 1 � 1 hleetin� Date: Febyuary 5, 2003 , ,; ,c � ; � . r. : � .� ,: , . , ; /> ;` i '` f :- . ,_ i � ; � � , _ _ , ; : �. : � , : �: �, ,- �: •: :�. : :/; ;, ,, ., At the Planning Commission's meeting on January 22, 2003, the Commission continued �heir discussian of the parking situation on Greenfield Avenue in response to the overflow parking generated by the business(es) located at 2402 County Ro�d I. The properiy owner had indicated a willin�ness to expand his parking loi by four stalls, hovvever this would require a variauce a.mendment and the execution af a limited use a�eement between the property o�mer and ihe City. The Commission was provided with a resolution to resirict parking on the east side of Greenfieid Avenue from the corner of Greenfield and Cour�ty Raad I to the northernmost driveway of the apartment �omplex, hov✓ever �he Commission did not feel the paxking restriction vvould resolve anything and staff was directed to bring back to the Commission additional f: '� information pertaining to distances from the corner and potential impacts to prope�°ties fu�ther SOUt�I O�triB COTrieT. �ISCILSSlO�'1: Staff inspected the area and took measurements relative to the distances from the corner of Greenfield Avenue and County Road I. The first measurement was to the location of the first proposed "No parking from I�ere to Corner" sign, just north of the northernmost driveway access to the apartment compiex. The second measurement was a 300-foot setback, then a 354-foot setback, and lasYs a 500-faot setback. These locations are rnarked respectiveiy on the attached map as locations A, �, C and D, Based on the discussion from the las� meeting, the Commission has already indicated thai Location A, about 150 feet from the corner, was unacceptable. Location B, at 30a feet from the comer, is situated across the street from the 7556 Greenfield Avenue, north af its driveway by perhaps 30 %et. There are no obstructions on the east side df Greenfeid at this spo�. Location C, 350 feet from the carner, is located almost directly acr�ss from the property line be�vveen 7656 and 7644 Greenfield. While there are no obstructions on ihe east side of Greenfield at this point, the driveway for'i656 Greenfield is at the south end of the lot and vehicles parked on the streei could be an obstruction for resider�ts backing out of the driaeway onto Greenfieid. I,ocation D, intended to represent a 500-foot setbacl� fr�m the corner, is actually about 515 feet due 9:o a dxiveway serving Greenfield Esiateso I , ;i r��r��i Id ��u� �� rki� L��ti�t�� s � - � � � � ,�s ,�- �,� a _, � ; ,� � �� ti � � � � ,( c��' i '�. R.a, � �r;�� . � ,',�! �t �a t.�2� � �,� ; �.,� a �A I� � r.� �'�a � � �'� �'- ��t �� `� �': � � � t�' � � � � �i t . �,� #— �� } . � � � r �� e. . � �. r , �' � �-. - k �: 5 ,�%ir a�c� � � ,s�, 1 � .G �`' � � �' i � f:i��e' 4 �}�" � �' "�"� `�� -�"'�:� � ,�r�.�' . � �� !G, � lt � �� - 5:�'^;��:., h . .. _,�aa�":s��:�.,� � �', _ i�. i+�, z.w ?.,.s�". ';'S�.�- '��S . . , e��:� . _.. °r ;-� . r...... ,� � R . .. ._ . ' .�._�. ..,_._:. -.:,. �.:.�'�e.: �"-,,,.-�z�.:,...,�..F. ...._ " , Y` .'Y:--"'-` . _ ^�t-`s . . ... . . . a- . .. . . . . . � 4.: � .'�..' . ' ., .' . . . -... . ;�' ... � _.. " . \t, E'a�tr��in� i:��}�� 'l't1lYt:ll'V' .�. .��.��)_' �� 1_i �ec�nz rr� eta dat�or:: The Plaruling Commission may choose to act on the attached resolution, Resolution %1�-03, recommending posting the east side of Greenfield Avenue "No Parking from Here to Corner." The Resolution does �ot indicate the actual distance back from County Road I and would need to be added as part of its adopiion. � � �� James Ericson Community Development Direc�or Attachn�ents: 1. I�esolution 718-03 -� ,, 1V1�lJ1FA9� @' HF.� g�L-91`li\HLV:3 ��fYA1C1Ail�l�1V ��OI,UTIOI�d 1�0. 718-03 • � �� =�� . i; �- ,, ; �, '; : ,. '�- �; -.. �� I : ; :1 �-, ;�. . ;1� � � ' 1 ; '�. : , , -. .., �. � : � :�: . :��_ ; :: ��, :� �- . :• , �� •: ;�,, ��, �; '. , '�; t, .�, ' t. . - ,�. . �. ;�. _ �;, � , ��.' ' �. � �� i. . W�IE�A5, the Mounds View Planning Comznissian has reviewed the parking situation on Greenfi�id Aventze between County Road I and Bronson Drive in response to compiaints from residents in this area; and, WI�E1�t�S, the business locateci at 2402 County Road I consistently and regularly overflows its parking lot resulting in employees and customers parking on Greenfielci Avenue; and, WFff�It�.�S, the west side of Greeniield Avenue has already been posied as No Parking to control and restrict on-street parking on this block. I�10�, 'I'I�EItEFO , I3E �T' 12�SOI.VEI� that the Planning Cammission af the Ci�yy of Mounds View, f nding there to be sufficient cause and in the interest of public safety, recommends that a"No Parking from Here to Corner" sign be instailed on the east side of Greenfield Avenue, feet souYh County Road I. �E �� FIN�I,�' I2ESOI�VED ihat the Piannang Commission directs staff to forward tlus resaluiion to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 5th day of February, 2003. ATTEST (�EAL) Jean Miller, Acting Chairperson James Ericson, Community Develapment Director � l . . . . .Y � ../...i..'. l�� ...,._.�,,. .. .,...a .,.,,.,, �.:��i._ ....:i...l„ �...n:�'.� _ � i,..':/Jr n,,,, .. . . .. . ..� - . _. _. .. ... . �r.� ,. , i. .,, , '. � - \ �. .. Ite121 # b City of Mounds View � �SS� � 1uleetrng Dat.e: Februa�y S, 2003 � , ,::... � . ,. _... . . ...�. _� .. �; _. . .. :: . . �. . . . �� ,,. ,. , � , ,; .,, . ,. _. _ ,..... �.�:. . , .. r.:� � � r i . ,; ; ,, `;: , . ,: `�, A ;� �. — =�' i �/ �. � � Y ' �n , ' :�' �; . ;R� . i�, ? � .,: i:,. i �_ .�`;: '1- ,- " �,,, ','; . . � , �; . � •, � . ; ,; , TO A �IX-iTI�IIT TVI�TI,TI-FAI�IL�' ST'R�TC'I'�Jl�E Int�°oduction: The property owner of 2075 Hillview Road has requested a permit to expand her four-plex by constructing two additional units in the basement of the four-unit building. The property is zoned R- 3, Medium Density Residential. In texms of density, both a four-plex and a six-unit buiiding would be appropriate for this district. However, there is not enough parking on-site to satisfy the zoning requirements for a six-unit building which has prompted the property owner to request a variance. D�,�cussron: Chapter 1221 of the Zoning Code requires that multi-family housing developzxaents provide a minimum af 1 and '/a outdoor parking stalls per unit and 1 garage stall per unit for a total of 2'/a � �� parking stalls per unit. Currently there are tweive stalls on the site, of which only two are garage stalls. While the total number of stalls saiisfies the total nu�nbez- p�esently required, there should be two more garage stalls foz' the property to be completely cor�orming to the City Code. To expand the number of dwelling units in the building, there would need to be a iotal of 15 stalls, six of wl�ich garage spaces. The variance being requested then is to maintain the �resent parking capacity at 12 with oniy the two garages. While tl�e property may l�ave more parking capacity than marzy of the other surrounding four-piex units by virtue of the garage stalls, if the property were to expand to six units, the number of additional vehicles cauld potentially exceed the lot capacity on a daily basis. Where would the overflow parking be satisfied? One couid suggest that as a condition of the variance, ihe property owner could, through a lease provision, limui the number of resident vehicles to no more than two per unit, which would be consistent with the parking capacity of the site, but then there would be no parking for visitors. - Upon closer inspection of the property, it does appear as though there is a possibility that additional parking and/or garages could be consiructed on the site, however a survey wauld need to be completed io verify setbacks and spacing requirements. V�ar•aance Conside�°�taonsa For a variance to be approved, ihere needs to be demonstrated hardship or practical dif�'iculties 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 Pianning Commission) review a sei of specified criteria for each appiication and tnake its decision in j accordatice with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivisian 2, af the City Code, The Code clearly states that a hardship e�sts when all of the criteria are met. The individual critez-ia are as foilows: a. Excep�ionat o�° exir�o�°dinary circumstances apply t� the prop�rty whic6e c!o n�t appiy gex�e�aliy io other �rope�ti�� ia� the same �one or �eci�ity ar�d resa�lt �'rom lot size or shape, t��a�r°aph� o,� othet• circumstances amer �hich it�e ovvne�°s of ih� property sinee the eifective dat� hereof have had no cantrol. The property is zoned R-3 and is improved with a four unit residential dwelfing. The property is similar to ihe other four-unit dwellings in this area of the City. The lot is not irreguiarly shaped however there is a slope toward the rear of the property and a drainage easement that res�ricts development in this area. bo T'he late�al enter°p�°e�aiion o4'the provisiar�s af thi� Tetle v�o�ld deprave ii�e applicani of e-eghts comm��ly enjoyed by oiher pa-operrties in the sar�e district a�reder the tc�m�s of ihis '�'it1e. The subject property appears similar to the majority ofR-3 zoned properties in this area. The literal interpretation of the provisions found in the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, in that no other property owner is seeking to increase density by expanding to a six unit residential dwelling. c. 'I'hai �he special conditions o�° c�rcurnstances do not result �'a°om tl�e actions of the �p��icant. The four-plexes in this area may have been constnzcted prior to the enactment of the zoning code provision which requires garage stalls for each unit. To that end, the property is considered a legal, non-conforming use. Increasing the density, however, is an action of the property owner. d. T�eat g�°anting the variance reques�ed would noi canfer on the applicaa�t any speceal prervilege that is denied by tl�is 'Titie to owners of other lands, struct�res or buildin�s en t�e sart�e districi. Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege that wouid be denied other property owners. To expand one's properiy, ane must have adequate parking to meet ihe increased demand. �o T'h�t tlae vari�nce reqe�ested �s the mir�irr�ur�rE var�ance whecl� would alleviate the hardship. Economic condafiar�s a�on� �hall �ot b� coeasidea°�d a hardshipa The varianee requested is twofold-a reduction in the nurzzber of garage stalis and a reduction in the totat number of parlting �talls provided. Because it appears as though additional parlcing could be added to the site, the variance rec�uested is not the minimum to alleviaie the hardship. f 'I'he var°ian�e vvo�►d a►o� k�� atea°iall� detr��rnea�taT tm i�h� p��°pose of fl��s Title or �o oiher �YOpe� in �h� sa�� zon�o Grranting a variance to allow the expansion of the stnac#ure from a four unit building to a six unit building without a coi-responding increase in the parking capacity of the site would be �'l .��.��.�� detrimental fo the intent of the zoning code and would potentially adversely impact the surrounding properties. go The proposed ea�°xarace �EII eaot impair an adeq€�ate s�pply of light �r�d air to ad�acent property ot° su�st��tially ►ncre�se t�e congest�o� of �he publie s#r�eis oa° in�re�se ti�e clanger oi f re or endanger th� public safety or substantially dire�inish or i�e►e�ai�� pra�eriy values vvithin tl�e �r�ighbor4�oo€�o � The proposed variance would not result in any of the above-cited adverse ef�'ects with the exception of a possible increase in congestion on Hiilview Road. .�r�blic C`otn�ent: This zneeting has been published as a public hearing and notices have been mailed out to property owners within 350 feet of 2075 Hillview Road. I have received two phone calls regarding this request, one frorri the adjoining property owner to the east, and the other fi-om the owner o� Colonial Village. The neighbor was simply in#erested in learning tnore about the request and did not immediateiy indicate a posiiion regarding the variance request. The owner of Coloniai Village was opposed to the expansion, especially if ihere was inadequate parkir�g to support the expanszon. �ecor�cnaendaiaon: StaflFrecommends that ihe variance request, as submitted; should be denied. If however the applicant ', were to submit a survey and siie plan showing a parking e�pansion such that a mimimum af IS `' parking stalls are provided, a variance might then be justified regarding ihe garage requirement, Thus, there appears to be two options for the Commission to consider: A. Direct sta,ffto draft a resolution denying the variance on ihe basis that {1} there is no apparent hardship to warrant approvai and (2) the impact io the neighborhood could be substantial B. Take no aciion on the request, allowing the applicant time to survey the property and to design and submi� a parking expansion plan sufficieni to satisfy the total number of parking stalls required by the Zoning Code. � ; ._ . �� James Ericsan Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2, Location Map 3. Photographzc Documentation `E 4. Site Plan N:1DA.TAIGRO[TP5ICOMDEV1Development CaseslVRQ3-001 (Bui)�Parking Variance - Feb 5, 20p3.doc ��.. �' ' ' � �:°3"��... '_r'� �:.. � �� 6 Hr, €�� kT� E _ � �J �. S' .� ..... .................�.., �-. _. � � _ � �— � �f � e.�, � � § � . "��: . � � �� , ��: , � � {��;- ... .. ..... , S �i"" � . . �, � j �� _ .,.., �� : [_ < '� .. ` A� . � � .�.... .,.... ...�. �. � i �� i► ..��:, ,�.N��,� ;� ��,�� , � � � ��t-� [��' � � rr �---.,�'� .-� • 0 �: �,J �. : � xJ � ! t, � ,� � v�s �Z �..:�:....�..�.._..._...�r....�._.._:....�:r..,... ; , �:�..��„, _W....�.:�....:._......::....::::.� �,�.�...,..�. ..._.�.�.t..�.��.�..��:�.�....�:�..�.,.._._.:....w�ww ........,..�.�....�..,H 4.:,.;�.��r��.�,....�..,..�.� �:� � � .�..�._..�. � �.. .r _��___... wv..,,�.�:�M.,.�,�...:.�.�...� ....................�.............:h.:..:�._�......,��v..��....�..�.w_:�...�:u......�....��:,...�..,.�,..�„��,�..w:.,N,�,::.,...�,.�:.�.:: ��.�.... � j. ,� ..,. _ � � ,r . d^`:�` � � � f ....,.....o>... ,�,-,�_.�,e.,...-,,.,,..�r..,M, w:;�" `.^'�`. � �� °""1 '`� �+. .... �.,, . -.....M...,««. �i ti°�.��...w.._ �...�.._._� _....,H,.. �_�..��.,.��:N,�" ` „�..:...�..�..� . . ... ....,. . � ;� �. >. � �: ��r (No �cale indicated) '� �' � :- s �? ` �. �: '."� �'` �. ,� ; > w.: � �:> ..�,.».i... � . .. _; . ..i.�...��...-.,..,,r..,......,�..:,..4.,.,,....,.. F . . . ..I.....�.,..,��,.�'(,,,�..,; ''..y:ti„t .. . r s M i~ t'. 1"hUy �'�'li B.�ai PrQ�ert}r I€�v4lve�d: �Oi� �ill�iew }�c3�d Variar�ce F?�annir�g Case No.Vf��3aU0� ��7� Hif��i�w Roa.d �`:.4�.�..----> Pi�o�ie�tie� Wi�fiin 35�` _ .; t ;I 1 1 . r .. �: .. .... .... . .....�_. � �� , �. , . , ,, � . , . , �; r r:r �20'�' �_ e��' ` :�� , > �� , � � �:�; � ` �! � C�J ' � : C� � 4"� t �9' s �' ': J��',�+6q,� C�d ; � T : '� I '../' i �D � 4�t °; _ fi� ? C�,F ; ,.o � �. �i i� � 'C`�K ,� 'C'�s' i �d � 4'�.� , �P _ .J- ..__ S} � .�.,. �j �, � i �°I: y �i d� s x;�i � �s ;�,I :� �'p�J� ��p rJ�� '- ��'r�y" :: R. Y�` 6� �; V t\ V ,-- ;; � : �j ! � '' °sf- d`�Y � 4�! C*� ' � : � � � �°$ 6�� ', C� i '4°� i i -i:._.; - ._,',. _...__. 9 ;� � c�' !�i,� � :�.� 1 �' �,� `�'°°�_ � ; � :� � �l�� ; �°7� f .'. �� : � ��, �;�� : � � ��' �� na� � �— r-- +:� ; 4— � : ,— . �c' ��[� 3 C� �� 9�i i 0� ,' 4t0 �- d°� ' ct� �l f t`� i 4�I � ; {'��M ', ("�� ', � ,� .; Of�.i � ' � i U"�4 � � C� C7Y ; � , � � � � � � � ; 6 ' i i c� � �B ' c�8 ' � a : c��t ,�,�j � , ,� ' ��,# � ; � . ' � ' ' � . . . . , , . < ...... . ,. . ... . . . �� ..... � ......... .. � ��'� r-- ` r�a r� �. ' +�s � � ` r3 � �, ; r- ' � �. ; .� �� ' � � ; � � �'° ; � �7`i �9'i � P� ; � r ��r-e �—:r� :��g ;�r.,` w {�:��.,1',� �1j� .'� �' '� 4 ' � i`� i � �; • � i i fi '- � . i� ��:; 4 v �I � ] �'d' `� � � � i �1' '. '€*,A �9 ` � i G*1 s 4�`? i �7 � ' C� . CL3 : L�3 t °�` � '�6b � � , '=� � �} : '1� � , IF� � #� � C`�i' : � '� ; '� � t91 ' � � 1'� : E`-- � �;��<r- '� C�: Cy;C�.�9i� � �;� � �- �`d �� i C`�J �� *# ; ttij C�! ' C�! !'t'�1' - C'� � CV I i�J' r C�d j iW ' t'+B E 4`-0 ' ' i �} f t „ .°. � ; 1�} �''. . � � , �`°° , id"t.. � ,; . ' � . 4� J i'^� ' � � �: �°�� a�.u�'�:r°�.�;r�:r- �—�,C� �'�'+�c�i.i�-�P� �r � . � .., ,w,°". ; r ; �r r" �'° ; ,,� i �9� : W^ � :� � ' ��j � :. � � �'�: �''� � � � � '� '� ;� �� '�..�� -.:� S�bject Proper#y 207'S 6iillv�ew i 3 Ifiem # 7 , City of Mouna's View � 1 �� .` ! :1-. i ''. Meeting Dccte: Feb�ua�� 3, 2003 Tatle: �NNCJAL REVIEW OF THE PLANNING AND Z�N1NG CONIMTSSION BYLAWS I�iroductione The Planning Cornmission's Bylaws state tkat they [the Bylaws] shall be reviewed on an a.iu�ual basis, at the first regular meeting in February. I3zscussrono The Bylaws were reviewed in 2002 with no changes nnade to ihem. The Bylaws were last changed in February af 2001 to make the bylaws consistent vc�ith the City Code requirements, ►. i r�' r' �� i r' Review the attached Bylaws. If the Bylaws do not require any amendments or modifications, simply readopt by motion the existing Bylaws. � Gw�.d �� Jim Ericson Comtnunity Development ]�irector Attachment: l. Pla�inuig and Zoning Co�u�ission Bylaws N:�DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV�Planning Commissaon�PC Bylaws�Bylaws Report -- 2003.doc .......\ �1E� �Jl LY��A-/� �ALlH N . ��+�L V 1 tl Il.�� 1 Y� ��l V�A Y �S A��1tlS1tlffi�V �A�� p,�� 9 H� (Revised February 21, 2001) I. A.il'TFIOItIT'�': The Bylaws of the Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission (Bylaws) axe established in accordance with the Mourids View Municipal Code Section 401.06. Subd. 7 "The Commission shall adopt bylaws for its governance and for the transaction of its businass." Where there is a conflict between the pravisions of the Bylaws and the pravisions of the City Charter and the Municipal Code, the provisions of ihe City Charter and the Municipal Cade shall govern. (For purposes of simplicity, ihe Planning at�d Zoning Commission may hereinafter be referred to as the Planning Comrnission or the Commission.) II. .ADOPTIOl�I �F ��'I,A��, REVIE'�1 AND AI1r�E1�TDNI�I�'I': A, ADOPTIONAND AMENDMENT: The Bylaws shall be adopted by Resolution by an affirmative vote of the majority of inembers of the Planning and Zoning Commission appointed as voting members, and shall be placed on fiie witl� the Ci�Cy Clerk- Administrator and the Commiuiity Developmeni Department. A co�y of the byiaws shail be forwarded to the City Colancil far its information. Any atnendments to the Bylaws shall be adopted by Resolution in the same mannar as the origina.i Bylaws. B. ANNUAL REVI�W: The Bylaws shall be reviewed on. an annual basis at the first regular meeting of the Commission in February. I � � lL� �I� �, �� ' � � ! , � ��1� �� - Vacancies on the Planning Commission shaii be filled in accordance with the Municipal Code, Sections 401.02 and 401.03. �� % . � .�. � A. OFFICERS NAMED: The officers of the Planning Commission sha11 consist of a chairperson and vice-chairperson. The Commission may create and fill such other offices from its mambers, as it may determine, to transact Commission business. In addit�on, the T)irector of Cammunity Development, or ius or her designee, sha11 act as the recording secretary for the Cammission for purpose of preparing meeting minutes, B. ELECTIONS; TERMS Chairperson: At the first meeting in January, the Commission sha.11 conduct an eleciion in order to make its recommendation for the chairperson, foltowing the procedure in Section N.B, 3. The name of the person recommended for chairperson shall be forwarded to the City Council for action at its next meeting in ,ianuary. Based upon the recommendat�on of the Pla.nning Commission, the Mayor, with the approval of the City Council, shall appoint the chairperson of the Commission each year. 2. tlice-Chairperson: The Planning Commission shall elect a vice-chairpersan each year at its first xneeting in January, following the procedure in Sectzon N,B.3. ,j Cliy Q�MOUTI(�S VI�W Planning and Zoning Commissioz� - Bylaws Pa�e 2 Election Procedure: For each office, tbe chairperson shall invite nominations from Planning Commission members. After nominations have been recei�tJed, the chairperson shail entertaui a motion to closa nominations. If such t�aotion is made and passed, and more than one nomination has been made, the chairperson shalI distribute balloYs to the Commission members and each tnember shall wri�e his or her selection on the ballot. The recording secretary sha11 tally ihe ballots and announce ihe nominee receiving the most votes. In the event of a�ie, the recording secretary shall announce fi1�e nominees tied in the voting and balloting sha11 ba repeated until ata election occurs. If only one nomination has been received, the chairperson may conduct the voting by voice vote. If a ziaajority of the members present vote in the affirmatzve for the nominee, the norninae shall be elected. 4. Assumption of Duties: The Chairperson and Vice Chairperson sha11 assutne office at the first meeting in February of each year. 5. Term of Office: The chairperson and vice chairperson shall serve one year terms, and may �e re-elected to additianal terms in accordance with this Section IV.B. C. DUTIES OF OFFICERS; The chairperson shail preside over the rneetings oifihe Pla�ining Co�nmission, and shall have the authority to add or cancel regular meetings and to ca11 special zneetings as provided in Section VI. The vice chairperson shall assuma the duties of the chairperson, in the absence of the chairperson. In the event of tha absence of bath the chairperson and vice-chaizperson, those members present sha11 elect a teznparary chairperson io preside over the meeting. �1. CO�TA3CIL LI�SOI@T: The City Council may appoint from among its meznbers a Liaison to the Commission on an annuai 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 Cornmission meeting, a Commission member may be appointed by the chairperson to represent the Planning Commission at the next reguiar City Council meeting or at the r�aeeting where the City Council wili be considering the planning eases acted upon by the Planning Commission in the absence of the Council Liaison. VI. I�iEETI1�G� A TYPES OFMEETINGS; SCHEDULL': The annual meeting scheduie of the Commission shall be adopted by Resalution at the first regula.r meeting in December for the following year. 1. Regula,r Meetings: Subject to the adopted meeting schedule, the Coznznission's regular meefiings will occur on the first and third Wednesdays of each znonth for the purpose of convening pubiic hearings, making recommendations to the City Councii, conducting business which requires a vote of the Coinmission, convening as the Boaxd of Adjustment and Appeals, conducting long-range plani�ing fiu�ctions and ather official business. City of Mounds View Plamui�g and Zoning Conunission - Bylaws Page 3 2. Agenda ,Sessions; An Agenda Session is an informal session of the Plarming Comrnission, typicaily held immediately following adjournment of a Regular or Special nneeting, at which time the Planning Commission may review minutes, informatly � revzew proposed or pending planning cases or ordinanc0 almendn�ants, discuss previous actions of tk�e City Council or other Cornmissions, and to perform ather matters z�ot reqcriring a vote of the Commission. 3. �pecial Meetings: From #ime to time, special meetings may be called in order to process sig�aificant caseloads, to review worlcs in progress such as comprehensive plan updates or rnunicipal code revisions, or to undertake a refreat or strategic planning session, eitlaer amangsi iiself or in the campany of the Cily Councit or other commissions. Special rrieetings can be proposed by any Commission m�znber or at the request o£the Director of Communiiy Development, yet axiust be approved by a majoriiy vote oftha Commission. 4. Emergeney Special Meetings. Emergency special meetings can be called via written notice to the Director of Community Development by the Chaizperson or two Commission meznbers, or by the Director of Community Developrnent. (Emergency speciai meetings are those in which the subject matter is of such an immediate concem that it cannot be delayed until the next regular meeting of tha Planning Commission.) The Director of Community Development shall post and mail a noiice of any speciai meeting in accordance with State ,Siatutes. Planning Commission membexs shall be notified by telephone and in writing, if possible, at least seven days prior to a special meeting. 5. Cancellation oiMeetings: Regular or special meetings may be canceIed by the chairperson or Community Development Director in the event that there are no items of business requiring the attention of the Comznission, or for Iack 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 talephone of any meeting canceIlaiion. A notice of the meeting cancellation shall be posted as required by Sta#e �tatutas. B. QUORUM: A majority of the nurnber of voting members appointed to the Commission shaii consiitute a quorum. C. CONDUCT OFMEETINGS; ADJOURNMENT Meeting Chairperson: If neither the chairperson nor the vice chairperson is present to conduct a meeting of the Planning Comtnission, the Planning Commission may eiect a meeting chair from among those rnembers present prior to the commencerneni of business. The election sha11 %llow the procedures set forth in Secrion IV.B.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), City of Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission - Bylaws_ p ^ 1'age 4 3. Adjournment: Meetings shall adjoum at or before i I:00 p,m. unless a two-thirds majority of the members preseni agree to extend the time of adjournment. If there is no objection, the Chairperson may declare the meeting adjourned withouf the necessity of a motion or vote by the Commission. D. MINUTES: Minutes sha11 be recorded for regular rneetings and each commission member shall recaive 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 ofiicial record of the business conducted and actions taken by the Planning Commission. Commission members may request capies of approved nninutes after they have been corrected, if necessary, and signed as approved. Copies of the approved minutes sha11 be fiied with the Comimunity DeveIopment Department. Unapproved minutes shall be clearly marked "DRAPT"; approved minuies shalt be �narked "APPROVED". A policy statement regarding the content and format of the minutes sha11 be on file with ihe Director of Community Development which may be revie�ved from time to time as needed. VL I1�FOIbI�ATIOlVAL PACI�TS: Each Commissioner shall receive a staff report, plans ar�d additional informarion, as appropriate, foz each item placed on the agenda for any regular or special meeiing. The Commission packet should be delivered at least four days prior to the me�ting. Each Commissioner is responsible for reviewing the material �within the pacicet priar to the meeting. _� VII. PI80FE5SIOI�TAL, COl<iSLTLT'.�1�ITS: Advice from, consulta.tian with, and/or requests for ' review by the City Attorney, City Engineer, City Planning Agency, or other paid consultants sha11 be in accordance wifih the Municipa.l Code, Saction 401.07. VIII. SUPPLEIVIEN�'AYtl' PUBI.IC!-!�'IOI�T�: 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 Counci( or City Staff. These materials shall be retained by each commission rnember and returned to the Commianity Development Director upon the member's resignation ar termination of appointment. � � � ,h i� ` ; ; � ,�� .. A, AT7'ENDANCE: Commission mernbers shall advise the desigz�ated Staff inember or the Commission chairperson of an anticipated absence from any regularly scheduled Ptanning Commission meeting. Any member attending less #han 20 meetings par year wi#hout the consent of the Commissian shail be deemed to have vacated the office, and such vacaricy shail be filled by the City Council pursuant to Section 401.03, Subd. 1. A leave of absence may be granted by the conseni of the Comtnission. B. CONFLICT OF iNTEREST.• 1. General Standard: No Co�nmissioner shall be appoiriied with private or personal interests likely to conflict with the general �ublic interest. If any person appointed to the Comir�ission shall find tl�at their private or personal interests ase involved in any matier coming before the Commission, they shall disqualify themseives from talcing part in any discussion or action an the mattez; altematively, they may be disquaiified by Cily of Mounds Vie��v Plazming and Zoni��g Conutussion - Bylar��s Page 5 a two-thirds (2/3} majority ��ote of the Commissioners in attandance. 2. Conflict Due to Economie Tnterests: A Commissioner has a conflict of interest if, in his or her discharge of officia,l duties, would be required to talce az� action or make a decision that would substantia.tly affect fhe Com�nissioner's financial interests or those of an associated business, unless the effect on the Commissioner is no greater than on other memb.ers oithe Commissioner's business classificalion, profession, or occupation, In ihe event a conflici of interest exisis with respect. to a particular matter before the Commission, the Commissioner shatl disqualify himself or herself from taking part in any discussion or action on the matter. C. EX PARTE CONTACTS: Ea �arte contacts are contacts between individuals seeking to influenee the decisions of the Planning Coxnmission and individual Commission members outside the meeting foruni. Such contacts include meetings with project proponents, residents, property ovvriers, arxd citizens separate from Commission meetings, communication between Commission members outside the meeting forum, telephone calls or letters which attemp# to iniiuence a Comtnissioner's opinion on a matter which wiil be subject to the Commissionex's vote. When ihe Planning Commission is involved in a matier which is to be hear�l and decided by the Commission (e.g, variances), Pianning Commissioners shall indicate to the person contacting thern lhat such contact is inappropriate and all testiinony needs to be offered at ihe hearing to ensure a fair hearing for all parties. In a11 other cases, Planning Commissioners should discourage such contacts and should avoid expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case. When ex parte `j contacts occur, ihe Planning Comrnissioner is responsible for notifying the Community - Development Director, and for canveying the substance of the communication at the next commission meeting at which the matter discussed is under consideration. 1�1TTEST: Gary Stevenson, Chairperson James Ericson, Community Development Director N:\t7ATA\GROUPSICONIDEVIPLANCOMM�BYLAWS\BYLAWS 2001-- WITII CHANGES.DOC NIOIJ � �IE� PL II�G- COIVTIl�[ISSIOI�d February 19, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Call to Order 2. �Zoll Call 3. Approve Minutes: None to approve 4. Ciiizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda � �_ .:: , �: �' � -�� -° � � � �: � � � �,�� =� Plann�ng Cases 'VI2.03-001 Consideration of Resolution No. 719-03 Denying a tlariance io Allow a Reduction in the Nurrxber of Parking 5paces Required for a Six-Unii Muliiple Dwelling Rentai Property Location: 2075 Hillvievv Road � Applicant: Thuy Tl�i �ui & Jamey Viger b. Plana�ing Case 'I`X03-001 Consideration of a Text Atxxex�dment Request Regarding Zoning Code Chapter 1111 Relating to the R-O Zoning I3istrict ` :1 Location: 2855 Highway 10 � " Applicant: Greg Johnson 7. Plar�ni�g� Case I`'II03-001 Consideraiion of a Zero Lot Line Subdivision Request Location: 7656 Silver Lake Road Applicant; RM Michaels Construction, Inc. APPLICAf�TS: YOUR ATTENDAfVCE AT THiS IVIEEi'INC IS REQU�STED. PL�A�E NbTIFY TH� COMMUNIiY DE1/ELOPMEIVT �EPARTMEIVT Al° 763-717-��20 iF YOU ARE UNA�L� TQ ATTEND. 8. Ne� Planning Co�YUnission iVleeting: Nlarch 5, 2003 9, Adjournment to Agenda Session AGENDA SE�SION Review Minutes from January 22, 2003 and February 5, 2003 Planning Comrnission Meeting :2. Sta�'Reports Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports N:�DATAIGROCfYS\COI�fDEV1PlFUU�uig Cominissiou�PC Agenclas12003\o2-19-U3 YC Agencia.doc . .,,, ..,`, r ._..,,� . �.,...::. .,..._.. '.,_ _... _::_:: r.,r�..:,;.:: .....��,:�:,r,,: ... ,_ `:�...,_ . '�:,:: n.,n _ City of Mounds Vie�� Itena # 5 � 1�� Meeting Date: I'eb�ua� y 19, 2003 ��:Y:_, , 1. ��x� . ..,,:.::�r .� ,,,. .,.. .,��.� ,,,,�� ,.,__�;� _. .., . ,.�., „r ..�. _r.;:.� v ,r�, b, �,..,. ,_.�,:. . ,� �.. :. �.�, ,�.< , .. ..F=.,., r ,. _.��,,..I - � �., � �. .�� E ,,. � 3 � ,'_ �. �. � �b ' ,_�. �= � 1' : .�� -.R� ' :�! ._ ';'t : � -. �. , �; �; s '` .,, f: �� . .-.. , :� :: ; . : � �� •��: .: ., ,- �; I�at�°oductivn: The property owner of 2075 Hillview Road has requested a permit to expand her four-plex by constructing two additianal units in the basernent of the faur-unii building. The properiy is zoned R- 3, Mediurn Density ResidentiaL In terms of density, both a four-plex and a six-unit building would be appropziate for this district. However, th�re is not enough parlcing on-site to satisfy the zoning requirements for a six-unit buildinb which has prompted the property owner to request a variance. I)iscussi�fa: The Planning Commission held a pubiic hearing regarding this request at their lasi rneeting on February 5, 2003. Residents from the area testified that the fourplex shouid not be expanded and '`; i that a variance should noi be gra�ted as there would be the potential for parking problems above aad beyond what they're already experiencing. The Planning Commission directed staff to draft a � resolution to deny the request based on the consensus that there was no discernable hardship to warrant approval. Chapter 1121 of the Zoning Code requires that multi-family housing develapments provide a minimum oi2'/� parking stalls per unit. The requirements further state that at least one garage space sha11 be provided for each dwelling unit, which would be included in the 2'/2 sta.11 toial requirement. Currently tlaere are twelve stalls on the site, of whick onl�� two are used as garage stalis. (A third garage stall is being used as tha garbage dumpster enclosure, ) To expand the number of dwelling units in the building, there would need to be a total of 15 stalis, six of which garage spaces. The variance requested is to nnaintain tke present parking capacity at 12 with only the tvvo garages. ilia�aance Consideratf�ns: For a variance to be approved, there needs to be demonstrated hardsiup or practical dif�iculties associated wiih the property tlnat makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burde��some or restrictive to a prope�-ty o�aner. Staie statutes require that the �overning body (the Planning Commission) review a set of specified criteria for each application and nnake its decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set farth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, ofthe City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship e�sts when all of the criteria are rnet. The , criteria are as follows: a. Exce�tioeaa� mr extraordinary circumstar�ces apply to tlze p��perty wviaich clo not apply �ener�l�y to other propes��ies an the sam� zone or vicis�iiy and �-es�lt from lot size or si�ape, topoga°aph�r or mther ci�°cumstances mvee� �vhich the ov��ner�s of �he p�°op�a°� �ince � t6a� eff�eta�e date �aereof i�ave l�ead no eo�trol. Tl�e property is zoned R-3 and is iznproved with a four unit residentiai dwelling, The property is similar to the other four-unit dweilings in this area of ihe City. The lot is not irregulariy shaped and as such there appears to be no extraordiz�ary circumstances relating to the property or the request. b. Tit� 18teral interpret�tion of fhe grovis�mns of this Tatle wmuid deprive tlae applicant of rights c�mt�onI� enjaye€� by other pr��erties ita the same dis�rict u�der �he terms of �his �'itle. The subject proper�y appears similar to �he majority of R-3 zoned properties in this area. The literal interpretation oi the provisions found in the Zoning Code wouid not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, in that no other property owner is seeking to increase density by expanding to a six unit residential dwelling. c. 'I'hat the special cox�cftt�ar�s or ci�-cuansta�nces do �ot �-esult from th� actaons of the applicaa�t. The four-plexes in this axea may have been constructed prior to the enactment of �he zoning code provision which requires garage stalls %r each unit. To that end, the pro�erty is considered a legal, nor�-conforming use. Increasing the density, however, is an action of the �' property owner. do '�'taat granting the vae°ia�ace requested wouid nvt con�'er o� the applic�c�t any specaa[ privile�e th�t is der��ed by this Tit1e to ovvners of other� lareds, strucfures or builc�ings in the s�me districi. Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege that would be denied other property owners. To expand one's property, one must have adequate parking to meet the increased demand. e. 'I'hat �he varaan�e req�a�sted is the rni�irrdum �ariance whieh vvouEd �.lievi�$e t�e hardship. Economic eondi�ions alone shali not be con�idered a hardsE�ip. The variance r�quested is twofold—a reduction in the number of garage stalls and a reduction in the total number ofparking stalis provided. Because it appears as though additional parking could be added to the site, the variance requested is a�oi the minirrium to alleviate the hardship. f. T'he varga�ace wouici raot be rnate�-�ally detrianen#�I �o the pe�rpose of tlaxs 'I'et�e or to otl�e�° property �r� the �arzae �or►e. Graz�ting a variance to allow the expansion of the structure from a four unit building to a six unit building withaut a corresponding increase in the parking capacity of the site would be deirirnental to the inten� of the zoning code and would potentially adversely impact the surrounding properties. �. 'I'�� proposecl �aria�ce will not imp�ir an adequate supply o�'li�h� �nci �ir to ad,�acent property or substantiatly increase the congestion of the public st�-eeis or in��°e�se the _ daz��e�° o� fire or end�ngea• �he public safety or �ubsia�te�Idy dymia�ish or i�npai� , pa-operty values �v�thin the neighb�rhooda The proposed variance would not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects wiih the exception of a possible increase in congestion on Hillview Road. I�eco�amendaiann: Adopt the attached Resolution 719-03, denying tile applicant's request for a variance from the City's parking reyuirements, due to a lacic of demonstrated hardship or practical difficulty associated with the praperty, ,; , � James Ericsan Community Development Director Attachments: l. Site Plan 2. Photographic Doc�unentation 3. Resolution 719-03 N:�DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV1Development Cases1VR03-001 (Bui)�Parking Variance - Feb 5, 2003.doc �Y:; f �..:� k,..q�� .-�' � �� l :�� !_. �--.11 1 ��.t� � - _. ��"' .��t� ` l�� : � �.... � ..........�.....�_....jJ. _ ... � —.ri�� :� � � ��. .� =-- , �� .. �,: � �� . �. � � .. � � y.., � , Y� � �� :,�� < _..... ...... , � # �... � (: � � j .N«.. ..... �:�.� � � �� t:�_ ..._...... �..,..... .'��er°�� S�1F✓�" .� ,� � .+�. ,.,,��•��ta�1��1� �'�,,. � �p� �� ff� di .,�� : l - � �� . �i �1 1 � �. �: ��. i� , • i �>� �j � �� .._.�.,. .:.,�t .--.-«.: .. : �.,....�....,.,.,. ,.,.�.,.—...., .._.r.�,:��.�.�� a,��? �v...�.�,..�. .....,.r.._ ,_�....r �, b.... � �?r��,:.��:� � � �:. �' �� : �' � I �� ' ��, '�� .°� �:.�� .. .��,.��.w.._... v....w... _�..._..�.u......._._ w.��_ �.. ._.._�-�-_ __..: .,�.,. .............._......��a...w,,..�.�.� ;,. . . .. � ^', r . ` *, F'hoto�rapf�ie Document�tian: __ _ _ ____ (Looking north, east side of building. Trees are on subject property.) � ��. �';� , ��,.�� . � �m 3h�ii ''¢�i✓ . ', Y. y� � � y � . . �> � � �; � � � h :� J r � � sc. �/,� � � � � ( i� r 3 . l 3�* � � � h �� j ��" �// 1 �� t � s < `��. "�s � .i, � � � \ �rfi ,s` d,�/�4 � . � !'t � s .'y 4�i� � cf ��. z� ?`� � � „ ki_ �'' ��i, "a� t�� - �� 7 �,�+' : �� y y�� . �� i��, w -. r�^�� ?� ��.z �� i '�. � � < �:, , r,,, �k r � h 4 �. . S � 2 • R< .�G.n � ��r ' �, f� F�' �:,1. , %sf`rps�s� '�'�� x; /�?� :,� �.� Clx:,��f � �� %/ zs. Y /f ...... � , s ., . .�. _ ..�� ,�fd,;�: � a � ✓/ . �z � c .�k � , �„ � � . atq --�,� ' t '�." // 32 ` �,i.:, .. : ..�, ,:,��' . :; .:`' �:;��.n � - � g �; .,.... �-..-;.M" �� s�'`� . �� „ r�, i,; s: `_` ` ' ;: „ .,.....:.. _, :,,;,, < . . ,.. ;,A, .. :. - _ ..: :�>:< , ::..:..: . .• • ,. 4< '� . .... ; .:: (Looking north, parking lot, garages and west side of property.) 1�OT�I�tDS VIE� PI.Al�lOIII�G CO�VII�II��IOI� �E50LU'�'I�1� iVO. 719-03 �IT�' �I' Ii�IOUI�DS �1��/ ��iTIV�`�' OF �11VY�EI' S'k'A'I'E O�` lYIII�I�ESO'I'A �� - .�� ; . �, ��. .�: �� ; _ -, ��,, : R, �. �, . : � . �� . � ■; � '�� .� : ; ; � .� .� �-, _ : �;� " ,�. , ': � :; . .� .�: �; � � . �, .. ,, �, ;;` „ , ,; .. ' ,: : : �,: .� � ��: , . t � � ��: • ' 1 :` � � :!� "<�� ► ; .� �. � . : � , .. _ �, � �. .� � ��,� � 'WI�E�.4�, The applicant, Thuy Thi Bui, has applied for a variance from the minimum parking requirement for a multiple-family dwelling; aiid, W�IEREA�, The applicant is proposing to expand the existing �our-unit dwelling to a six- unit dwelling; and ��E�EI�S, the property is zoned R-3, Medium Density Residential, wkuch allows a six- unit dwelling; and i�I�EI2EA�, The City Code requires I.5 parking spaces per unit plus 1 garage space per ;; unit; and, - ��EA�, The property currenily has 12 parking spaces, of which only 2 are garage spaces; and `�fi'�EREA�, according ta Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Fianning Commission is to review a standard set of criieria, of which all must be saiisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code. I�t�W, 'T�E�tEFOItE, �E IT 1�E�OL�I), the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the foliowing finding of facts related to this request: There are no exceptional or extraordinary conditions relatir�g to this raquest or to the property. 2. The literal interpretation oithe Zoning Code, Chapter 1121, Parking Requirements, does not deny the applicant rights commonly enjoyed by other R-3 properties. 3. The applicant, by virtue of the desire to expand the building, has caused ihe conditio�s which necessitate the variance request. 4. Granting the variance would confer upon the applicant a special privilege not enjoyed by others in this zoning district. 5. Granting the variance would be detrimental to the neighborhood in that par�r�king problems already gresent would be exacerbated. Resolution 719-03 Page 2 I�O�', 'I"I�E�F0�9 �E IT �+'CJRT��It I�SOLi1�i) that the Mounds �Iiew Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby deny the variance requested for a reduction in the parlcing requirements associated with the expansion of the four plex located at 2075 Hillview Road. I�IO�, �'�E�F��, �E I'I' �'Ii�IAI,I,Y ��OI,i�D by the Planning Commission that the applicant shall be notified of the right to appeal this denial to the City Council. The appeai shall be submiteed in writing within 10 b�siness days of the adoption af this Resolution. Adapted this 19th day of February 2003. ATTEST: (SEAr,) ; Gary Stevenson, Cl�airperson Jzm Ericson, Community Development Director '.I - . >' t Ci�y of Mounds View Iteln # � ___ 'I I � 1SS1 � 0� Meetzng Date: Feb�^uc��^y 19, 2003 � ,, . ,,. � ,�,. :..: �::> .. �. . �. ,.�. : _ . .. .._ ;. .. .. �_�-. . .,.. ., . ��,. . - �� - , , _ , .� .. ..... . : ..... .. �� ,_ �,., ... � �_; .._� . ..: _ . v. _ _ , _. 7"at.le: Consider�iion of a Texi Amendment Request liegarding Ciaapier 1111 0�' the �oning Code ltelating ta the R-O Zo�jrag District -- Plar►ning Case �03-001 Introductaon: The property owner residing and operating a business at 28b5 County Highway 10 has requested an amendment to Cha.pter 1111 of the Zoz�ing Code relating to the maximum aliowed square footage of an accessory buiiding. The Code indicates that accessory uses within an R-O district are regulated as they are in the R-4 zonirzg district, which is the same for an R-3 dzstrict, and so on, In the single family district, an accessory buiiding may not exceed 952 square feet without a conditional use permit and that the iotal square footage of all accessozy use space shall not exceed 1,800 square feet. �iscu�sro�a: The prope�`ty owner assezts that the zoning requirements relating to the size of his garage, which is essentially his place o#'business, are too restrictive and not in keeping with the inteni of the Residential Office district. According to the Zoning Code, the purpose of the district is as foliows: The purpose of the R-0, Residential Office Disti°ict rs to pf°ovic�e for high-density residential use crrzd foY the �i°ansition in land use fi•om resia'ential to lrnv antensity business allowing for the inte�nzixing of such uses. The zntent is to allow for a more dense development, wzth or without a corrunerciai component. In other words, this distziet is a true "mixed use" district. Given that commercial and residential uses are is allowed on the site at the same time, one could argue that there are in effect two principal uses. As such; tke garage area should not be considered accessory but rather principal, and should not be subject to the accessory garage requirements as articulated an the single-family residential districi. There are a number of approaches that could be taken to resolve this situation, ranging from doing nothing (if the deiermination is such that no changes should be made} or to completely rewrite the district requirements. Staffrecommends a simple addition to the permitted use section to include the following language: All permitted uses allowed in a B-2 District Automotive Accessory Installation �perations While staff is not coznfortable with fhe language relating fio high density residential and density bonuses (refer to the attachmeni), we are not inclined to malce any changes relating io this section % of the Code. The Comprehensive Plan Future La�d Use Map indicates the property located at 28b5 County Hzghway 10 should be deveioped as a mixed use planned unit development, which is to say that both commercial and residential uses would be permitted. Thus, �he proposed Code rrevisions would be consistent with tlne Comprehensive Plan. R-O Text Anxeixdment Feb 19, 2003 Page 2 The intended result of this change would be to eliminate a requirement to satisfy the maximum square footage rec�uirements of a garage in a single-family district. The property owner would then be aIIowed to expand the size of his business in accordance with the requirements of Section 1006,06 oFthe Building Code (development controls) which states, among ofiher things, that expansions exceeding 10 % would need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. Idecomniendaiaota: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the rec�uest and the proposed changes, and direct staffto draft a resolution either in support of or in opposition to the proposed changes. If there is support for a revision, the Commission can direct staffio prepare the appropriate ordinance for Council consideration. �_.__�_: a—<_ .�_.1-��. James Ericson Community Development Director Attacl�ments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Chapter 1111 of the Mounds View Zoning Code N:�DATA\GROUPSICOMDEV1DeveEopment Cases1Tx03-0Ol (R-O Revision)1PC Repart - Feb 19, 2003.doc Zo��r�g 6�ap ! �. w t �2 j ?`_'� J ' �'� � ."�'�- 1 w•� �'�.°�'c �- �,_��i.i- _��.�` � . a r`�' �?-'? I.,--� � � ' t7� 'C%•.x �� ti«., � � ) e-ti�' J ? "^a,�� (k;,l i A . .� ;w`.Jej'[ 3�� f�y _ r+ ` � � ,!`..: yJ � � ,,. . � �o _ _ � � ' -�......�.- ...�„ � ° .!`'° �` , .,. . . . � l . �_,: ,� � : . _ ,S� �:� 1�..��'�� .... �� > � � L' � � 4r� � � �"� . s . . . .. .. ,�.�� !� . �� :;.� iY4 � f L,1 � . ; r} ;. S,y`• . �"'J � r. ��1 � •� "' . �,r ��.� �L.i . Lti Si`"� � �y f:t� f,'l'} �fzj� �:}. . . ��Z�� r. �Sr � ] � � ��I 4 1 ' c 1 C-S �'"d �� ' �P-��-�'�5y� ? ^� ,� .. '�� "� ",��1 �k �'�f �I ��'�:�rL�� j � .,�1,/0 ; riq �'1 f 1 .�..�,,, ��44�� f.'3 I -r.- • ' ' ,� � v � � � � � . ... . �,,� r t1 l ,�3�. U�� `'� i � '`•— `4,_ � I '��i: ;� � '� �� +°s Ls� �� rFt. ." y % �...° �'� , "' f w�� -r- , rs r�` - F� �. e � E-•s u t� �s a �- d '�'�i §�`�- i �l � � � ' � - '-�`� �1! � _ �� C2_'€ �_ �a r. f .. �' �. . ;{�•• �r`,t�� $ .. � ��;l� � _ : ��'i Fs51: � � ��:�_`. � �� r s (,�F N CJ,.N�� s' � :� ` x �J F Y F' � � � � � � a, .....K.. ..... . 7 � �� t . ' : .. .,r. , . ��•�.I , ... .e , ;.r.� ; . .. , � : �� i.�.. � �i.. � - 'd,;�y ' �. � � � � r C J }" ; � " °�-J fi� ; �:e � '�:�w _1'' �t: �i-y ' J"jj)�*� tt'b :� 4� �. ` �� - -? v a � ..' ��°. 1°°., . �..�� r� F=; , .. - .. .,. . . . .,.� f � ; t1! ,�_,�:: ,�t' E � � . � 4.� r�r�. � . '�.,� $ "'9� - � �� .`�J �� U v! . . . E`'� � : �-, . � r r � '�. � �` �„ v t�,: � .�'�-tl.,s`z �3�x�.'' �.''L.r�l� � a �. �� . � j �� "; � - >` € .. � � z�� M; ' �'�, a�, �'�a�� t;.�,��, ._.. � '• , '�,, # �.<.� s : 1 �!J i�? S_ . �> �'v. � �. �, i "t t�" - .. - � . ,. , .. . � � ,�M1 ^t... � �� K, �4 �� J i "f '� R �. y ,,,, g j ` '� � `',�. C,� € ,.j#,1 '�� z . Y Ss�. ` ` " .a� � k? `.5 -� � . _.. . _.. . . ._ .. . sg�� qL ; . . , .' ^`��` R3 C � �� o �m<�� 31�?�� . � +,,� > �� n �� t"' F ,yL�y � 3�� y�< �r _ �IJ��I.�..�� . : C >`�+ �'._ ....... � . t'+ s�z... `'�vw ' ' � � . . . . ... . � . . : b`'�'�, i � : . •, y3� . � � �ppficar��'s V�' �� :� �r�tr�, ��,� °,, � �' Property ~�� ;�� ,r'�� , va y:��,s. �� :,, �`` ,.:.,�. . .<... . . � . ...... � � � ��:.. � }� �,.:: � � � � r�� .�ri ��;� `�i.Q. � �.x � � �F Y. - . . {` . � � �.,r �, '�" �i� �. : � .. � � ` �a''� � c�+ � � � ��' � ��+-I °?�,.. .6 �`��.Cyl r �a�p� '� �� , . ..... . . �� '�. ` M' ��£�1�.Q.Y .a � �h yS . J ��'i:��.�qi � � . � ��a�IJ'.�•.�' " y+. 'S �ry� p � . V : � . � � q':,�'. "i'v�C ��y� . . . ., ., ... .. . ... . .... . . . . . � �� Y �4 w' .r�, fy .-_ ��f E �.' �4 �'1 y-0 -� l� } 1� '�':� a e a � � � } ' �' � „�<s y �� `'� �� y � � �;' `,� `�'i',� .�.�c� `� �? T - �$ ��.t.�� ,'�' ``yyy,,��..''�� r �,�i._.eF:3�.. �3 J�A,�i�`��C 3�� \ ��`� . � � � J... ��„ y�. f i�! F ,4'� "C � ,�''' �. �''w. ; �+' �......,w.r. ��- .... .:... ...........,.....,.,...�.h,.�..._. �.� �� 'R � �'� : " . �� e{� .h{ Nt "� ��Y �� ' ;ti.� �`� � . °y � -_, ' �/ �^ . � ......... ' ' Rx""° �. -.� : ��.F �r --`>�"' �"��: i? � Y� ... .. . .... ... ..... .... . sx : £ �� 4�`.3 i 4K��aY.`�,�� ..� .. .� �'�'� � �y� �_ .. „ � �„ �. ��,� i�, •� -�r r..t s �� s� �. � i" �a� i� ;�I�:� i ��l Y '�°�� E 3 S3� �" � �`i �` ��.��;�. . .. . _. .. .. � �.. . . . . . _ ^��i+� �`"� , , , �3� ry ��. ��'i .� � I I�� 7`4''� � � � � i� �t L'� �S .. ,.:�' ;..: ; , �t .C� �`��t �E,�. >�� .. ti � � � ` � � � t . .. ... . ... . . . . � `� �� s ; � i �� x i � � � � �. � �� 5 �� 3 � £ �� , ��.�� ' ��,� . . �� .�. � .. ��. .0 � � y„a .... ..........:... .� . . .., l.-"�� .. ._. �..�� F�� '� i p �, — Jr �� -� I � �• �?` : � � �.�. 3 . �;�-��"# x�� t�� , �a �� c�a �e �.� ,:� ; 5 F 1�� :� � : � ��:� �� , ��, � ,"�'.i .��, y�., �.. .. ,...3�,� �� "'9 /i . �� tiA . T�S �^G FP�4 _ . j � �S� � , �� ' � �� .� �� r $ _.. ""�3 .... . _ _ .. r . . `��}�''� . ; ;�� .�� d ��'J �� i _ _ . :�- �� .,` � l.��i . .. ' . _ [ � = , ....... , �.-�,...� �-.�,�,�. � -.-.6�:. � c� � ��k��: .�:.,,.w 3�; ��, 11I�.0� C'�I''I'EI�.1111 1"� I '�; ��.U� �� ; �� _ �! �: ; " ;1� �. SECTION: 1111.01: Puzpose 1111.02: Permitted Uses 1111.03 : Accessory Uses 1111.04: Condiiional Uses I1I1.04 - `',� 1111.01: PiJ12POSE. The purpose of the R-0, Residential Office District is io provide for high density residential use and for the transitian in laz�d use from residential to iow intensity business atlowing for the intertnixing of such uses. (1988 Code §40.15} 1111.02: PE �I) �TS��: The following are permitted uses in an R 0 District: All pern�itted uses allowed in an R-4 District. Club or lodge without the serving of food or beverage. (1488 Code §40.15} �' 11 i 1.03; t�CCE��Ol2X USE�: The following are permitied accessory uses in an R-0 District: AlI pernutted accessory uses as allowed in an R-4 District. (1988 Code §44.15) 1111.04: CO��'I'IOI��I, iTSE�o The following are conditianal uses in an R 0 District (requiring a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in and regulated by Section 1125,01 of this Title): Subd. 1. Ail conditional uses, subjeci to the same conditions, a� allowed in an R 4 District. Subd. 2. A�artment density bonus, A maxinnum of tsn percent (10%) reductian in square feet of lot area per unit for multiple farnily dwellings of ten (10) units or more as required in �ection 1104.02 of this Titie based upon the following bonus features and square foot reduction: 1111.04 Bonus Feature a. Type tvvo constrE.iction b. Elevator sezving each floor c. Twa-thirds (2/3} of the required fee free parking underground or within the principal structure (not including attached or detached garages). d. Tndoor recreation and social rooms equal to twenty five (25) square feet per unit or seven hundred fifty (750) square feet total, ��vhichever is greater. e. Major outdoor recreational facilities, such as swimming pools, tennis courts or similar facilities requiring a substantial investment ec�ualing at a nvrumum five percent (5%) of the construction cost of the principal structure. I 111.04 {Rev. I/97) 5quare Foot Reduction Per Unit 100 square feet 50 square feet I5� square feet 50 square feet 20 square feet f"'; Subd. 3. Medical offices and clinics, dental offices and cliYaics, professional o%'f'ices and cornmercial (leased} offices (limited io appraisers, architects, attorneys, certified public accountants, clergymen, dentists, engineers, manufacturers' representatives, physicians, real estate agents and other similar uses which require no delivery of storage of inerchandise and are seivice oriented with no retail saie of goods on the premises) and funeral homes and mortuaries; pro�vided, that: a. The site and related parking and service entrances are served by an arteriai or collector streeti of suf�icient capacity to accorrunodate the traffic which will be generated. b. Adequate off-sireet parlcirng is provided in compliance with Chapter 1121 of this Title. c. Adequate o� street Ioading is pro�vided in comp�iance with Chapter 1122 of ihis Title. d. Vel�icula�- entrances to parking or service areas shall create a minirixuzn of conflict with through tra.ffic movement. e. When abutti�ng an R-1, R 2 or R-3 District, a buffer area with screening and Iandscaping in compliance with subdivision 1103.0�(6) of this Title shali be provided. £ Ail signing and informational or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with t1�e l�ounds View Sign Codel. g. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Title a.re considered a��d satisfactorily met. 1 See Chapter 1008 of this Code. Subd. 4. Retail commercial activities; provided, that: a. Merchandise is sold at retail. b. The retail activity is located within a structure whose principal use is not commercial sales. c. The retail activity shall not accupy more than fifteen percent (15%) of the gross floor area of the building. d. The retail activity is not located within a structure whose principal use is residential. e. No d'u-ectly or indirect�y iituminated sign or signs in excess o�ten (10) square feet zdentifying the name of the business sha11 be visible from the ouiside of the building. f. No signs or posters of any type advertising pz-oducts for sale sha1l be visible from the outside of the building. g. The provisions of subdivision i 125.01(1)e ofthis Title are considered and satisfaciorily met. Subd. 5. Buildings combining residential and noruesidential uses allowed in this District; provided, that: a. Residezatial and nonresidential uses shail not be contained on the same floor. b. The residen#iai and nonresidential uses shall not conflict in any manner. c. The residential building starxdards as outlined in this Chapter are met. d. The provisions of subdivision � 125.01(1)e of this Title are considered a.nd satisfactoziIy met, (1988 Code §40.15) Itezn 7 ,, �_. .... . ..� .. ..., .:: ....., . � .. ,.::._ ,.._ < ...._- , . , �; � . ,_.. ,. , ,,.., „._.:; . . . „ .. ....... ,.., .�: r,, ,. ,�. .._ ;�, , . Cl� Of MOZd12Ci�S VZe1N 1 ��51� � ��"� Meeting Date: rebrua�y 19, 2003 ��;;;:��r�., _. �.�:��;��.,..��w;�; ,,., � .��.�..� � � �:: �....,,; �.,� �,��. �� .a� . . ;. _ . .. ....:, T'atleo DISCU55ION AND CON�IDERATION Q�' A MINOR SUBDIVISION REQUEST OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 7b56 SII.,VER LAKE ROAD (M�CJNDS VIEW PLA.NNTNG CASE MI03-�O1) Ini�°oductf�n Rose Osbourne, representing the applicant RM Michaels Construefiion Inc,, is requesting approval of a minor subdivision to convert the lot at 7656 �itver Lake Road into a zero-lot line subdivision. The lat was previously subdivided and rezaned to R-2, Single and Two Fa�nily ResidentiaS, last year by Terry Martinson, the previous property owner, Minor subdivisions are those divisions of land less ihan two acres in size in which only one additionat lot is created. Minor subdivisions do not require a public hearing and in contrast to a major subdivision, a certificate of survey rather than a plat is all that is needed to record the change with Ramsey County. The applicant has subzniited the required certificate of survey which describes tk�e proposed subdivision. D�sc�ssion The lot has 132 feet of frontage on Silver Lake Road, 32 more feet that the mizvmum required. As shown on the attached site plan, the applicant is proposing to subdivide the parcel horizontally into to two equal haives of 66 feet. A twinhome would be built on the property straddling the lot line as shown an the at�ached Certificate of �uzvey. Both lois created by the subdivision would confarm to the minimum lot size requirem�nts and setbacks as established in the zoning code. Easements are shown on the survey these are easements that have already been dedicated frotn the previous subdivision. No fiarther dedicaiion of easements is necessary. Park Dedication. This subdivision is subject to a park dedication %e even though a park dedication of $2,110 was paid far this subdivisian in 2002. The City Code requires that any time a subdiviszon occurs an land having previously paid a park dedication fee, the original fee shali �ie deducted from the present park dedication fee calculation. In essence, the applicant wilt be responsible for ihe difference between what was paid in 2002 and 5% of the 2003 iand value as established by the Ramsey County Assessozs office. Staff has not yet contacied iZamsey Couniy as to the 2003 Iand valu�, however that would be established prior �o Council aciion. Recording Requirements. If the certificate of survey is approved by the Councit, the subdivider shall, ' within sixty (60) days, record a deed conforrning to the tertns ofthe CounciPs approval ofthe subdivision with Ramsey County, and within te�� (10} days of recording, the subdivider shali furnish the Cit�T with a reproducible copy of the de�d showing evidence of the reeording; otherwise, the approval of the Minor Subdivision Report March 6, 20U2 Page 2 subdivision shall be void, and the Clerlc-Administrator sha.11 so notify the Couniy IZegister of Deeds or Registrar of Titles. No building permit shall be issued for construction on a parcei created by such minor subdivision until evidence of recording has been submitted, The City Attorney wiil review the Certificate of Survey and any documentation needed to record the suhdivision with Rannsey County. Deed Restrictions. According to Subdivision 1.107.03 of the Mo�.nds Vi.ew Zoning Code, deeds associaied wiih zero lat line subdivided parcels shail have eertain restrictions added �o the deed that protect what happer�s in tbe event of damage ar deshuction. The restrictzons are as follows: a. If one dwelling unit is burned or destrayed, it shali be reconstructed in a uniform appearance. b. If both dwelling uni�s are burned or destroyed, minimurr� lot widths shail then prevail as for single-family homes. c. A double dwelling unit may be rebuilt rraeeting the original condiiions of this Title. d, A uniform e�rterior appearance, in terms of color, design and maintenance shall be maintained. R�c�rnmenci�tio� �taf�recomme�ds approval of the at�ached Resolution 720-03, a Resolution recommending approval of a minor subdivision (zero-iot line) of 7656 Sziver Lake Road as requesied by RM Michaels '``' Construction Tnc., with siipulations noted as fotlows: 1. Each resulting dwelling unit shall have separate utility services 2, Deeds sha,ll have restrictions as addressed in Subd. 1107.03 of the Mounds Tliew Zoning Code 3. Deeds shall be recorded with Ramsey County within 60 days af Council approval 4. Each resuIting dwelling unit shall meet existing building codes 5. The builder shall obtain access permits from Raznsey County prior to worlc comtnencing on the SitO � �1�1J�.�-� C� 3ames Ericsan Community Development Director 763-717-4021 Attachments: 1. Application 2. Zoz�ing Map 3. Certificate of Survey 4. Resoiution 720-03 � �� ,�,';i,f� j.��l6i'i Ch.Yf-�%i _,;f ;IJI'sif:3 e � ��_� >�..,,.......•-...,,......�^^a°�.'�' �' . �� ,.... - ...,,, iY �. 7�t�� kt£��"f N3s1•lA ;T cds.r�),� a�� 'l+i�r.3 t : ...... ,..._.. ; ,,W.�. � �.,.......,, �. .,.� ,,, .... ��} ��`�" ,_""`�'� �g r_ � ,�,.. .�..._... C} (� �('� _ � �t�3``,�i.�,f. - - � i ;,. � f � .,.._. ._..., _,...,. ..._.. _�.. ,»,., �-,,,.� .....,. -. .r : ;. � � �"% ij : 5 '�N j� �� .�.1j �.'�,1 ^') 1 ��3 � �'�: •" } :'f � . � � ;�: �y az � ... �`...., 3 .� � n F �" � � �� f ; C) „�3: f � ... � � 1 �; � � � �; �� a�'t��f:,i l��a��; �. t� �i o� (;�; � � kC� .' s � �,M.. .,... '��'1� � `� ' 4u � . �` � I �`� ` � �� ' �� `` ```. l � " ` �� x� �'��`.`.,r � ` �. i' \ , � ;1 � � ~ � �� .; �:: D" �R \A G.,'k � l �^ � �� . . �U '�' \� ^`�'� \�; '' +.t �k` f �'� w' �.� � "�t � �� :\ �. \ ` � � � �� f\ � � �� -� ` ti � ( '� 4�` Q �€. �9 ��'� `{4`j �� `� � - � ( � y �"� � 4��'' � � �1 �.. � .... ...».��Y� ,(�.. ... A �� -�� s.` �� M ,,, I:,. ..... � 5s3ca �� C1&� ., � t'�L� � � . � G •�c� �:.��. ��,. I � iii;� i � �`f� '�°*�. k'�`°'.,7Fa' �. � � ( � � � � � rr� ; �,i i`` i :�'"�' �.�:i �«�« � '� ' I'* v� � � �° � � � � � �. � �? � �1' �? : � � � �:�� ; �� -- �r � � � ��.�:1'.�a.�� ir,FZ.ri. � .b'iiJlf;iAlil,�lo1.'�.•.� *��I�� ....`�'M1.^ �.... _ �� :� w' �s ....... ...... ....o.. .-�... ,..... .�..... .... � �� {a r� .. �., t � ��,. .. � a; } �� h2 ��£ °''`'� �� ,..._ �..,� .. � G�S`i� � :; � �, f n3: �. �' y_.... , ...,..... �� 4, ri;;: . �}.�..,,.. i 5C �� ,. ,: : �7 � � �$ �� I f �J 4 � l(j 3.- �'� �� '•� k { k . Yti � . 4 � �., `- '�;� �' i� � � ' � � k�Y. 'Q � `�•�`. �.. -{� a� �-, ' . . . . � . C,#. �0.. � `''r��' � ¢f 1- �� I-� �f � >F �� p'.,� � � .� � � .x �' • \ 1 � � .7f � �`* f� y�c�'%. �'�j�lif .F.� ~� ��"�?`'�� Yyl7 �'�°�. r ,: .' ......�M„ P.�: �,lJ (t �� 3i'�+17�* „LT3'S� �� i�' � , > � � '�:: � �� — �� ` `�'� �' �:. � � � . ...�.�-»�"�"' br � � f� � �'x�'t}f"v (3� � �. 1 �a �3 'x I `� ,;.. x ._..:l. � ".� �; �� w �° � �r � x. � xx� � (, s-.F . �. � � �, I �`, f i� .�"� u� � �� us � �E �� '` �"�i �^."»-�.a,+`. � y„�. `�`i3'{ � � ? ��>�. � � � � ��.a. ��,. � �� : �..- -...n �. _� _.... ,�;.,..�-�; � �i.in� ��l >��f�%ii�� ,i�° '-m.-,'�-.-T-�'�' ,� �,�t � tf3 �� t�f��. � {}("� t .� ,�,.. �. T.�... '�+rLl}�K�k_ �fE�.��.#�� ^ � �.� � � E � 9�y � � �. �i 3� � ,.: �>� C% 31 �Y ,� � .. � � �g rr� �x >: ; �.� � � i €.� �, .� � � � I � � � .k:. E � w.,. � �:.'�.aQ? �� : .. � �� .. .µw 'S.,v �,,, �r-. � �. � � �� . C9 � : � w 4,�2 �� ,qy „� i i�':. ,`'�' _ 4 t tKt � � �� % ..t"' C7�+-� �. ��a �� y ' � f�' U.. � 'ki! � 3�f. �"��' � �. �� tx � i�%. �; � �. � � � �� .�� .� � �.'�w :«�.y� e? � � �.� T�iF;�.�Y'. � °� � . � � � �. e_�. ,� �z ,� '�: c�a 9.� . �". � C,� � � � � � � �-� � � �4 ��. � � :� �:" �s Y�,?. � � r�; ::� Zoning Map � � : �.�� "�" : ,. „ .. ,. � �. '��Y. �.F �� ..�.�....... .w... ...... ..:r..... . __...... �� , .. �� : �, :��.� ,v..;.... .�.� �� .......:.�� ,'��: �. : �`�� °��. r,�� .._..r. . .� � � � �� ;:... ,,� � �� ,. .��°� £_ ��. .� .. � , .. ... _ .__ P �� $. ��, , � : > � ..,. . .. . � �... .,. . . _ � �� ,..,. .�w.. ,ti.w:__M,..�w „ _ :: ; � � �� ,: �� ` ` ......� :� ,. . �...... ; �"�� . ..>�::t%.�.:�4k.n ...v�y..(o(.p....�.t.. :.��_'. �n. �� . • f v. ' 2L,d' S: 'aA 2 � : 'F' 3� . � � ;: d� � �! � �"*�. �''� �d ....: . . . . . .......... . � �� . � �-� � �'�' .. �.. � v. w�. �`�� t , ��.�� .�� 1 r�'��' ��w �� ;�� `� ��. �� ,� �' �� . ��'� ��:� , �.�:. ��;.:,: {..�.��.. �' �S� `' �' 7fi56 ' � .... .: � � 4'4s _r�;...: z .r. . a � . � � __ ; �� ' ;t �„,. . : �� . ; .. . ...... ..�;�; .. ..... : �.'�.:� � ..M. �� .��.a £ �� °�� .: � �� ,., ,�.��. �.. ... ;��::� f �� ; �°�.:�, .�« . .,,�...��,,,.. ' ��;�;� �� ..r .,� � �� Q � .- .�.�_. �� ;� � �I ` ��.�� . r .,�.... ; . �� _: � .:-::"-;, �. ! " • • -• R • f � �_ �_ , _ � _ � � � ,� :��,r� /..:,., ( ,,. °�s"r.", :>�'; �16. �'::?ii. r� �;`� . � ��...' , .:t._. ._ � �� . Z','� �•,; w .: �. .. ; � . , . .._ ,_ _ 2 G�r�`.r5 "' t'Fa't'��w}��'��. C�N�Mt��lI1Y C7��L.C��3��Ni ��"��t7'��T :�: a, ;A; � ��` � '� .� �;�0�. Ca�r�ty I�aad �.�; �tpu€��s Vi�w; MN ��i1? ��5�) �1�-4i�26 ��X �6,��j 7G5-��60 P�e�s� i"yp� �r �ri€�t T�fr�rmatic�r� T Gampi�t� ��t}�:5id�s ofTh�s �or-m ��pii��t� I��c��i�� ..w..� . > ., ... .. � �} p�{ /�!�f� .,«p^� ,^� / . .t�._ p .. `��! t 1� 0.d� fi��I�t..�l l� � \.. � �i �. � 5 �y �-.. � y {:�, i:.�5 � t,:� E-� �., . i. �....fn' �� l.. . ��- ...............� ..J" Suy��.i� i T I��F�Cri1� ( -).. _ �" -� � , r a a � # ..,,, . . .,.M , , �C�Cj'C�,`Sa :�� 4 6 S�� r,., , � � S� � � ' !s ^^v� ��.; ��X ✓'�a '� �y �,' , ..,. . �, f;,.W . � Y ,...e....,_ �.s7 , � � � . � tf ! t f" � k � � i � < � !4 � ?�'! � �3 J� � l` ' t 3.a.,....:� � J 4..°ItY4�E�'. . �..'i�Yl Y� t..,9/'SFr!;,a�\ ��/��:j. c. i°i�.Z}��i..,ie(A%%'?"s"*.,. ��•e� i� ��r� (eh��k.a:ppr�priat�:bc��c). C�� t�v;t��r ofi A�vp�rky C1 C�ntr��t f�r i��d' C��r►�er �,1 L�ss�e! �1p�r��r�r, Man�ger.. . �1 Agr�e��nfi tc� ��t��ase CJ �7�h�r (�x�iaii�� t �� .e .�.. �. fi:� , rw:,,<•.ri..... � �;��ific,��1�,�.�tar�� r�v�itte� �v,ii�e�n�� a��6��r�st �r� pr..�p�� i� �%e��.:r��'��Iicati�,�, ,��at� i.� , , ��rc��:t�� ar��i�rc�,�t%� prc��e�, �au r�u� �d��r�r�t'cr�i�'� a.�e��r ��'��r�ri��?rz a�car�a ; 1 s , �� r�r��rgi�#�g cur�,set�� tn �lr�.��,�� f ffsi� ��S�rlic�tl�r� ,ar %h� ��,�p�� cr�r� t�±t�� sl�rt �it�� a��a�i�a� fc�� i� �a b� a��;��: �r�� i��taa� j�r:�� . . �.. � - '`°� ' : ^\ � 9f Ad�ress �r ��rieraf I»v�ti�n r � �� '�`a °`� � k�=��..��;__�,�-�.��:. � m t l:pg�( n�seripiic�n �.... �,�..�.. � � �.�,; �s,,w� :�t�x .� . � M� �� <.=•�f�, �`� . � . « r � .y 1.� � �. �R � .� Prop�r� Id�ntifica�i�r� # (PIN #) # �� a�r�s Curr�€�� €ar�€ng Rr a a.s! �'' � �. � C1 � � 1� n CJ C] � fJ � Cetmprel��ns€�� Plan An�e�e{meri�. ��zonin� I�ajar St�bdivis��rt Min�r Subdiuislon Plarin�d lJ�sit i3�v�[aprt�en� (PU(�� Ua �imen�lm�nt Ct��ditiona;I�?�n�erinz Use P�rr�it Var(a�ic� Text Amenc[mc�t, ,�ar�'rrig Cnd� T�xt� A[�er��m�r�fi; �1ki��r Gity Cade C��E�� G��ui��(Sit� Ff�n Vtle�l�n� A.it�r�liar Permit N1�ll�art�i. ��f�er P�rmi� Ut��r� .,,�...._._.._...w�w �,�., ��D �5.(�� $St�4 $��? �7�U �35� �=1, 1�-� $�Si�� ll ��h��-s T�2�. �-�., �-�. $�.5[l,` ��i �ii�ers �3�� .�0 � �� .�5/�cre; ►�in ��:2�. rr�� 7'S4 R-.�.,. R°� _�1.5(�; �.11 cilh.�rs �,�C#4 1��:; R-� $�5.r �i! �th�rs. ��;QO �fi��ri�s Vie:vd �i��iiig Ap�Iic��Yior� �r��r�t' �� ip�ri� ,-• .. ,;..�.,_::.�::. '.�..,.��.. ��'�p�rt'� t'�i��i�ir��id;� G �lbstr�ck C:3 T�r�ens ��°��t�� +�� €'t�p�s�i (ath5�ch ad�itiona� su�:��o�ting documen��ti�i�� if �7e�:e�sar�� _�- � . : � <: . . .._....----�.,.w_.�...._ ,, ,< :.. -� ,•�..� ;...�>� �.�.;:..:.. •M, , i ,; .. a � ......................:..............L;.. � .....--'---,.-...—. ......... . • —...:�..:_..�...,...,.,... P��,�a�e €doti;; A�,�;ic��t� u�: rt;s}�oti�?6tP P�C �l? ebst� in��rsrec! associatEd sr;t:� the fii;n��. r��vi�va :inW.l�ro�esslnr� nf tfti� 3�ap;i�iira:r. �:�eh f�es wre zc be ;:aid i� r��rro�v i.i� frur:Y c- �,pCt�.�'�CCIj��; l)f :Sli9E�tYi&tl� fXO�: 2�1� �� af P�a�nds Vi�vv, �ees r.��,y ii-,�J�de �a4 �r� i1:(5t 1f�3E;gt'� X+J G(}5t�, {UI' S�dit&:I��P1Y� f� d CiG''i� b j�1�� Cli+j� C�l'.SU��]r f11; Ki��;��tlt'� S�N1CL5, �ttDYi�By, dfl(�.f?fi9if?[,G�1' �Ft'S, �il,{?(',�jS�$ �;��y �Isa �'�e. re�;.�sre,j i� raier rosts pP �i rt�l�c nntrr,�s, materia#s �rid stalf time spent in the reuiei�, ri.se:�r;; t pr �r`�Nar�ti�as �;k s�:�7�eri�?= uss�ciate� �a�i�li this ��pt'scatit�t�. 7'I�e �p;)IiCa;t± sha}) be resp4rt�Ulc: fc�; �a31 r a�C�t�U#e fn��ts'ed C�;ts {i� excess �:`th,� Ef11LtrJ1 f,�A�3C).�'ff �mac,ti , t�t�y� pni rir�n af th� d��es�r r€at. s��nt cl' er-iGUmbcre�i sr� ail.k�e r�tun�ed to the �ppficant ��st'r�Er� 3G d�y., a�ki,: .i �;ci�ti�r�s(ie�tt c;f'tY�ie ��tiC�tion t� ca�r7pl�t�G. 1�2��rr��r�t �F'p�rk deU3caYio� f�r?s is rer�i�ired :with �u4divis'.o�z a�;;1:.c.�ti�;i�s- I��K�OI'VL�llGE 7FiP;T I hcv� ie�� I( �f �he ir�±ermacinn �'€st�cl iri �ti�: �Eat��itt�r� A�;{�Ilcatipn ��d f;�lly t:r>�vrshatid ��tat i. �ni ; pst� ��sibte fo� H'•( �4�.incurred �f th� �i��+ r�l�ted ti: the �rar.��:yi�l� �7I 1;hfS C3{3�GC��IQfY. 1 i' F _= :. . F ,f } � � . : �....... �„�..ey t.:�`.... �.�1: ^w7... .,..,.��......�.... il `.!� -�......T ��".;.,>�:_7. .. � - _ .._ ............:.. m,,....—. _._-�..........,,,.,,....�..... . ._ ,....�...._.......,. )°i�}�{�IGeifii �j}�A �a�� , �• I� ' a: ;a M`,' ; sw, r � R r: w_ � R._ i, i ; iY �� s � �. � s � � • � ; � e � : � �� ,�� : _ � � �� .� ;�.�� ; �,�. N�m� o� Ap�lic�riti (t!'ped/�.�i�it�dj 3�� r� v:> �:... �".:i.:.� �::,<, �� .� � � � Si�rtature �f ��Ii�ant_'�� . ��:-...v ��"� , N�me c�� i�rpp��t;d Qavr€��- {tY��dip�i��ci) J�� r�� . .�. �: �4 � -( �, � ` � � �# s��=. � ....----- e � �:.;-�. r.�.-> ��,. �.�...>��•.° � ! .., , 5ic�n�iure c�f �ro��rty �3�vner �_...t.:2�f:�.� t�Yn��.:. _. . . ,_�._.. �......� ..,..._—...�.....,.�... At�:�r�ss rai O�vn�r f t ;� �. -� �_ _�:.�,,,,k��_f�� ;3,�: . ;%�.��,�;�, � s�r.h,� t �,,a, �� "a ?�?tl(: ��iUiil�Ei i�f d'�V�"IC.-'C (:::� i ;"� ..., ;�.....`�"y �. .. s� ' �"` �-`: _m_�...._. - - -� � M .I z:,....--�....._m.,,,H,.�, ._... �`3T`Idl� ` � ;.. `sv� '��...� ; <`.,#°� +..��sx �..�, 5 �:�' s ` i�~� j�.s C .e�i�.... ��5�= �;i ti;K�:�k%k� �.P�K;oc rs:�,' �; � MaeIF�F:k' %Kir:. K�::K3<.:i::=k:k:icW �:� u.;�;>t::c� �c *:k� %Y• �>k:ic' � �3k=K ��Sk*:k�c'.:,-a.�%k%f:�.ky�: � »::3k`k�l<:XC:z:%i:�x�ir�:at:k�� f' �i: ;k:v��=h� �4�CA1,'�k.i��.A�4;�E� '6..Pr3� ��6, A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �'13s� C5C 5U�}t'€"€ICL'r�� .. . : _ .....................::. ` . ..,..w... ._ p�.te L}C ACC��ta17Ce: G[1�ci�� .iti�it �..._..�.�. _ _...._y.. Y .....�.....�. ��0-cia� litrait. - F�,Ur��ir7 ��se �� ;", _ .. _ -------��.,.,..M._...._.... ..._ � � � �_____�._��.�............�----- �ssigi��d ko� _....—.._...._..._.____--�---.......... . ��R� P�ici, AC�ot��!� � Check Yi' f��s:�i�t ; ,4F��i�catio��: ? ; : ; � <<,. <. ,... , ,; .,. ,:....----. ._ .................._ . ��..._........_.__. ��,.,..�....�H:. � ............. Pa.rk [��ciicatiorF:�...,.------- ,..�,,,,,,k.,M�...�_._ ��ps��its: �.........._.�_ _..,...�,,.,M..,...,�._.. ,. _ _V._...._ .�.,_,...._..m _._........._ i�i:J��r. _..�_.,__..__ .�..._ �.. _.........._,..._ 1"t�i:�l: —.....,.�.m^ ................_..__ �,___.._.._�.�__�........ , �.,�,,.. _.__ ........� ; �i-S�� ;�' ` � t= �°, `� „ ° �:. , �;� � : �. . . . - ', ° � . I :� x.Y�l �[°Iilyfi�I►iiC� � � - '; � : '. � ;1 ; �- �� , . .�. ; .� --, _ � _ � . _ ,�; , • ;�, � � '•' ;�; �'�� .(��, ; � ;� • ;�; �,. f, _ , �; ;�, ;f �, ; � � :. ') ;�. `` .I; ' � ;� � ,, �: �. . ;� :�: .:. � '' � � �` `�� "1� _ _ ` .1 '� " ,. �_ i �', � �1._�� 1�� i ' WF�REAS, Rose Osbourne, representing the applicant RM Michaels Construction, Inc., has requested approval of a zero-iot line zxiinor subdivision of 7656 Silver Lake Road, zoned R-2, Single and Two-Family Residential, legally-described as follows: The east 205.1 D feet of Lot 3, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition Ramsey County State of Minnesota W��EREAS, the appiicant has submitted a Certificate of �urvey dated 1-23-03 for the above described property; and, WHEREAS, the propo5ed Certificate of Survey has been forwarded to the City Attorney for review; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicant's request for a minor subdivision and has determined that it is in canformance with Chapters 1104, 1201, and 1202 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, a park dedication fee shall be applicable with this subdivision. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, having found that the proposed subdivision satisfies City subdivision and zoning code requirements, tihe Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the minor suhdivision of 7556 Silver Lake Road requested by Rose Osbourne, representing RM Michaels Constn.�ction, Inc., suhject to the following requirements: 1. Prior to the City affi�ng its seal on the deeds, the appiicant shall be responsible for submitting the required park dedication fee. 2. The deeds shall bear the following restriciions: a. If one dwelling unit is bumed or destroyed, it shall be reconstructed in a uniform appearance. b. If both dwelling units are bumed or destroyed, minimum lot widths sha11 then prevail as for single-farnily homes. c. A double dwelling unit may be rebuilt meeting the o�iginal conditions of ihis Title. d. A uniform exte�ior appearance, in terms of color, design and maintenance shall be maintaine�. Resolution 720-03 Page 2 3. The applicant shall record the deeds with Ramsey County not Iater than 60 days ' beyond City Council approval. Failure to do so shail render subdivisian approvat null and void. The applicant shall submit proof of recordation to the City of Mounds tTiew. No building permits shall be issued until proof of recordation is provided. 4. Eaeh dwelling unit shall have separate utility services. The applicant shall submit a uiility plan to the Public Works Department before requesting permits. 5. Each resulting dwelling unit shalt meet e�sting buitding codes. 6. The builder shail obtain access permits from Ramsey Couniy prior to work commencing on the site. BE IT FURTHER RE50LVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff to �'orward this resolution to the City Council prior to a.pproval of the minutes. Adopted this 19th day of Febzuary, 2002. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson , ATTEST: James Ericson, Comn�unity Development Director (SEAL) P120CEEDING� �F "Y"�E I�fO�JI@1D� VIE�I PLAl�t1�1II�G COIl�IIV�I�S�OIV C�T�' OF 1��IOiJIiTI)S VIE� 1`LtSiV1�L` Y�� 11 i� F y li'iYl\1'VL�� R.1'R 12egular lYIeeti�g January 22, 2003 11�Iot�nds �iew :City Hatl 2401 I�igl�wa� 10,1VI�unc6s '�Iiedv,`10�IIV $SII2 1. Cali �o O�°der The meeting �vas called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:�2 p.m., Januai-y 22, •2003. 2. Itoll Call Meinbers Present: Comzmissioners Members Absent: Hegland (excus Also Present: Community De� on G �: opment Direc �e n;1Vliller� Jahnson a2id Song. Page 2 30 � A�prove �Iinuies '� � � � , a. Dece�abe�-1�, �002 M�JTTON/SECOND: Approval was moved and seconded. To Approve the Minutes of the Planning Commission for December 18, 2002 as Presenteii. `'` Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Mation catried. 40 None. I�eq�est� aa�ci Coanrrxe�.ts on Items Ielot on the Age�d� 1lilou�ds iTievv ��aa��ing Commissio� .Tanua�y 22, 2003 12egular IYiee�ing pag� 2 5. Cot�tinued l)iscussao� on lZestricting 1'arlcing along Gr-eenfield r�veza�e Coinmunity Development Director Ericson provided an update on tl�e parking situation along Greenfield Avenue indicating that, after the matter was brought to the attention of the - Commission, Officer Broos was asl�ed to observe th;e area. He tllen expiained that Officer Brose had observed the area and recommended postii�g a sign no paricing here to corner just north of the access point for the multifamily housing. He also indicated that it would be possible to recornmend posting the entire east side of Greenfield as no parking but that may be excessive. Director Ericson indicated that at the last zneeti�ig the propexty owner had conveyed to him a wallingness to expand the parking lot. He then indicated there is 28 feet of green space between the parking lot and Greenfield and adding one parking stall on either side would ��vork but adding a second stall on either side would encroach into the right-of-way by 7 feet, He further coxnrriented that it would be an option but the property owner c�vould need to apply for a variance to amend the previously g�-anted variance to a zero foot setback as well as execute a limited use agreement to control use of the right-of-way. Director Ericson indicated ihe lirnited use agreement would protect the City from bearing the cost of removing and replacing the driveway should it $ecozne necessary to access utilities that may be in that right-of-way. He also indicated that one benefit of`the,�ariance amendznent is that the Commission could require a development agxeerrient that would give the City control of the site, wl�ich it currently does not have �Ie`then said there have b`een issues at the site that could have been addressed by a develop development. Director Ericson indicated thai on variance the hardship requirement situation cari nieei the criteria to p impact to ihe green space if the p"a appearance tnat;XS: �. of the one been compieted required for #his wbacks of the variance is that in arder to gxant a ;d to`lie met and Staff does not feel that the hardship. He also indicated that there would be an �ere expanded that wouid detract from the residential Director �ricson indicated fhe City has not received an application for a variance amendment but the property owner has expressed a willingness to do so. He then indicated he had asked the public works depat-tment to comiilent on any potential issues with using the right-of-way but pnlilic worlcs has declmed to comment pending receipt of an application. He fizrther commented tliat there is a water m�n in the general area that would need to be located. Ericson inciicated a resolution far conaideration had been drafted restricting parlcing north of the northerr� most access to Greenfield Estates. Johnson asked if adding the two stalis would push the parking into the right-of- way. Director Ericson indicated the variance previously granted allows them a 10 foot setback and adding the two stalls would make it a two-foot setback. ?'} ; IVloa�nd� �liewr Planning Com�assion January 22, 2003 l�egular l�eeti�g Page 3 Commissione�• Miller asked if the origiz�al variance was for the numbez- of stalls. Director Ericson indicated the variance was for the setbacic. Commissioner Miller asked why there was not a developmant agreeinent originally. Director Ericson indicated he was not sure wl�y a development agreement was not reguired but said, in retrospect, one should have been done but they typically were not clone for sriaaller developments and this developnient was perceived as a small developrnent. He then indicated that aIl commercial developments now require a developme�it agreement. Commissio�ier Zwirn aslced why the address for the building �s 2402 County Road I when it faces G�'eenfield, Director Ericson indicated the property owner requested.the County Road I address and is allowed io do so as the property is on the conler of Creetlf"ield and County Roac1 I. Chair Stevenson said he feels ihere should be a`number of feet listed in tlie resolution to malce it clear for Council that the Comrnission Dizector Ericson indicated that Staff would need ` ' feet begins. Cornmissioner Miller indicated she thought the:E Road I. 5 of the apartments. point for where the 75 75 feet back frorn Courxty not allowed 30 feet back frorn the intersection already. postii�g no parking to 75 feet would just push the parking fart�,er'dow�� the b19c1�. Com�issioner Johnson indicated' he would rather see the parking stalls added and approval of a two foot variance befor� restricfing parking but, if the issue is not resolv�d, he is not against pasti'ing the whole east side of Greeniield no parlcing. ' `Coinmissioner Miiler; street no parking she did not thinlc it would be fair to the residents to marlc the whole D�,rector Ericson c�arified that the City does not have the power to force the property owner to apply for the variance and expand the parlcing iot. He then said that posting the street no parking would force the property owner to work to resolve the parking issue by applying for the variance to expand the parking lot. li�lounds Vievv Planning Cora�mission Ja�uary 22, 2003 Rega�lar 1Vieet�ng Page 4 Commissioner Scotch aslced how many parking stalis are required by the Ciiy's Code for this size huilding. Director Ericson indicated that a building of this type on any other site would require 20 spaces but 15 spaces was approved for this Iocation. Commissioner Scotch con�mented that there is plenty of parlcing two blocks away at Mounds View Square, Director Ericson indicated that posting the street no parking iequires a'public hearing before Council and residents can provide comment on tlle proposed parking restrictions. , Cornmissioner Miller indicated she has seen parking in the area where parking is not allowed. Director Ericson indicated that enfarcement of the no parking restriction �i�vould become a police issue. Con�missioner Zwirn indicated he brought this issue to ihe'Commission because there is a substantial problem. He then said that, in his, estimation, tiiere are 6 to;8 cars parlcing oi� the street tllree to four days per week and fhis Resolution does not go;£ar:enough to soive the problem as the driveways are south of where the parking restriction siops so there would still be an issue coming and going from both his driveway `and his neig�ibor's driveway. ''� Commissioner Zwirn indicated he has discussed the inatter..�vith his neiglibors and they agree ' #hat restricting parking to the mic�dle of the b�ocic would.move the issue io an area where there are no drivei�vays affected. ;He theii said he has been trying to deal with this issue with a property owner wfio� is �ot willing �o address the problems. '` Commission�r Zyvirn commented'that all weelc there were two garbage cans in the handicapped parking stall with -overflowing garbage. �� tl�en said that the only way to resolve this is to put no parking on the east side of Greenfie�d to the middle of the block where neighbors feel comfortable with it and force'the property owner to bring a variance request to the Commission to resolve his parking proble�i. '; Comrnissioner Zwirn cominented that there are issues with coming and going from this property diie to having a business located in a residential area. He then said that Mr. Fa�rell is a businessman and he should have come to the Comrnission to resolve ihe parlcing issue. Ha fui�her conunented that the issue has subsided some since this has been brought fo the attention ;,,. of the'property owner but it is not resolved and the only way to deal with it is to adopt a resoliztion far iio parlcing on the east side of Greenfield a sufficient distance to x�nalce it safe for the resrc�ents and require Mr. Farrell to come to ihe Commission with a variance request. He also said that adding four stalls on the property would loolc terrible and he would be against that but would consider adding two stalls. l�/Io�a�ds View PIanning Commission .Tant�ary 22, 2003 l��gulaa� I�eeting Page 5 Commissioner Zwirn illdicaied that residents fought to have the west side of Greenfieid pasted no parl�ing to deai wifh overflow parlcing issues froin the apartments. He then said that there is a bus stop across frorn his driveway where children baard the bus and the area is too congested and nat safe. Director Ericson offered to have Staff ineasure the distance of the pzoposal by Commissioner Zwirn to locate the no parldng sign in I:he middle of ihe block but estiinated it to be approximately 300 feet from the comer. Chair Stevenson indicated he would prefer to table the resoltation to allow �taff more time to ' research ihe dzstances for the Commission to review. Director Ericson indicated he would l�ave the temporaxy inspector:go'out and iooic at the area and marlc the County half section map that wauld be reproduced for the next rneeting. He also indicated he would mark on the map the location of the driveways for consideration. Chair Stevenson indicated he would not be at the ne�Y meeti�ig due to a vacation. 6. l�ext Plan�ing Cornanission 1Vleetang: Febi°uary 5, ZaQ3 ' 8. t�djoe��°�yneni to Agenda � There being no further meeting at 7:37 p.m. Respect�iilly Jiiri Ericson Director Site Secretarial, Inc. oi� the Piaiin�ng Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the adjourned to the Agenda Session} P1�OCEEI)II�IGS OF'�`�E I�'IOiJI�i)� V�E� PI�AI�NII�tG COMI�[I�SIOI�d CITX OF IO�IOY31�1DS �IE�� P�9 6..�1.11VA�y 1VY11V1�L' S�HL-9 Re�U��p �ee�lII� �'ebruary 5, 2003 1Vlounds .View City �Iall 24Q1 HigI1V6`ay �(}9 I�I011tl(�S v9eV6'' IV�N!55312 1. Catl io Order The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Miller af 7:00 p.m , Feliruary 5, 2003. 2. l�oil C�Ii Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Index $o Minail;es Plan�i�g �ase VR%, 3. Appro've 1VIi �, .Tanu, 1VIOTION/SEC�ND January 8, 2003 as P � None. Commissioners Scotch; Zwirn, Miller, Johnson arid Song. Hegland (excused); Stevenson (excused} ` Page 2 ohnson. To Approve the Minutes of the Plazu�ing Comznission for Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. lteq�ests and Cor�ments on items ldot on th� Age�da IViounds View Pianning Co�mission Re�talar ldieeiing 5. Planna�g Cas� VI203-001 February 5, 2003 Page 2 Community Development Director Ericson indicated the applicant had requested a variance from the parking requirements as the applicant plans to expand the four-plex by constructing two. additiona] units in the base�neni. Tlie property is zoned R-3 and a six-unit building would be allowed in an R-3 zoning districi, however, tl�ere is not enough parking on-site: to satisfy the zoning code requirements. Director Ericson explained that the City Code requires 2.5 parking stalis per dwelliug unit and one of those stalls needs to be a garage stali. He then indicatecl tlzat this property does have two garage stalls and 10 surface stalls az�d noted that to meet ihe Cziy's Code requirements tk�e: , applicant would need to have 6 garage stalls an� 9 surface stalls; Director Ericson indicated that many of the other four-plexes in the area have no garage stalls and in looking at the property there appears to be sufficient:room io. expand the parlcing lot along the east side of the building. ' Acting Chair Miller aslced if there were three gaxage stalls ; Director Ericson indicated that one stall is beirig used fox t�e garbage dumpster as an enclosed dumpster is required. , Director Ericson reminded the considered and noted that all c variance. He then briefly revif that be Director Eri ;sion that tliere are ust be satisf ed in � se critena:with the riteria that need to be justify the approvai of a �on indicated that Staff had revievsied a11 flie criteria and made the determination could not be met'and the variance;should be denied. He then indicated that, if the ;r yver.e to come to fhe City with a plan to provide additional parking, it may then r to cor�sider grantuig a variaaice from the garage stall requirements. on indicateci this meeting had been noticed as a public hearing and residents were hen ind�cated_��e,had received two calls, one from Colonial Village and the represeritative indicated:that they:would not be in favor af ihe expansion if #he parking requirements could not be m,e� and the ather call was from a neighbor calling for further iriformation who did not provide Staff wzth an apinion on the matier. Direcior Ericson indicated one of tlle property owners was iii attendance at the meeting to answer any questions. He tlien indicated thai the Comrnission couid ezther deny based on the fact that th:e �ardship requirements had not been met or postpone action and aliow time for �he applicants to consider further parking accornmodations. The public heaz-ing was opened at 7:05 p.m. IVlounds Vxeva� Pia�nit�g C�rnm�ssion Feb�-u�e-y 5, �003 Regular IVYeeting Page 3 3afney Viger of 2955 Bunker La1ce Boulevard, Ham Lalce, indicated he would be amenable to looking into adding further parking to the sita. He then said there are only four cars in the building bui that does no# mean there could not be rnore so he has na issue with doing a survey and working on more paricing. Caznmissioner 3ohnson asl�ed if residents pay extra rent to have a garage stall. Mr. Viger indicated that one of the garage stalls was being used.as storage arzd one;had a vehicle inside. Acting Chair Milier asked if there was any way at all of adding garage,space. Mr. Viger indicated the back of ihe property slopes a lot and uldicated,he was not sure if it would be possible. Commissioner Zwirn asked what would happen to the trees if parlcing were added in front of the building. Mr. Viger indicated that at least one tree wouid be lost Cornmissioner Johnson aslced if it would the six stail garage farther back on the,pr Mr. Viger indicated the slope b the garage Mr, Viger Mr. Viger Director„� like to kee �ner Zwirn aske �stirnat�d the di them if at iger indicated he garage and construct distance li'etw�en.the corner of the building and the corner af be about 10 feet. trees to `accommodate parlcing. �rty owner was allowed to cui trees down but the City would a new tree if it is necessary to remove a tree for the parking. Warren Hertenstein, 21'02 Hillview Road, indicated he has lived across the street for 52 years and.;for many years th"e apartments were unsightly with junl� accunnuiating and police axid aml�ulance vehicles visiting regularly. He then said that, in recent years, the place has been clearied up �nd°He appreciates that. He further commenied that he is co�icerned wit� adding niore density to the area because there are parlcing issues already. He also commented that he is concerned that there would be no lawn or landscaping if parking were allowed in front of the building. 1l�Iou�ds View Planning Coynmission February 5, 2003 itegular l�eeting Page 4 Paul Hertenstein, 2102 Hiilview Road, indicated he is concez-ned about the traffic up and down the street. He then conlmented thai there have been instances of vehicles traveling at speeds of up to 50 m.p.h. down their street. He also commented that the previous owner, Jeff Johnson, had made nice impro��ements to the buildzngs but there have been issues in the past and he does not wa�1t to see the potei�tzal issues intensified by adding t�wo more units. He furtliex comniented that allowing this expansion sets the stage for requests from the other four-plexes in'ihe area and he does not ihii�Ic the area can handle the added density. Mr. Hertenstein indicated there is a problem rx�ith paxking when the Iots are plowed, and two days ago he could not get his mail bacause thea-e was a car parked right in front of l�is mailbox. He then commented that there used to be 2-hour parlcing signs along the sfxeet but those were ' removed. Brent Bedbury of 2096 HiIlview indicated he has issues with not'being ab,le to mow I�is lawn or get liis mail due to paricing related probiems. Lou Bedbury af 2084 Hillview indicated people are parking out in the street' already and she does not see how the City could allow further density, more people, <and more cars in the area. Ms. Bedbury indicated they have been putting up with�uzilc for years from the apa�ments and she does not want the density increased. She then said that she does not''want to loolc out her window and see parking in front of the. biiilding. Conunissioner Scatch rec wiih resolving the matter. Ms. Bedburv`indicated sh l�nits look €eriants. Uariene � �y - and � indicated that that he was no� the parking issues io the City for assistance � been to City Hall cancerning the deterioration of some of the �ne`up,,bu# she does riot want additional units and does not want to ars when:they were promised years aga that the building would be d that allowing additional parking on site would assist with �eet. ulding only has four cars and he has 12 parking spaces. He fihen e of any �arking issues but offered io post a sign and speak to his ? 102 Hillview Road, indicated she has never seen a vehicle use the garages she ihinlcs they are just used for storage. She also comrnented that she pay extra to hav� a garage. Acting Chair Miller indicated she was concerned that approving a varzance for less parlcing would cause the other four-plexes in the area to come to the City asicing for the sarne accommodation. 1VIo�ncis `Viedv Pla�a�fng Co�mission Regular Il�ieeting Febr�aary 5, 2003 �age 5 Commissioner 3ohnson indicated that the previous property owner had checked into the number of u�azts he could have and that is why the building was reinodeled as it was. He then said he does not think a variance would be appropriate in this case. Commissioner Zwim i�idicated he understood why the applicant wished to expand the building but indicated from an aesthetic standpoint he would side with the resideilts that it wouid be unsightly to look out your window and see vehicles parking in front of the building. He also indicated he was concerned that approval of this parking variance would meaai the,City would be obligated to grant parlcing variances to the other four-plexes and the area.carinot accommadate. that type of density and traffic, He further commented that allowing this would detract from the `' property value of the neighboring properties due to congestion, aesthetics, and increased traffic and he cannot see how ihis would blend in well with the existing co�nnuz�ity. Mr. Viger asked if his project could proceed if he were able `to provide tlie gaa;age stalis. Commissiox�er Jok�nsan indicated he would need to provzde 6 garage stalls and 9 surface stalls. Mr. Viger i�idicated his intent was io provide haizdicapped accessible �.nits as ihe building lends itself to that due to the walkout. Director Ericson indicat�d the options would be to denial, appraval, or hold off an action to, allow tim Commissioner 7ohnson re� there is no hardship and if The Comxnission directed' Director Ericson x�clica would consider a resolL move forward if the ap� requirements of the Cii� Ms Bedbury indicated tki.e,parking. She also s, Director Ericson indica� aiit� asl�ed thai intereste a resolution for draft a resolution of parking options. il'with the main reason being ihat will want ihe same accommodation, a resolution to deny the vari at�ce. ;ed the next meeting, would be February 19, 2003 and the Cornmission tion danying the. yariance request. He then clarified that the proj ect could �licant is able to provide enough parlcing to satisfy the parlcing �'s.Cade.,_ �here are Iittle kids on that street and she cannot see where they can meet �id she"does not want the increased traffic in the area. Staff could infoim residents as to whether the project is proceeding residents provide their name and address. if residents could bring a petition fo stiop the proj ect. Director Ericson indicated that the residents would be within #heir rights to protest the projeet by petition but explained that, if the projeci meets the requirements of the City's Code, it would be difiicult to prohibit the expansion. 1Vlounds Vie� Pla�x�ing Coa�arnission I2egular INIeeti�g Febra�ary 5, 2a03 P�g� 6 Ms. Bedbury asked why tlley could put parking in front of a building and a residex�t could not parlc in frant of their house. Director Ericson explained that parking is allowed in front of a building in an R-3 zoning district. He then indicated Staff would research whether there were landscaping prornises made when the buiidings were originally consiructed. Cornmissioner Scotch recommended that the neighbors discussing the parking issues with the property owner. The public hearing was closed at 7:45 p.m, 6. Consideration of a Iaequest to itestric� Parking Ave�ue Souih af County iSoad Ie Community Developn�ent Director Ericson provided situation alang Green�eld Avenue. He then asked tlie scenarios, one for no parlcing from 150 feet to corner, one far no parlcing 350 �'eet to corner, and one for no Acting Chair Miller indicated that at noori she r all the cars parked along it all the way:down to possible to add a time iimit to the no parlang s�j Director-Ericson ind parkmg;�; . Acting Chair`Ivlille�- : residents in the apart p.m. would alleviate ven �long the East �ide of Greea�field :f liistory and update on the parking u�?issiov to consider four no parlcing E`or rio parking from 300 feet to corner, �g 500�feetto corner. lown;Greeniield and could not believe -ive:' She then asked if it would be ission has the option of listing a time for the no she do�s not;li%e Option D as she does not want to punish din�s. d';,Qption B and asked whether no parking from $:00 a.m. to 5:00 Gommissioner Zwirn indicate� he would like to see the zestriction unti16:00 p.m. as that is when #here is a dramatic drop �ff in trafiic. He then indicated that he has discussed the matter with the �neighbors and no one..lilces Option A. He further commented that he would lilce ta see either Option B or Option,°C because he feels that the property ovvner needs to be sent a xr.iessage and be forced to coine to the City with an aiternative to the parking problexn, Commissioner Zwirn provided the Coinrnission with pictures of tl�e parking and traffic problems along Greenfield during the recent snowstorm. He then said that getiing the no parking signs back far enough will force the property owner to act. 1l�Iounds View Plannang Commissaon Regu�ar 1,/Ieeifng 1 /I February 5, 2003 Page 7 Acting Chair Miller suggested limiting the no parking from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m, Commissioller Zwirn indicated that Option C would be ideal as it is south of 7656 Greenfield's driveway. He then aslced if signs could be posted along the length of the no parking area rather than just at the conler. Commissioner Johnson indicated he wauld lil�e to see the restriction be fioan 8:OQ a:m. to 6:00 p.m, so that residents are not punished. Commissioner Zwirn indicated that there liave been some issues with trafitc on Sa�urday, marnings but the property owner has not been there long enough to deiermine whether weelcends ; wi11 be an ongoing issue. Commissioner Song indicated she felt the residenis should have tlie r�glit ta determine what iime the parlcing is restricted. There was consent to recommend restricting parlcing 350 feet back from 8,Q0 a.in: to 6:00 p.rrz. Monday througY� Saturday. MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Johnson. To Approve Resolution 71;8-03; aResolution Recommending Instaliation af a"No Parl�ing from Here to Caxner" Sign on the East Side of Greenfield Avenue for Public Safety Purposes. , Ayes — 5 Nays = 0 Motion carried. 7e Revi�vv a�ad Discnssioi MOTION/SECOND: Jo�nsor� any Changes. !. `, Ayes;-:,5 �.. „ ` l�lext Planning Cairimi There' the �rie �i':Planning Con��ission ��laws o Reapprove the P1atuling Commission Bylaws With�ut Nays — 0 Motion carried. 1VYeeting: Feba-uary 19, 2003 Ageuda �essro� �er business before the Planning Commission, Aciing Chair Miller adjourned p.m. (The meeting immediately adjoi,uned to the Agenda Session) i lViouud� Vrew Planbztag Commissio� Regular l�/I�etfng Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Trauscribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site SecretaYial, Inc. Febrnaa-y 5, 2003 Page � ,.l ' � `, �� $��s �� March 5, 2003 -- 7:00 P.Ni. li�GULA.R MEETII�TG AGENDA 1. Call to Orcier 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: a. January 22, 20Q3 b. February 5, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Commen#s on Ite�ns Not on the Agenda �,... �. . ,:. . � �, � ��.� � . � � - � �� _" ,: � � : � a "� �� '`: s. ��g cas� ��o3-aa� Conszderation of a Text Amendment Request of Zoning Code Chapter 1111 Relating to the R-O Zoning District Lacation: 2865 Higi�way 10 Applzcant: Greg Johnson 6. Discussion pertaining to a Code Amendn�ent to regulate the siting and licensure of Pawn shaps in Mo,a.nas view. .-- a � . , �a : ; - � � , �_ �. � �. i .,. . .. �� • �. .: � , �. 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: March 19, 2003 8. Adja�-nment to Agenda Session AC�-EI�A SESSION 1. Staff Reports 2. Cllauperson and Plannii�g Conunissioners' Reports N:�Data\Groups\ComdevlPlanning CommissionlPC Agendas12003103-OS-03 PC Agendadoc City of Mounds Viei�� - Item # 5 � � ��. 1� � � ��5�� O�� Meetir�g Date; Ma�°c1� 5, 2003 �—.. ,. _.: , ...�� . ... . .y ,. ,: �,. . ., �*. �. . ;�,-� >.. �,� n ,,. .. .,-,:.z, , . , ,...,-; '�'.. F ,.� , � . 7'atle: C'on�ide�°aiian of Re�o�ution 721-03, a laesolu�ion l��eo�nmendin� Approval of a Zoning Coc�e Text A�e�drraent to Chapier 1111 Relating to the 12-0 Zoning I�xst�°ict -- Pl�nning Case 'I'X03-001 Iiat�°oc�uciio�z: The property owner residing at and opexatzng a business at 2865 County Highway 10 has requested an ainendrnent io Chapter 1 I 11 of the Zoning Cade relatzflg to t1�e pei7nitted uses atlov��ed witlun the R-O Zonzng district. The Code indicates that accessory uses within an R-O district are reguiated as #hey are in the R-4 zoniilg district, which 2s the same for an R-3 district, and so on. In the single-family district, an accessory building may �ot exceed 452 square feet without a conditional use permit and that the total square footage of all accessory use spaee shaIl not exceed 1,800 square �eet. Drsctsssion: The property o�mer asserts that the zaiung requirements relating to the size of l�is garage, which is his j place af bnsiness, are too restrictive az�d not in keeping with the intent of the Residential Office district. According ta the Zoning Code, the purpose of the district is as foliows: The pu�pose of the R-0, Residential Office Distr•ict is to p�ovide fo�° high-density residential use and for the t� ansition in land use from �°esidential to lovv intensity business allowing fo� the inter�mixing of such uses. The intent is to allow for a more dense development, with or without a co�nmercial component. In other words, this district is a true "inixed use" district. Given thai comrnercial and residential uses are allowed on the site at the same tirne, there are in effect two princi�al uses. As such, the garage area in this case should not be considered acces�ory but rather principal, and should no� be subject to the accessory garage requirements as articulated in the single-family residential district. Based upon the discussion of the Planning Corr3rnission on February 19, 2003, staff has drafted a resolution which recommends amendment of the Cade to allow for the following language to be added to Section 1111.02, Pernrzitted Uses: � Automotive Accessory Installatio�� Operations The resolution further states that the Plaruaing Cammissioi� recommends that the connnnexcial use be subjected to the regulations and requirements of Section 1006.06 of the Building Code, entitled "Development Controls." If approved, the Resolution will be forwarded on to the City Council who would be presented wzth an o�•dinance effectuating the change. Because the text ainendment is within the Zonzng Code, a public hearing will be scheduled and the neighboring property owrzers would be notified. -.->,} � ;. : i ;., �, ... ;::.. . �.. . ,.. _.; ,.,.. ,....�,:;.,: _ . ... .., .`.. 3. . .,. 3:'3:.: i s :: :. i x'.., 3 : �: :z'i:�A'i"i .). :i'��,i .. �'tt<3.�" _. . � eC O lB2 i? l eyZ lt [l �lO D2 : Staff recommends approval of the attached Resalution 721-03, a resolution recommending to the City Council amendment of Chapter I 111 of the Mounds View Zoning Code relating ta t11c R-O, Residential/Office zoning district. � C�,u�e�d G� James Ericson Cornmunity Development Director Attacl��aaents: 1. Zoning Map 2. Resolution 721-03 N:IDATAIGROUPS\COMDEV1Developrraent Cases1Tx03-001 (R-O Revision)1PC Regort - Feb 19, 2003.doc Zon�ng ap ,. I'f I �L '�,ra a3� �3 _ � �..��r ��? _ � �.Yr��*d � � ��: �i� , _ � �.... � . � ��a. : f , � � . �� r; � u� ��: � � �'� � # ��E �' �? �,� : z.� ��.(;�� ; tik ev �� i,a � _ ..... %i �'�t � �..�,�� _ . .. � d E� � ` ` `r tf: .Y'+! .i � i'�J. t��""�� r? S'�'�J : � , ; .� � ►�`a , i'� �— � - ti � �; r ��, r�i�„ � , t , , � # .� � � - °,�j �j � a i } � �� .; � ��'� ��+��'';1.'�.�� • $1,��: �1�� ,� .� „� -� d -�' � �t��.:;, � � ,, � . '�'� ' � � h +P: � � � r�i ` l. t'� ' r T-- : �� {°�� `'`.� ' � �. �k �� T � A` , 't`�f� ��1 � ... ' �! . s— � � f � i�i � : r,= �� $ � � � � 4�+r : � a s �1 : �� \ ,�q . � � � � c J r [-= � 3 t14< .. � .. �� +�. a . . �`i'3 �y . ^U I�� '� '� C*�- 4''� - �f � . �"� . > � ��' � �P 1 � `� ' G� : — ,,, > R, K � , : .. . . �a > . � � � � k . ; ��3 .� � 1 �J J , � � s _ .. ._ ,. _ a ` . u� ��.t . s�' � � ��-�E. � � "'1 '. + , ,�, s� : �j5 � �- �*� t� � ; �� ta� : � ... � �- r�, ` � ��'��:f �''? �� _....... . _ ..� ._ __.. ' c�.. � � T� �� . �a � � k ' . �.�� s � ^ k ..._.� 3�CJ�� ,' , �,�,� �, � ry `4 �;, } _, L.'�+ °t r.}��-. t . _. s� ,( y � M1 5. �;. ,{`J,i r, '{'.' s"'a%il _:3 . :.. ... . � �`3 � ,,}' . ,.-. :� i y,{ ..,. .,,. � �� f`h� , .. � �, d7 � .,;.. � , �b�-� . �, ,Lr � � � ��?�, �0�� .. � ��a�'� � ' � �_�� f ��, �� . �'�� , �€�� . _ � � � � � x�. � .:. � . : �J�� ... . � �� . '� '� � }� ��y� �'SCI�� ;. , .,,, �E� � � �� `�, ' � .... _. . . ,: _ : ��a�t � � ; _.. ' . : ,... . � � ``� :. ,. 8�� '�'�� : ' Ap�licant's � �� ►�� ; . . �::.:..... � ,� � � Property �`� � � �� ,�� 3 ....� , .... . .., . �`�-,_ . , , � ; : ' , , ��J: � r��,� � � , �� . .. __... � � � �- - �- � � ��1 � � ' �.�� - � , �' � �.; . :.. . . _. .:. , .: .... : �. �. : '�w �. � �i �� '� ��J,��. � � � � �a,�p �,� � , .....: ........ �' � . ,� � �7k�{� , ��'� f �� t - >. }: / �'A � � " j � t7'� r � � �t �� ,��,� . f:,. � �.. � � � t-''" �z�aa��` ` 4:" �,� .,.�.' � .., ,.. ,�m--».;�f� ,� �j ��._ _ � � � i _,A—„h.,._�._._ ..„ _:.,_ � ,; � �`�. . ,�°"��.,Y�,! d � ; � � � � �.�. ! � � —rl3 r `�}`� �. �.w'" � � s � n ; ; �� ¢� � , � ,. � . .. , �_ . - . . � : , � . ... __ .... � ,. . .,.,..,.... 4 : � � _.... . . .,,„ _. . .. t�'�� i��E - �%� *a.,. ;'�: ,.-� 4:JG��i , _� e��y��+�� :� �� '�i'� �� , : ; >., . _.. r._.,,:-__.__. . �., ......... . ...:....:. �'. : .3 +��.^p""� � ��y � �b' �.k;� � � � ��'' �� t �' s�..�� F � .. _ . �„�, � �3�, _ � " �� ¢ 1�� .�' �' C�d � ��x., fr � :,....... : 4�� £�� ` : �� ,-..:: ,.. .- .� -� 3 ^� F��^g $ . . ,.. t �: ✓ LJ rl1.J � ! C�i� 'r ��.�°i ', ��3.� _� .�� , .. ,,..,µ.. _,.. � , ... ,, . .. . . .... _. � , � � � � � �' ��3 � � , � a� ;� ' '�8�� ; '..�� . " _ ta;. .. ,,.,�,. '�d'�i�� ' �� . . ,., .. . ..._. � __ .�� . ' �`�� ' �a }'�i�� ...7 � .. .._..�� _ ... r . . � � �� ; "" '�'�� 6� i'��,Ct ` _. .._. .,. .. , ; ;` �� ' . � _.. ._.._ _:.:. � � .. .. K . � . t..-... . .,..i.av.._.........:...-'vMmP1FTIh V6'WMwt...°!'9'YfL . . . � �:�x ��G �. �� ,:� � `'�' � � � . �, � � �. ,. : � �- i� �i �: '� �� i'� :� �� :- .-'�.�,;�," �. ��J � #' , i ," 1 i, � . ,i � � i,._ . �' " * ' , �;i i,r.r � . j . _ _ ; , . . . . r ] �, �R,_. ; i ....� �: `,... �° ., •� � � i _! ,� � � ' �� '�: ' . , �� , . � . �, , � �. i , . 1 ,.� i : 1t'. WHEREAS, Greg Johnson, property owner of 2865 Highway 10, has requested an amendment fo Chapter 1111 a€ the Zonir�g Code refating to fihe permitted uses within fihe R- O Zoning Distric�; and, WH�REAS, Mr. Johnson maintains his residence ar�d operafies a commercial use on his properfy which is currently zoned R-O, Residentia[/Office District; and, WH�REAS, The purpose of the R-0, Residenfiial/OfFice District is to provide fior high-density residentia[ use and for the #ransifion in land use from residenfiial ta fow intensifiy business ailowing for the intermixing af such uses; ar�d, WHEREAS, fVlr. Johnsan has operated his cammercial business at this location `� for twenty years and is now seeking appraval to expand the footprint of his commercial bui[ding in exces� of what is allawed by residential district standards; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission believes thafi fihe R-O Zoning District was crea�ed to provicle for a mix af uses on fhe same (ofi and tha# the commercial use existing on the subject property is consisfenfi with the intent and purpose of the districfi; and, WHEREAS, as p�rmitted by Chapter 1111, there are two disfiinct principal uses on the property and that the cammerciaf building should not be considered a residential garage and held to the same requirements and restrictions as provided for in a single- family zoning e{istrict. NOW, THEREFORE, BE !T RESOLVED, THE PEanning Commission recommends amending Chapter 1111 of the Zoning Code ta further clarify the permitted uses within ihe R- O district by adding the follawing text under Secfiion '! 111.02, Permitted Uses: � ��; . -� �� .� � � . � ,, _ � �� NOW, THER�FdRE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, fhat the Pianning Commission recommends thafi separate and distinci commercial facilities within R-O districts be subjecf to fhe iJevelopment Review requirements as se# forih in Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View Building Code. NOW THEREFORE BE iT FURTHER RESOLV�D that the llAounds View Plar�nirtg Commission direcfis staff fo farward this resolufion to the City Council prior to �pproval of the rninutes. ��c,lui:ic�n i � 1 �� Adopted this 5th day of March, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Comrnunity Development Direcfiar (SEAL} N:�DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV�Planning CommissionlPC Resoiutions1721-03, R p Text AmendmenY.doc Itein # 6 Ciiy of Mounds Iliew �a �n � � ��s� � � ��t Meeting Date: Maf°ch S, 2003 : ;�.�,:,�� : �� _. . � � :�.,�: . �,�.�,. . � . , �� . � I° '. ;/ '` , � " t I f • I : / I° ' /�? % �. �- ��° � � /. , ; �,, . , .; �� . ;, � ,�, ; , : � �_ ','' '/:►. I I . �iziroductiora: Because no land use co�lirols or regulatians exist for pawn shops and related establishments within the City, staff recornmended to the City Couz�cil that it adopt an ordinance which clirects the Mounds View Planning Comnlission to conduct a study of tl�is matter and make recomme�ldatio�ls as to the adoption of a.mended official controls or regulations to fu1fi11 the City's legal obligation to adequately protect the public healih, safety and welfare. The ordinance, which is attached for the Commission's revzew, was adopted on January 27, 2003 and provides for an eighfi-znonth period of review. Di�cussio�c: ;; Due to the staffing shortage within the Community Development Department and ihe City in � general, I have made arrangements with a Planning Consultant to review existiz�g ordinances fram oiher communities and to ci�raft an ordinance ihat would regulate the zoning and licensure of pawn shops in Mounds View. A f rst draft of the ordinance should be avaiiable for the Planning Com�xxzission to review on March J 9, 2003. I�eco�eanz en dc�taon: If the Commission has any questions or suggestions regarding the pracess, feel free to con#act me prior to the meeting. It is possible that a representative or representatives of a pavv�i business looking to locate in Mounds View may be in attendance to answer any general questions regarding the pawn industry � Ca.�n�&.d ��tR.u� James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: i. Ordinance 709 N:IDATAIGROUPS\COMDEV1Special ProjectslSP-114-fl3 (Pawn Shops)�PC Report - March 5, 2003.doc �� ' ! �' ;�� ; i `�; l � � �" ,;;. � � - # �, �:-; ._ , _� _ _ _._ - � • . �_ � , . *-,_� � .. -' � Y '� � � �� _ . ,. � � , . -, �, . , , . ,� ;i , ,� .-� � , � : �. - ��, ;: _ � , _ � .. :_ � ; , , � � �� : � I " �� -; �IVH�REA�, the City Council has considered the issue and continues to consider #he issue of whether the City si�ould adapfi an ordinance to address fihe City healfih, safeiy and welfare issues caused by pawn shops and related establishments wiihin the City; and VUFlERLA�, City sfiaff has made an Enitia! review o� fhis matfer and recommends that fihis mafter be more fufly sfiudied; and �lHE��AS, fhe City Council has authority, pursuan� to Section 3.06 of the City of Mounds View City Charter and Minnesota Sfiatutes Sectian 462.355, Subdivision 4, to adapt an emergency interim ordinance during which time fhe City will conduct a study of the possibilifiy of adopting new or amended controls fo fulfill the Cifiy's legai obligation to adequately protecf the pubiic health, safety and welfare; and 1�lH�REAS, an emergency inferim ordinance is necessary to protect fihe pubfic healfh, � safeiy and welfare because no land use con#rols ar regulations exist for pawn shops and refated esfiablishments within the City; and 11VFiEREAS, the City Council authorizes a study as to the possibility of adapting new or amended controls to fulfill the City's legal obfigation to adequately protect fhe public health, safety and welfare; and WH�REAS, the City Council makes the fo[lowing: I�llc:t7P. • : i i. The �ity Councii authorizes a study to be conducfed for the purpose of considering the adopfion of new or amended land use controls ar regulations as defined ir� Minn. Sfiat. § 462.352, far pawn shops and related establishrnen#s within the City of Mounds View. 2. The Ciiy Counci[ of the Ciiy af Mounds View directs fihe City o# Mounds View Planning Commission to conduct a study af this ma�ter and mak� recommendations as fo fihe adoption of amended afficia! controls or regulafions to fulfiil the Cify's legai obligation fio adequately protect the public health, safety and welfar�. 3. This emergency interim ordinance is to protect the health, safefy and weifare of fihe Ci#y of iVlounds View residents and �o protecf �he planning process, because no land use controls or reguiations exist for parn�n shops and related establishments within the City, and not to delay or prevenf �ny single project. '.l t f)�°t;I;r,�riGL; ;�`C��? �='� c¢c; � .., ; " �OW, iHER�FORE, based on tf�e above findings of fact, I:�.t.�a��'L�7�t!i[�111�17+ . i, � �.� j i. SECTfON 1. The City of Maunds View Nlunicipa! Code Appendix D is hereby amended to include re�Ference to the follawing emergency Sp�cial Ordinance Na. 709. Subdivisio� 1. Purpase. To protec#fhe planning process ur�derthe authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, Subdivisian 4, and fo profiect the pubiic health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City af Nlounds View, the City Counci! of the City of Mounds View hereby adopts an interim ordinance which prohibits the presence and siting af any new, or the expansion of any existing, pawn shops and related establishments wi#hin fhe City af Mounds View. �ubcl. 2. Ap�ticabil��y of O�°dinar�ce, This inferim ordinance shail be in effect unti) the 27#h cfay of Septemf�er, 2a03, or until the final adop#ion of an amended ordinance fo regulafe pawn shops and relafied establishments in the Cify ofi Mounds View, whichever occurs first. SECTION 2. This emergency ardinance is efFectiv� upan adoption in accordance wi#h Section 3.06 of the City of N[ounds View City Charter. Passed by the City Councif of the City of Mounds View, Minnesofia, this 27t�' day of January, 2003. ATT�ST: (SEAL) ,�.�� , _ � �. Scot� Riggs, City Aitor�ey Jerry Linke, Mayor James Ericson, Interim City Cleri<-Adminisfrato� ,;°: Frar�: �Sent: To: Cc:: Subjeci: Dear Cammissioners: Ericson, Jim Sunday, March 02, 2003 10:15 PM Gary St�venson (E-mail); Greg Johnsan (Business Fax); Joan Lenzmeier (E-mai() (E-mail); Liz Song (E�mail}; Mari Scotch (E-mail); Mike Hegland {E-mail} Benesch, Barb Viger/Bui -- Intertding to Appeal The applicants Jamey Vigor and Tui Buy (2075 Hillview) are appealing the Planning Commission's denial of their variance request far the reduced parking at their Hiilview Avenue four-plex. The appea! (attached) was received within �he required timeframe and will be scheduled for a hearing before the City Council on March 24, 2003. ;;_- 4ppeaf Notice Rec'd - March 2,... James Ericson Interim Ci#y Administrafor City of Mounds View 24Q1 Highway 90 Mounds View, MN 55112 � � 763-717-402� (phane) 763-784-3462 (fax) jime(a�remnet.org <mailio_iimeCc�rcmnet.orq> (e-mail) http://v✓ww.ci.mounds-view.mn.us {web) / � � � `1 � March 2, 2003 Moui�ds View Plaiining Comnlissioz� 2401 Highwas� 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 RE: Danial of Variance Request 2075 Hillview Road Dear James Ericsoil: I am aslcing for an appeal to give n�e the time ta speal{ with the property owners involved with the decision on FebYUary 19, 2003 regarding tny reques� for Variance. I would like to apologize for my ixzexperience regarding the proced�es for the Variance Request of Februai�y 19, 2003. I plan to speak with the property owners withii� the boundari�s. I had no thought there would be any resistance to the variance request which was denied. Being made awax�, that the property owners are not in favor of more blacktop, garages ' and tree cutting is why I am plan to speak with them privately, be�ore I waste anyinare of the P1aruling Commission's meeting time. It has been brought to my attention that there is a need for disabled housing in the Mounds View community. My plan for the additional units is to remodel them fo accommodate people with disabilities. I will be speaicing with J'eremiah about the requirements of conditioiial use. At present, there are five more parlcing spaces than are needed for that building. I will be coniacting you soon. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jamey Viger jv/jv � : ,! ° :1: ' ? . � , ' 1 ° 1 :1; ' :f> `� � . 11 11 ' REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes a. February 19, 2003 b. March 5, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda ^ �,. „ , ' :� � ,-� .a�: •. �' i s. � _ � 1 .� .:�■-: s,- ,, : 5. Public Hearing and Consideration of a Request for a Variance to Allow Encroachment of a New Home into the Prevailing Front Setbacl� at 7741 Long Lake Road. Applicant: Hamilton Creek, Scott & Gretchen Davis Planning Case IVo: VR03-Od2 6. Discuss Proposed No Parlang Request on Greenfield Avenue Special Planning Case No. SP-115-03 7. Consideration of a Development Review Request to Exparzd the Business Located at 2865 ��' County Highr�vay 10. Applicanfi Greg Johnson Pla�ulvig Case No: DE03-001 8. Discuss and Review of Proposed Code Amendments io Regulate the Siting and Licensure of Pawn Shops in Mounds View. Special Planning Case No. SP-114-03 APPI�ICAt�TS: YOUR �°�1`ENDAfVC� Ai THIS M��1"IN� IS R�QUESTED. PLEAS� NOTIFY TH� CQPtAMU�11T1� bEVELOPMEtVT D�PA#2�'MEf�T AT 763-717-402D IF YOIJ ARE UNABLE TO ATTE�I�?. 9. Next Planning Comrtiission Meeting: A�ril 16, 2003 10. Adjournn�en# to Agenda Session Ia' ` � ,�'� �_ 7�� 1. Review Minutes: March 19, 2003 2. Staff Reports ' 3. Chairpersoia and Planzaing Conunissioners' Reports N:�Data\Crronps\Comdev�Planning Commission�PC Agendas�2003\04-02-03 PC Agenda.doc .� i#err� Rdo: 5 M��ting Daie: Apri� 2. 2003 Tyg�e of �a��iness: Pubfic Hearir�el _I ., / _. � I :, � ' � ... �; fl�ounds View Planning Commission �rorno James Ericsan, Acting City Adminisfrator Item iitle/Sub��tn Public Hearing and Considerafion of a Requesf for a Variance to A(low Encroachr�ent of a EVew Hame into the Prevailing Front Setback at 7741 Long Lake Road. .; � . , !n January o� 2002, the City Cour�cil approved the final Plat for Gustaisons Fifth ,qdditior�, a repiaffing of fand locaied afi the northeast corner of Coun�y Road i and Long Lake Road. The subdivision was campficated due to ownership issues, variances and uiilifiy work, which was no4 iniiiafed untif �he fasfi months of 2002. After all of fhe (egal and utilifiy issues had been resoived, the Cify issued a building permit for a new �om� on Lot 1, Block i of the subdivision, the northernmost lot on Long take Road. The permit was issued on January 27, 2003. The survey attached to the permit application ir�dicated a building setback of 30.3 feet from th� property (ine abufting Long Lake Road. Such a sefiback compfies wit� the City's "fiypical" requirements. �'l D�s�u�sro�: On February 28, 2003, one of the Cifiy Counci( members contacfed me c{uestioning the sefiback of the new l�ome under construction at 7741 Long Lake Road, in tha� it was significanfly closer to fihe sfreet than other homes on the block. Staff inspected the property and verified thaf the home was ir�deed cioser to the sfireet than ihe other homes along tha� side of Lor�g Lake Road. The survey for the property indicated the building woufd be sef back thirty feef (30.3} from the Long Lake Road right of way. The inspection reuealed thai the home was being constructed according to the survey-specified set back. Setback r�quirements are addressed in Seetion 1104.01 of the Zoning Code. Each zoning disfrict is lisied with the corr�sponding front, side and rear setbacks. In an Ra1, Single Family Residential districf, the typical setbacks are as foflows: Front, 30 fee�; Side, 1� feet; and Rear, 30 feet. ft is f�otnoted in the Code #hat sheds and garages, attached or detached, can have side and rear setbacks of 5 feet. {f�o accessory buildir�g can be located in a front yard unless it is attached to the principal structure, and even fihen the minimum sef back is fhirfy feet.) The front yard setback is further footnofed to address the issiae of °pr�vailing setbacks", arficufafed as follows: "Where principal buildings in existence on lots wifhin the same block on the same side of the sfreef have front yard setbacks different from thase required, ihe minirr►um fronf yard setback for any new principa! buildings shall be the minimum fronf yard seiback in exisfence for any one lot. !n no case shal! the -- front yard setback be less fhan thfrfy feet (30)." ��tb�cl< F�epdi°fi 77�'f Long L.��ce f��sad P,pril �, 2�t�3 F'a�� 2 Based on the above informa�ion regarding "prevaili�g setbacks", if becomes readify apparent fihat fihe sfir�cture under cons#rucfiion at 7741 Long Lake Road is �oo close fo th� street. The building permif for the sfirucfure should nofi have been issued; fihe error is admifitedly the City's. Incorrect setback information was provided fio the developer and/or his surveyor, and upon submission of the buildi�g permif applicatiar�, anofher error was made in no� verifying the setback of the building. After learnir�g of fhe po#ential error, �he Cifiy's temporary inspector fie[d-verified preva►iling setbacks and at fhe same time siaff reviewed �he Long Lake Road recortsfruction as-built pians, survey quali�y plans which include buifding se#back informafiion. The field inspection and r�view of the as-builfi pians indicateci that the home (ocated at 7801 Long Lake Road was the closest to fhe s�reet at 41 feefi, and as such, 41 feet would con�titute the prevaifir�g setback for fihis bfock of Long Lake Road. Once the prevailing sefback had been determined, ihe buifding official posted a"Sfop Work" order on the property and sfafFthen nofiified the d�veloper, Neaf Zinser. Three optians were presented fio Mr. Zinser: Remove 1 i feet from the garage fio s�fisfy the prevailing setback, slide fhe whole structure back by 11_feei, or apply for a vari�nce. Mr. Zii�ser indicafed thaf the second option {move fihe building back an additional 11 feet} was NOT an option due to the extent of fhe consfruction already complefed and immediately requested fo be h�ard for a variance reques�. Mr. Zinser also requesied �o c�ntinue consfructian on the house itseif, to which the building ofFiciaf agreed, amending the Sfop Wark order accordingly. One additional issue regarding the constructian is inconsis�enfi wi�h fhe ,Zoning Code. Subdivision 1 c of Secfion 1106.03 of #he R-i Zor�ing requirements indicates fihaf no garage ''; shail exceed 952 square feef in area except by conditional use permit. The size of fhe garage at 774i Long Lake Road, at 25 f�et by 42 feet, is 1,050 square feet, 98 square feefi more fhan the maximum withaut a.CUP. Furfihermore, ihe Zoning Code sfafies that the maximum square footage of accessary building space on a lot is 1,800 square feet. A shed has been constructed on the [of which, at 30 feet by 31.66 feet, totals 950 square feet. The shed and garage space fogether totafs 2,OQ0 square feef, 200 square feet more than what is allowed by the Zoning Code. Thus, in addifiion to the front sefiback issue, to maintain #he size of the garage, a CUP would need to be obtained; and to maintain the TOTAL square footage, a variance would need to be approved far ihe additional 200 square feet. :. .- . For a variance to be approved, the applicani needs to demonstra�e a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the praperty that makes a iiteral ir�terpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restricfive. Minnesota stafutes require thaf the governing body (the Piannirrg Commission, in IViounds View} review a sefi of specified cri�eria for each appfication and mal�e its decision in accordance with fhese cri�eria. `�hese criteria are set forth ir� Secfian 9125.02, Subdivision 2, of fhe City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exisfis wher� all of the criteria are met. The criteri� ar� as follows: �etb�ck F��pc�r� � i�1 �.ot'�g l��ke Ro�a �,pri1 �; 2fl03 ��g� 3 a. Excepfional or extraordinary circumst�nces apply to fhe property which do not apply generally to oiher prope�ties in the same zone or vicinity and resuli from !ot size or shape, topography orofher circumstances over which fhe owners of the property since the e�feciive date hereof have had no confrol. The proper#y is zoned R-i and is currentiy beir�g improved with a new, 4wo-sfary single-family dwelling. The fot is nofi irregularly shaped and af 22,000 square feet, is mare than double the siz� of a standard fot. The sole cause of the variance request, as it is well documented herein, is due to a Ciiy oversight. The Commur�ity Devefopment Departrr�ent failed to "flag" �he setback encroachment and issued the permit in error. The developer began construction in accordance with fhe City's approval and it was nafi �tnfiil fl�arch 4, 2003, that he becarr�e aware of ar�y probfems. b. The literal ingerpretatior� of fhe provisions of this Tifle would deprive fhe applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properfies in the same disirict under the germs ofihis Tifle. . Whi(e fhe literal interpretation af the provisions of the �oning Code would nof deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, to apply fihe provisions after-the-fact would c�rfainly deprive the applicant a right he was granted by virfiue of an approved buildir�g permif. If should be noted however that mistakes and oversiqhts do occur and that when discovered buiiders are required io correct the misfakes, even if the mistakes '; are not their own. The qu�s#ion, then, is, which is preferable—preserving the intent of a - �niform building setback and requiring the applicanf to tear down walls, redraft plans and pour new footings, all af considera�fe cost, or to grant a variance because of the Ci#y's error. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from fhe actions ot`fhe applicanf. The special conditions do not result from the acfiions of the applicant. d. That granting the variance requesfed would not conferan the applicant any special privilege fhat fs denied by fhis Title to owners of other lands, strucfures or buildings in the same disgricf. Granting the variance would confer upon ihe property ow�er a special privilege thaf would be denied other property owners. Nowever, one could consider the investment already made by the applicant a mitigating factor. e. That the variance requested is fhe minimum varrance which would allevia% fhe hardship. Economic conditions alone shall noi be cansidered a hardship. Leaving the structure "as is" cerfainly could be considered �he minimum variance which would alleviaie fhe hardship. The cost of removing ane foot of the garage, k�l tilES C�S�, would essenfially be the sarne as removing 11 feet. �ct6�ack i��or� 77��1 LQng L�lc� Rc�ad �kpril 2; �0�3 i'ag� � f. The variance would nof be maferially defrimental to fhe purpose of this Ti�le or to other properfy in fhe same zone. Granfiing a variance to allow the strucfure to remain within the setback could be viewed as mafierially detrimental to fhe purpose and intent of the zoning code. I# is hard to imagine a situatian where ihe Pfanning Commission would have appraved �his request had th� setback been flagged prior to consfructior�. Staff has naf received any feedback fro� neighbors regarding this request. g. The proposed variance wi!! not impair an adequate supply of light and air �o adjaceni property or substantia!!y increase fhe congestion of ihe public sfreets or increase the dangeY of frre or endanger fh� public safety or subs�antially diminish or impair pYOperfy values within fhe neighborhood. The proposed variance would not result in �ny of the above-cited adverse effecfis. � All af the criteria, as i�dica�ed above, r�eed fp be s�tisfied to justify the granting the variance. Certainly the fac# thai fhe applicanf was issued a building permifi in good faifh does support the requirement that the excepfianal ar exfraordir�ary condifiion nat be caused by the _ �ppficant. But does fihat error necessitate approvai of fhe variance? No. The fact thaf the � Citv erred in ifis issuance of the buildinq permif even qiven the maqnifiude of the oversiqht, does not in itself obli afe variance a roval. The Pianning Commission needs fo de#ermine whether the City's error in itseff is sufficient justification to grant the variance. , . .. Affer holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the builder, the proper[y owner ar�d affec#ed neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions re[ated to the request: 1. Approve the requested variance with stipulations requiring appiication of a conditional use permit for the oversized garage anri a variance for �ccessory space beyond ihe 1,80Ci square foot maximum. Furfhermore, � stipulaiion should be included which indicafies tha# if the strucfi�re is ever damaged or destcoyed, the original prevailir�g setback sha11 apply to any reconstruction. Reso[ufion "A" is atfached for this option. 2. Deny �he requested variance and require that 11 feef be removed from ihe firont of the garage io satisfy the pr�vailing 4-1-foot setback. �f th� Commission determine� this optior� is appropriate, the applicanfs would h�ve ihe right �o appeal the Commission's decision and ; su�h an appeal would be heard by the City Council on April 14, 2003. Resofution "�" is af�ached for this optior�. ��fi�acF� �-e�po� 7'741 L.ong L�4ce f�o�d April 2, 2(�03 €��c�e 5 3. iable the requesi per�ding receipt of additional information. �faff would NOi �ncourage the Commission to tabfe the request as the applicant and building owners have sfopped work on the garage constructian and �abfing tl�e request woufd exacerbafe the deiay. If additianal information is needed, I would s�rongfy urge the Corr�mission to cantact me prior #o fihe meeting and I will do my best to obfain the information for presenfation at the mee�ir�g. : ��il.t�;:Q �r�'=�?C.£�°Yt:: James Ericson Interim Cify Clerk/Administrator Afitachments: 1. Certificafe of Survey 2. Locafion Map 3. Resolu#ions :; . �� _ �� . �� . . �� . . � 9� � �� . � � r LL . � . � . � � N N . . � � � � � � � W . � . � � . � ! . � . � s� . � � � � w � Z�/�0 ' d QQ9,4X 10.3' s.a:� EGRESS � �tl � �� . _ � . �� . R • � ��=�� ::,�� 3rr: 0 �(9 �1 ° �"� I{� � F,J 1 a �� ..3 . � U t9 �� . �� _ � 6 z �g e� �� u�a �� Q � ��°u�u� � � � � �� U a� ' � �o Il � U p �+ � �� II � � ��d � �•w� � � � 10„3' S� ~'^ ~� � � .e. � � i+� o W . �1.� 0.'lih ' 0�� '� � ° d—sit� � � � `�e... a..�.o�o �^�"`'S � � O � . � �� ,�,�a � �- . � � �� . _�_.��_ � o �,�:�� `? , � `"'�"`•-�� °b�b_t � ,...._� •bp � ' � , � � dd .. � �.f1 Ddl P , . � �• a�u S�71n?13S vti • � vtix 1�111iP1 . . � � 0?sodo�d � NyG � i � 'NVS � ; � t��,vm�-- - - -��.��n- � ' � � . � _..._ � .� �. � � � �. ..._. � � — �. . � � �� N � � s m� . � g� � � � �� g�� ' � - a e-� , � � ° � �� v �� `" .� � " � �� . . � u�� - � � � a �� fi�� W � �� (� � .� ' � � � �{�o�pV� � � � �o��o ��. � - � � � i � � �'�� o �• . � ��=z �y � • � �� b�8� 9TsT"C 9�1-Zi`�adZ BL,�� LD� �S� 66��# �13 S�Xt7� i%dWw WOL�� '� ; „ ,; �. > a ,. � ; ; , _ r ;a p:< �__ l .;� . � \ �� `� � �� l�� ' Namilton Creek Cos. P�o��rty irivolved; 77�;1 LQri� L;ak� [�o�d: Pl�rir�ing .Case No. VR03 Q0�' 7741 Lon g L��e R_o�'d � ProperCi�s:'�tri�l�in 3�0': r � ' ;';• �'' � . � � i.� ` ' � .. -. . .. . � . 1 �� '3 ��. .. .. : , .T ' �'.. ; .:: � I�� " "� � ��: � ;: � _� , � �' �i �� - �� , �- , > �- - "�. `; s . �� : ��; � ' .1;� .. I,. � � . � .fS . � ,� _,' i � � � _ � � � i � � � .�' �' � � ! . � .. � . ,:". � ' ' . :.. : ", k: � � � � ,� ��. : � F. � : �. _� i '�, - . � �, � �� '-� - _.�1 `— y: �, . i "' �' " .. ��' . R .�� . ! i ;:. WFiEREAS, the appficanfi, Hamilton Creek, has applied for a variance from the minimum front setback far a single-family dweiling und�r construction at 7741 Long Lake Road; and, �ilFi�R�AS, Section 11 O4:Q2 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that ihe minimum front setback far a principai building is 30 feet unfess the prevailing sefiback far existing strucfures exceeds 3Q feet, in which case ihe prevailing set back IS the minimum sefback; and, ►�lHE�EA�, the structure under construction, sef back 30.3 feei from t�e fronf properfy line, is lacated within the "prevailing" set back on fhis block, which is 41 feef; and, �HEREAS, the applicant was issued a building permit for �he strucfure on January 27, 2003 based on a survey indica�ing a 30.3-foot front set back; and, WH��EAS, upon discovery of i�s error, the City issued a"Stop Wark" order on fihe construcfion prompting the applicant to request a variance; and, �HEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 af the fl�ounds View Municipa[ Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criieria, of which all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to fihe Zoning Code. f�pV�, °fHEREFORE, �E IT RESOL.VED9 the Mounds View Pfanning Commission makes the following finding of facts related to this request: 1. The exceptional or extraordinary condifions relating to #he variance requesf is simply the Cify erred in i�s issuance af a building permit and did not discover the error until work had substanfialiy began on the structure. 2. The (i#eral ir�terpretation of fhe Zoning Cod�, in conjunction with ihe City's error, does deny the applic�nfi rights commonly enjoyed by other recipients df building permits. 3. The applican� has not caused the condifiion which prompfiec� the variance request. 4. �rar�ting fhe variance would n�t c�nfer upon the applicani a special privilege. , Resolution 720-03 (A) Page 2 5. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. � 6. The variance would noi be materially detrirnenfal to the purpos� afi this Title or to other property ir� the same zone. 7. The variance would not impair an adequate suppiy o�f lighfi and air fo adjacer�f property or substaniiaEly increase the cQngestion of the public streets or increase fihe danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substar�tially diminish or impair properfy values within fihe neighborhood. N�VU, TFi�R�FORE, �E BT FURTH�R RESOL��D that the Mounds View Pianning Commission, based upon the above idenfiified finding of facts, does hereby approve the variance req�esfed for a 30.3-foat front setback for the sfructure under construction at 7741 Long Lake Road, subj�cfi to the followir�g requirements: �. The applicani shall apply for and abfain approval of a conditional use permit for an oversized garage before the Certificate oi Occupancy can be issued. 2. The applicant shall apply for and obtain approval of a variance for 200 square feefi of accessory storage spaCe in excess of the maximum a!lowed 1,800 square feet of space. 3. If the structure is ever damaged or desfroyed beyond repair, reconstruction shal[ occur ai the originai prevaifing setback of 41 feef. Adopted fhis 2nd day of April 2003. ATTEST: (SEAL) Gary Stevenson, Chairpersan James Ericson Communi#y Developmenfi Director � �, . - a . .- �: �, � . _ � � ;, � -T ��, � .�' _ , � . i:�. "..�. _! �I,: l�� . ` �, , � , !�:#� 1E' ".' • � - � �} +:: . �.� - �: �:e . ;. !.�- [b "-:#" ' -'.�` r: _ � . . . .. . . . i ' � . . � � � � � :�� .. � , . � . � . ��, , � �, ; ;" !, '1. 11 1�/HEREAS, the applicani, Hamilton Creek, has applied for a varianc� from the minimum front setback far a single-family dwelling under consfir�tction at 7741 Long Lake Road; and, iiVW�REA�, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code inciicates that the minimum front se#back for a principal buifding is 30 fe�� unless the prevailing setback for exisfing structures exceeds 30 feet, in which case the prevailing sef back I� the mir�imum setback; and, 1�I�EREA�, the structure under consfiruction, set f�ack 30.3 fieet from the front properfy line, is located within the "prevailing" set back on this block, which is 41 feet; and, VU�iEREA►�, the applicant was iss�ed a building permit for the structure on January 27, 2n03 based on a sunrey indicating a 3�.3-foot front set back; and, WHER�A�, upon discovery of ifs error, fihe City issued a"Stop Work" order on ihe construction promp#ing fihe appficani to reques# a variance; and, !�/�i�R�AS, according to Secfion 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of fihe Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which ail must be satisfied, in order to granf a variance �o fhe Zoning Code. NOW4 TFi�REFORE, �� Il° RESOLIlED, the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following finding of facts related �o fhis request: 1. The excepti�nal or extraordinary condifions reiating to the variance request is simply thafi the Cifiy erred in its issuance of the buifding permit and did nof discover the error until work had subsian�iaiEy beg�n on the structure. 2. The literal interpretatior� af the Zoning Coc�e, in conjunction with fhe Cifiy's error, does f�4T deny t'he applicanf rights commonly enj�yed by ofiher recipienfis of building permits. 3. Grar�ting fhe variartce wQUld confer upon the applicant a special privilege. �. The variance would be maferially defrimental to the purpos� of this Titfe or to other proper�y in th� same zone. Resolution i20-03 (�) Page 2 N�►iV, TFi�R�FOR�, �� I`� �IJRTHER R��VE� thaf the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the aboveadentifed finding of f�cts, does hereby DENY the variance req�ested for a reduced 30.3-foot fronf setback for fhe sfructure under construction af 7741 Long Lake Road NO�, THEREFOR�, BE i°T �URTIiER i�ESOL.V'�D that the garage currenfly under cons#ruction at 7741 Long Lake Road shall be reconstructed fo compiy wifh fhe exisfiing prevai(ing sefback which is 41 feet. �iOW, iHE��FOR�, �E I°T FINALLY R��Lil�f� tha� the ap�ficant shalf be nofified of the right to appeal this denial to the City Council. The appeal shall be submifted in wrifing wifihin 10 b�siness days of the adopfiian o�F this Resolufiion. Adop�ed this 2nd day of A�ril 2�Q3. ATTEST: (SEAL) �ary S�evenson, Chairperson James Ericson Community Devefopment Director ;? ;.: J tterr� N�: 6 6VIee�6ng �a�e: April 2, 2�03 T°ype �f �usiness: Comrnissian Business I " ,I 1 ' ^ -%, w° Toa Chair Stevenson and Planning Commissioners ��o James Ericson, Ir�terim City Adminisfrator [tetr� �'it6elSu�Oje�fa Further Discussion and Reconsideraiion of the "No F'�rking" Request on Greei,field Aver�ue South of County Road i i ... •.. On iVlarch 24, 2003, the City Cvuncil held a pubGc hearing to consider �he request to past the easf side of Greenfield Avenue 350 feet 5outh of Counfiy Road I"�!o Parking" Monday through Saturday, 8 am to 6 pm. Commissioners Jahnson and Zwirn attended the meefing as did properiy owner S�eve Farrell and a tenant at the praperfy, Ted Rose. fVlr. Rose operaies the Stafie Farm Insurance Agency in the building. � . After takir�g festimony, ihe Councif ackrtowledged that a parking prob[em existed in the area and was cancerned tha� i1�r. Farrell's clients and employees were parking on the street causing an inconvenience for the property owners south on Greenfield Rvenue. The Council discussed wi#h sfaff and fihe property owner various alternatives that cauld be �mployed to resolve fihe sifuafiion j wi�hout imposing parking restrictions. ,-, The Co�tncil asked Mr. Farrell if he woufd be willing fo expand his parking lot, fo which Mr. Farrell responded in the affirmative; and the Council also discussed the pQSSibilify of allowing parking on Greenfield direetly across from the building, but not any further south until beyond the 350-foot location. Allowing parking on Greenfie[d across trom the business would leave two or fhree sialls and if the parking lof were expanded by two stails, that could potentially resoive the parking situatio�. While that may be true, the Counci! was told the Commissian had a(ready discussed the parking lot expansion issue at length and was concerr�ed thafi any furfher expansion of ihe lot would be an aesfhetic detriment to the neighbarhflod. The Council also suggested exploring the possibility of striping for narrower parking stalls (i.e., 8"/z feefi in widfh instead of the required 9 feet) and whefher that would cjenerafe mare stalls. After considering ai[ of fihe fesfiimony and information presented, the City Council tabled acfian on the requesf, �ending the issue back to the Pfanning Commission for addifionai review and consideration. . .:. .: Reconsider �he parking situafion and dimensiona� requirements and defiermi�e if there is a need to amend fihe Commission's Resolution 71�-03 recommending IVo Parking on Greenfield Ave. �Q��; "��-�� Jarr�es Ericson Infierim City Clerk/Administrafor ;�; ;�; � ► ; .. : I ;�; , � ,.:�; _1\ �� ' 1 �` : ' ' 1-' � '�.., , � ` �� i, . .._ , � � �� ; .� �: ; f, ,, ::. i. �� - �. �, � , . ; � � , �; ; :. . �� : ; �; , , � ; t � �. � �� . . :. � � ��• :� � •� �� , ; : f, �, � . ;•, � :�; ��, � � � �: �� ; < � �� ._ ��. f, ;�., � � �, � , .,�. i�E12EAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the parl�ing si�uation on Greenfield Avenue between County Road I ai�d Bronson Drive in response to complaints from resid.ents in this area; and, �I�IEI�AS, the business located at 2402 County Road I consistently and regularly overflows its parking lot resulting in emplayees and custo�ners parlcing on Greenfieid Avenue; and, �IE�AS, the west side of Greenfield Avenue has aiready been posted as No Pa�king to control and restrict on-street parlcing on tlus blacic. NO�1, TFiERE�'ORE, �E Li RES��i/Ep that the Planning Commission of the Cifiy of fl�ounds View, �inding there to be sufFicient cause and in the interest of pubiic safety, recommends that a "Nv Parking from Here to Corner, Mon — Saf, 8 am — 6 pm" sign be installed on the east side of _% Greenfield Avenue, 350 feet south Caunty Road I, shown as Location "C" on fhe attached Exhibit 1. �E I'I' FINAIII�Y I�ES�L�D that the Planning Corxu�ission directs staff to forwaxd this resolution to ihe City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this Sth day of February, 2003. Jean Miiler, Acting Chairperson ATTEST James Ericson, Communi#y Development Director {SE�4L) ,; � . :. , ; �, ; : > � �. , .•�. �, 1 �. � ; _- ; ��',. .#; '� ..�< .� . ; ,; . ,.. � s r = �; 4''= � � ,.-' �_ � i; �.� � ' s `� , 2402 Co. Rd. I �� J � v � � � � S' i o � � � v � � � � � � �J^��yn�lqX �ryt,' lP � / " 1 A • � i " � � � d ,1 :l I � ' -I /.,. �, M ..i �: To: �rorn: liem iitl�IS�abje�i: � *,� ,,' liem IVo: 7 (1�e�fin� �ate: Aprii 2, 2Q03 iyp� of �usine�s: Commission Business Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Acting City Administrator Consideration of a Development Review Request for a 780 Square-Foot Expansion to the Business Located at 2865 County Highway 10. Planning Case DE03-001 Greg Johnson, the property owner of 2865 County Highway 10, has requested a Development Review to expand his existing business located on the property. The business is operated fram a 1,248 square foof building alongside the property owner's residence. The property is zoned R-O, Residential Office, the only properfy in fhe City to be so designat�d. Recentfy the applicant requested a text amendmenfi to ihe Zoning Code to officially recognize his business as a permitted commerciaf use and to i�e considered a commercia! use rather than a residential accessory use. The Pfanning Commission recommended approval of this fext amendmenfi and the City Council gave first reading to fhe corresponding ordinance at fheir meeting on March 24, 20Q3. Second reading and adoption of the ordinance will occur on April 14, 2003. Submifited for the Planning Commission's review are copies o�f the Site Plan, Building Permit Application, Zoning Map, and front Building Elevation. 1 . A Development Review is requir�d for this expansion since the amount of fihe expansion exceeds ten percent of the business area. (According fo Section 1006.06 af the Mounds View Building Code, expansions of less than #en percent do not require review.) The expansion proposed by Mr. Johnson amounfs to a 38 percenf increase in floor area. The expansion would allow for an additional work bay however would not increase the amount of parking needed for the business. Mr. Johnson proposes to match the architecture and design of the existing struc#ure, adding a brick facade to fihe frant of ihe building for added visual appeal. The expansion woufd not encroach into either the front, rear or side setback, however the building would be closer fa fihe residence. A separation of eight feet is propased between the house and the business, the minimum allowed by the Building and Zoning Code is thr�a feet. The parcel is 1.25 acres in area and is wooded io the rear. fVeighboring residential properties would not be impacfed by �he proposed expansion, na additionak screening would be necessary. While not necessary, Staff sent notices fo property owners within 350 feet of Mr. Johnson's property in ar� effort to ensure promote awareness and to solicit feedback, encouraging residents ta attend the meeting if they had questions, comments or concerns. , r ,. There does not appear ta be any negative consequences associated with th� requested expansion and as such, sfiaff is recommending adoption of Resolution 721-03, a resolution recommending approval of the requested Development Review io permit the 780 square foot expansion of Mr. Johnson's business at 2865 Counfy Highway 10. ��t �� James Ericson Interim City CEerk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Zo�ing Map 2. Si#e Plan 3. Floor Plan 4. Building Permit Application 5. Front Building Elevation 6. Resolution 721-03 :.) � C��Sr'� OG� �� -o ;� P�,� �11��'�� S a�rerr ° PartnerS�'�Q COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMEIVT ,:: , ,;. . .� f l 2401 County Road 1Q, Mounds View, MN 55112 t7�� 7i7-�aza Fax (651} 76S°1660 Please Typ� or Print Information - Campiete Both Sides of This Form Applic�r�� Ir��ormatso � Name of Applicant `�' 1�f�.�/`��{,✓ %fephon ��j �r��' 7�7! Address r��.S C��r.•a� w� l� Fa�7G.:�,} ��,� �»y� 1�/�' �.��,-�c �.�� /'��t1 .S�SI/� E-mai1: � � S v Gfir Io��ere�t ��t Prope (cheefc appropriate box) � Owner of Properry ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager C� pther (explain) C7 Cantract for Deed Owner � Agreement ko Pur�hase ,9pplic°ants rarr�sf pro�ride evideB�ce �fir�t�res�' in pe'op�rty at tfie firne of app/ic�t%�n, and if you ar� not tlre o r�,��r° af t/r� pr�pert�Y' yoa� rnust �itfier provrde a Iet`�er �f/a�rrr�lssie�n frorn ifi� o�rrrer givirrg �onse�t to tir� �lfng of this app/icate�n or tfre proper� o�r�aer° rr�ust sigr� tfai� app/ecation for it t� be accepted Prope Descriptac�r�/Prop�s�l Address or General Location � C �� f�a�.� ,.. �-�� /� z S a � r..e S �egal Description Property Identi�cation # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning .- + =r. .;. � ■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ � �. ■ ■ � �� %�: ,� c`..? �� .5 �'� � �-� Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rez�ning Majar Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Development {PUD} PUD Amendment Condltional/Interlm Use Permit Variance Tex� Amendment, zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develop Review/Site P[an Wetiand Alteration Permit WetEand Buffer Permit Other $25� $50� $50a $250 . $750 �350 R-1, R-2 $150; afl others $3Z5 R�1, R-2 $150; afl others $325 $15� $125 12s acre; min �1z5 max $7so R-1, R-Z $150; alf others $200 R-]., R-2 $25; all athers $100 ;; ; ( Moc�nds View Planning ,4pplica��vn �� . �.: y` � . �. - �� :��: � � . ❑ Torrens D�sc�°ip�i�r� �f P�°opc�5�l (attach additionai supporting documentation if necessary) __ _ -(� Q c�"% .� �� .�. �r.�/� <l.� _. /r.�� - — Please i�ote: Applicants are respons'sble for all eosts Incurred assoeiated with the filing, review and processing of this applica�on. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up fr�nt or upon receipt of statemeni from the City of Mounds View, Fees may include but are not limited to costs for consultants retained by the City, consulCant planning servfees, atiorney, and engineer fees. A deposit may also be required to cover costs of pubf ic notices, materials and stafF time spent irt the revlew, research or preparation oP materiais associated with this application. 'ihe applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs in exeess of the initial deposit amount. Any portion of the depasit not spent ar encurrrbered shal! be refunded Yo the applicant within 30 days after consideration of the applicaYion is completed. Payment of park dedication fees is required with subdivision applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE T�1AT I have read ali of the information fisted in the Pianning Application and fulfy underskand that I am responsib for afl osts ' curred by the City related to the processing of this appl'scation. � �` 'i ff � App' - Date Page 2 �Y [�7Y {�LBR) SYGNATURE ON THI� APPL�C�►l`30N, I IiER��Y ��C�4R� TFie4`F, �°O 1"HE ��ST OF l+�Y KNOI�JL.EDGE, i6iE IN��R�9ATIOBV P�OVIDED IS TRiJE' �,ND �►C�U TEa � Name of Applicanfi (typed/print�} K /�� (� �,�� •r--� Sgnature of Name of Praperty Signature of Prope Address of Owner Phone Nurnber af E-rnail _ ��1 �,-�-�`G_f <cJ _��C�_ �=� � �**:��x:��*��*�**�**�*�*�*****��*��*�*��***�**�*x��*�****��**�****:��x�=��x***��**x��*�x�**� FOFt OF�I�E 11�E �i�L� Date of Subrriittai �°� o' � 3 Date of Aceeptance: ..3 r�-� - b� 60-day Limit 120-day limit: ___ _ P�anning Case No(s) �S n� •� n�J, Assigned to: _ Fees Paid: Aeeount #k 'I Check # Receipt # Application: •�.5 �.c�� a.,.� � o� � `-�T �%/_5 �7 1.3�f � = Park Dedicatior�: De�osits: _ Qther: Totai: � � o�az /� � ,� Zo��ng ap a�� 1�? � ��c�},� . �.�� , �-� . � . � :� :� �c� - . � c�r � c� 1 �5 . �1 �I? � ui . � : � �2�£� �ti � � 'c�v 8{� _ . � . . �.; �' �a � im.r��i _ �� }Q � � ,. fi � � � 1�� c� .� c, i:, w7 cv � � cs J� g h3 , � {� � ! t}'} J � � - � � � �r ?�} : l��° �J ; 4�1 �::.��_ .. . .. .. � __._ � � �!�fQQ �5�,��&°` ;. �1 �� 127 �,� � i� 1: c� c� � � � cri r� ��s � � - � c�a : � � � '�r�t� f3 f � �i ` � �`� � �, �, _�_ � _ � � « � -� � � � 13 i c�,� c�r c� rs�- �� ` " _ '_ � . �`�,- � °o� ' � r� � � �� , � "� �� f� t � 6 . c� c�c � c�. rv �.t . � ...., � � . , . 3 f 1 t [ �.' t�a $� L(J '' � �� , �. �+ �a � � � _--¢. � � �_ �. �� 8�8 � : � �` � : � ,. � v � cv ` �` G�l � ` � �S.7�OJ. �� r� � ��'��' �� `� ��$� - .. _ � � � r,a � - � $075 �� ,`r �`�`� � �t�� - . . � I`,-�4 r `, �Q4� . - r �. � ' ,�' • �,. �� `�� I,:i("J $�}4� i 2��'G �d�4,> .. . + ` F�€�2� �� ; � � � � F � t3�2� . 1�� E �. � � � ��}2�' +�'�l � i $� T � �E� 3 .�-� � ( f ,� . 1 _ . . 8t�� . ''� � �, � 9�'{� $+3t�� ,' ��0 � `t R/ �yl/1�, / y� [ l� y� ....�! f ��!•d I �V� ' � ` . . __...._ '.. _ . ...-: �. .. _. � � `�. � � ,�� $(� �9i5 � � `�� ' 7�6�' i��5 � � � � � � ,' �r; �g„��j 7�� ' - � � � + � f�J .' � C3 y I ` � `�--�'— /�� CI�� ' E � I `'��2 . . . . � � •!. .�. � � # � ��9� 7F3S� 78`T � _. . .._ .� �� _.._ . . 7�51 � _ _ � 7+��i Q _ ,_ � s. � �� . � �� 7C�?! i �� ° �� o c�: �� .. � : �a �. � St7+� a, o� : ii8� � _ r�a . . . . __ ��5� 7��.77�C 77�� . . .. _ ... ... .. ..........w9r-n N�:r.. ^i�>r. �J <i' � � � �—� : � 78�1 c`� ... . � ��3� i � 78�� i8�� 7 ��. r�8� � � � p" � d— . �" N s {�*a N �e��" A �� c� � � � ��A� _�� '-� 7��{7 ��„�t �0. C��4�1 OG� I�OO MMD� �O��In - � ��D�� ° ��Q� °�� pplrcant to complet� number�d spaees Anly SffE AD�RE5S �� . � GTS� ~ tf �%�'"' � . �'' �%i� ��.3 i owN�R aiLaooR�ss . ziP �HOta� �'�� G�� Fs�,��-��-. -°� � i rnuvne _ p M{A1CA�DAES� Zi� PMONE ARCt11TEC71DE51dNERlE�JC IN��R USE OF NtAlt AoDRESS ZIP PHOAtE DESCRIBf WORK � �G� �G �� %d.� C�'�i� , �� d- � ,� � , � r� L�. Y °�J ��.u��o� oF �ap� �C� � `�`� �o�sc� T,�� . 7HE PERMIi B�C�hAES NULL ANO VOID IF WORK �A CONS7RUCTlOPS Si�o c! AUTHOIitZE� IS ND7 C9MMENCED WIiHiN 120 DAYS, OR IF COPlSTRUGTION �� i� sq. PL OR WORK 1S SUSPENDEO QR ABANDOhIED FOA � PERiDO aF 920 QAYS Ai ANY7lME ICFTER WQRK 15 COMMENCED. No d I HEREBY CEATIFY THA7 I F{AVE AEAD AND EXAMINEO Tt61S �uhpUnd¢ APPLECATION AND KIdOW TFtE SAME FO 8E iRUH ANb CC)RRECT. ALL PROVtSIONS �F i.AWS ANO QRBfNANCES GOVERtJiN� THIS iYPE OF WORK �� TRAC7 WILL BE COMPUED WIYN WHETHER SPECIFIEO HEREIN Oii Nbi , THE peu�pl�on GRANTliVG 8F A PERMIT DD�S W�T PRESUA�9E TO GIVE AUTHORITY TO VIQLATE OR CANCEL THE PAOVISIONS 0� ANY OTHER 57ATE OA LOCAL LAW ��,qpprove�e REGUlATIN CONSiA M Ofl 7HE PERFQRMANCE OF CONSTRE1CT10N � ZONIMG �sy",r�' Q . FLO00 PkAlk s�' PIPJV flF AACiOR OR AUTHORI2ED AGENT (DATE) WEiI./w� S'i� � � ORAlNAGE RE?Q6iT � � SIGNATURE OF OWNER (IF OWNEFi BUILPER) (DAT�) OTHER �Spee�y) � C?:R�'J� RoqWrod IM�O�`i�+IdT YO �►P�L[�,QaN'i m PLEA^�E R��D �seM�r�rs o r.o � r�o SPECtAL CONDITIONS S�PA�ATE PERt�IiS RE�UIREI� F�R: PLUAABIFJG � h#@AT11�1f3, VEPdTlLATIN� �R AIR CO?J�iTiOFllPdt3 # Avaucena,vacaFrrfnev ��6V 1 �IVM� T7 - �L.4GKTOPPIhIG # � s��4lE�i #� � WPi�TEF� �S CONTRACTQRS UCEPfSE �� srn� a Noi �Hrs ss at� o��pL�c��r�v� o�tL� i1-tE PERMIT WILI SE lSSU�� AI=iEA R�VIEWAL OF THE APPL1CAilON. � � � - �' •� � i� �I ) � -7 �i7 � �. � � �' o � � N �� . � � , �s �,�� qoqukad a Yoa O No i ' PAHKING SPACES i u� � 3LQCK LOT AtO. � i p�y� Na Requirad . , �� pµdl$ CHEpCEB 8Y TOTAL FEE AECEIPT / a�aoveo eoa �s�a� �r � , '� `\1 , ::.. ►.��1 C�" � � . _- � �� 1 ' � � • �. � . �. . ; , ��, �� r..� � �� „ �� . �i�� X_ � � k ! � � � �� . : _� � �� r� �� 1 �� _ �� ;�,F . � �� 1�1� �� ,., i � } � �� _. � , _ �-. � �' = �! ^ rl �� a e . , . �� ,,,, �nti� n� ��Wm d,S �L�.�b8�69L tiE �bT £0DL/1.L/E;0 2. 7'� � r. - �►� � ` � � � �' . �-= - :. - - � :�� b �r C� �� Z �� Z � �o � : . `�a,y f x� � *�. � ��-D t � .� :� , 7.5�0 �p _._.._ . .......... .....:... e �� . � i � . � ,�- _ � i r�.� �, �a � � � � °� f , � y� s � i 1 ��'. �� . �.� . � �-�-- --.: . . � �� .• ��p ✓�-/�. � � � � � � � � ��' �� d � _r �� f �. . � , C?�� . —�- � r I . �� a . . . :.: , : 0�-' i. I � � � � �.�' i • ' °�;, �� . � � � � j �`��r. r �,r ° ' °�' ` ' � . , y��`� � � ; .. ` �`-�`�� ..� � a�.� a . ' : �:� � . . ', � � ; � '_. � �� - � � ; � � , � '�� . ��R � �� . �� . �� ; �: �i = . �. � � . �'� �: .3�' .��': � ; '. -_� �i �,..�. _ ---�-�-- �.,�...��..._._,�..�.-.�� -�- {� . ..., �.�., � n�-, v�oi�in� ��e Cli:?.bRrfi4r' Y.€::fiT. E�0Zf1�GiE9 �-�� ;'�..�.. � 3. , ��; � �.'��,�_ • _ i : � . �' 1 '; �� ;.: . �� ' � `��: � � � . ,� :� .- ,� � ��' �....._ ,,��`'= � � ..- f - � ,��.ti:-,� i_ � � "�" , �., " - l! i` ± :i (� a-.. !�. ,�. �_ s G !` � .�: ; :� !' ` � „ �.,> � �, � � -. �E ; V�NER�AS, The Appiicant, Greg Johnson, property owner of 2865 County Highway 10 has req�ested approval of a Development Review to construct a 780 square-foof expansion to his business; and, !lilH�R��.�, the subjecf proper�y is zoned R-O, Resider�tial Office, and is legally described as follows: Sc�bject to Highway, Lof 49, Audifor's Subdivision 89, Ramsey Counfy Stafe of Minnesofa WFI�RE�aS, according to Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, \,j any new construction or expansion of existing facilifiies of ten percent or more of the buifding area requires fhe approva� of a development review; and, VYHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Building Permi# Appiication f�. Zoning Map c. Site Pian d. Elevation Drawing e. Floor Plan f. Staff Report l�fHER�A�, the proposed development safiisfies al! applicable rec{uirements of the Zoning Code; and, VVHEREA,�, fhe site plan indicaies thaf the proposed addition would be 20 feet by 39 feet with a fiootprinf ofi 780 square feet. td�VV iHEREFORE �E li R�SC�LV�D that the Mounds View Planning Commission, finding that all of the requirem�nis hav� been me�, does hereby recommend that the City Council approve the development review req�esfi for the construciion of a 780 square foot addition ta the existing business facility located at 2865 Counfy Highway 10. Resolutian 721-03 Page 2 �E i°� FiJRl`W�R RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resoluiion fia #he City Council prior fo approval of the minutes. Adopted fihis 2nd day of April, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Deveiopment Director (S EAL) ., � � ��, IV I I,:, "'" :. � . ., . . �; � � .� �� Ite�ra fVo: 8 Mee�ing Date: Aprii 2, 2003 Typ� of ��a��nes�: Discussion IV(ounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Review Code Char�ges Refated to Pawnshops The City is in the process of amending its Zoning and Business Codes to allow for fihe reguiation o# Pawnshops in Mounds View. The City Council adopted an Infierim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which directs the P[anning Commission to review th� zoning implications and io recommend applicable provisions. Thus far, fihe Planning Commission has discussed this issue afi their March 5th and March 19th meetings. ,� . Precious Metal. At the March 19th meeting, there was discussion regarding the possibilify of adding language fo the proposed ordinance to reg�afate precious metais dealers. Mr. David Przetyski, a Mounds View residertfi who is proposing ta open a Pawnshop in 11�ounds View, fiestified that he currentiy hoEds a Precious Metals Dealer License and anticipated obtaining one for his Mounds View business as well. There was same confusion as to ihe purpose and intent af such a license and why some cities regulated if and others did not. Roseviiie's ordinance, which was reviewed at the March 19th meeting, includes very specific requirements pertaining to precious metals deaiers. I did some research and learned fhat a precious metals dealer license is a State requirement. The Statutes, which i have attached for the Commissian to review, address persons or businesses that dea{ in precious metals. Th� County in which the business is located se#s the fee and issues the license. {The State indicates fihat persons engaged in the buying and selling of coins, b�[lion and ingots are excluded from needing a precious metals dealer license, though I'm not quite sure why.) Ta include language in the City's ordinance reg�alating precious metals dea{ers and requiring a local license for precious mefials seems redundant and unnecessary. If the Cvmmission agrees, our draft ardinance wi[I simply reference Minnesota Stafutes that such a license is required. Impact on Police Services. I asked the City's police departrr�ent to investiga#e how much additional work would result if a Pawnshap located in Mounds View by inquiring wifih police departmenfs in cities where Pawnshops already exist. The resufts of fhis investigation clearly show that Pawnshops are resource intensive, which means that s�ch a business would demand more police time fhan would a typicaE business. The Cities of Maplewood, Blaine, Coon Rapids, Roseviile, Fridley, Anoka and Spring Lake Park were contacied. Ali of the deparkments con#acted recommended we require the busin�ss to b� on APS (Automated Pawn System) and al{ recommer�ded the busir�ess NOT be allowed ta deal in handguns. The departments i�ldicate an average of 4 io 10 hours a week are spent working or� pawn- related issue�, which more than justifies the annual fees and per firansaction fe�. Pawnshop Repoi°t April 2, 2003 Page 2 License Requiremenis. Issues that will be addressed under the licensing provisions would inciude application, investigation, license term and renewal, hours of operation, separation be�nreer� similar uses and ali other operationa! requirerments that would be associated with business iicensure. Annual license fees, per-transaction fees, and investigaiion fees would be esfablishec[ by Counci[ resofufion, however sfaf� continues fio support the following fee structure as outlined in the last report: o $2,500 annual fee o �500 investigation fee o $1.50 per transactian fee a$5,aO0 performance bond in force far the life of fhe operation Attached to this report, in addition to #he draft Zo�ing ordinance fihe Commission has aiready reviewed, is the proposed ordinance language fo amend Title 5aO, Business Licensa Regulation. ;� f ! : �x. .. •, , . � , � . Staff recommends the Commission review and discuss fihe attached information and provide direction �o staff regarding the proposed ordinances. lf the Commissior� determines littie or no additional revision or updating is needed, staff would draft for the Commission's approva! resalutions recommending adoption of the two draft ordinances, with such resolution being , considered at your April 16, 2003 meefiing. `'' �a�..� C-�i.c�ccm. James Ericson Interim City ClerklAdministrator Attachments: 1. Proposed Zoning Amendments 2. Proposed Licer�se Requirements 3. Precious Metal Deal�r License Requirements and Application ;; � #':� ': x' �: �; - ��,� � .��:,=; _� i :� �: � - � � � ` � ;;. a � '� �" -� ` ! , �� _ >, , �� ; _ � � � . �` ` : � ` -. ��. � � � � " ; � �� 1 . � _ � . , ��. i ; � � � ._� � � �� , . �; � �� y ,; ' ', � � . � �� , r. A � �.�. , � THE CiTY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTIO�J 1: Section 1102.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code per�aining to definitions is hereby am�nded by adding new definitions as under�in�d to read as fol[ows: ,r,�:.: : �.�. � i ��. � -!:� - =:�; � . - y�- . • . . �:i � . � ` .�� r -.'' � . .�- � - ♦. � -�'' ' • - �: �,� . � .. : . � > '�. '• �' . �' y - � ■ -a' s ••;� ' . �; ', r . �. _ �. � 1! . ,' : , _. ,� . . r'. ; r. ! • - i i: • • - ' f � • y: •• .�. • ' � • � ' ��` � ' . -..�. � ,�'..� .' _ �. . . ..-�. ! . ... � . . � - •�'� ; •. � �� _ . . :.-� . � �" � �_ �.. � . � �' ",,Ii;": �, _ . ,' �" � • �' •' •, '. . � • - " �� •; • ' �. � � .: . • -, � '� � ` • • � • • • - � _ - r • - . f - • • :,". y - i • • .: • ' '� ♦ . �: � ` � _ , . _ � � - - • - . • , - , * t r . - ■ � - ' • - .: , _ �: - . . - ' . •. �: .. r .: � a. '• ' •-�• ' •. .i •' . • - s. '� - • . ' • - - r • . �' ,. a � . • s r: • . • • � � ,� •. . • . . . � _� ,,.• - '•. . �' , . • : � a.: � �� .: ' f . � - . ' �, �. ' • -�. . ' �� ' ' � : ' � ., ��,.. • � . ' � . �� ! . : ._.. . . . . . . �� / �.' • . � • �' :� • - �'. • � �� ' - : • ' - � �. ` :� . �i � a . ; . �. ., • � .- � ' �:. • • - �' � _� � # F - . 'f. �: , �. � � _ . . • �� ' : .. . . .. . - . �., . ' � �� . . � �' . � � ..' ' - . r . � , s� � - �. • ' s � '. All existing subsequer�t subdivisions within Section '[ 102.02 ar� hereby renumbered as appropriafe. SECTION 2: Secfion 1115.02 of the Mounds View Zonir�g Code pertaining to P�rmiited Uses wifhin the B4 Zoning District is hereby amended by alphabetically inserting �he following u�ader�ined uses: ... .: -.; -, .; -. . :.: . �. :. , .i / .� �,•� -� SECTION 3. This Ordinance becomes effec�ive #hirty (30) days after ifs publication in fhe official City newspaper. Read by fhe City Council of the City of Mounds View on this � day of , 2003. Read and passed by fhe City Council of the City of Mounds View this _ day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: Jam�s Ericsor�, Acting Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney , � �.� �-'' �. #" - � ; � ..: _ �„ .: ,_. i. #� ; �, : � .: , .� � .-. ,� � �; �° f �. :. . ,.. : �s ' ` � � ; ' � , � ' �`' � �. : T � - - _.. .. : : i i• ! 1 � � i:`, �; � ,' �._ '."��.. ,..�; : k � � �� :�` °_ „ _ �_ �. . ' � ., :. � ' � w. � , _ . . � � �. . � �� .., , � THE CITY OF l�OUNDS VIEW ORDAIf�S: SECTION 1: The Mounds View Municipal Code Ir�dex is amended by alphabetically inserting the folfowing sarrderl�r�eci iext: -. � . . _ �� .� SECTION 2: The IVlounds View Municipal Code Table of Con�ents is amended by inserting the following ur�clerlir�ed i�x�: ., �_ � � . " �� . �'-:f. ��.. .. ..::.... ...... SECTiON 3: The Table of Contents for Title 500, Business License Regulafiians, is amended by inserting fhe following ur�derlir�ed fiext: Pawnst�o�s .516 SECTION 4: A new Chapter 516 entitied "Pawnshops" is hereby added to TitEe 50Q, Business License Regulations: Ordinance Page 2 _,;..�;�.. �; . ■ „.. ' } . � �, . ; �-� . :i ` ', . • • a. 1: �. � � 1 -�:' -a; r 1 %- � • � ,', • � .. ,. . 1 �." • • '"r' - 1':-•. . 1 c •. t • t: � • . 1 : � . R " .. : .. �; . . _._.. r.1' :�;' r s,� ■. �; " i " � .r ' � �: �' . ` ,�. ' a s �� .�, , � �.. ., .. � __ ..,.. __ . . . ... . . . _� ; . � , �, � - � ' • ��. '� � ^ .-' �� -' • _ � ,- � �� `� • �� I - � � Y i��• • R�'_ • � �' . ^, " v r!.' ' "' ., • .' • ' 1 . � •. . 516001 PU��OSE: The �iiv Cotancil mf the �iiv of IVlour�ds i/iew finds th�t ; pawnbroker rec�ulation is appropriate b�cau�e s�ch actierifiies provide ar� oppor�u�ity for the comm6ssion of crimes ar�d their conc�a�rr'�nti because �uch b�sir�e�s�s have the abi#itv io receive ar�d �ransf�r s�oi�n prop�r4� eas6lv and quickly. ihe City Council al�o fi�ds ti�a� cor�sumer proiection �°equlaf�on of su�h activities is v��rrant_ed because custorners of s�acF� bu�in�sses �requen�l� seelk #heir s�r�ices durir�q iirne� of desa�rate fi�anci�! circ�€r��tar��es. °�o h�lp the Cifv off Mounds i/iew tv bet�er requlaie current anc# future p�wa� businesses, decrease and stabili�� costs associated v�rith the rec�ulation o�'the pawn indust�, ar�d i�crease ider�tification of crirninal ac��vities en the �awr� ind�astrv throuqh �he ti�ely colle�fion ar�d sharinq of_�awr� ira�s_action in�orma#iar�, this chapier �Iso irrv�p�lernents ancl esfiabli�he� fihe reqa�ir�d use of fhe Au#omated Pawn Sys�em (APS). . 1� �' � � � � � - . . :.� : - .�� ' .� �� .; � .. : �� .; .. . . . f , 1. � �.�� , � �; �� .�' �� f, r.. J � i � • ! �i � ��'��. fl � � � � �. � ��'� � � � � �'. �; � � . �' �. } � ' � ��.. � �.�� :� � � + � ��': A a " � � y �� - � •- . � . _ _ _ _ ., _ . . ., � : � � -- ■ - � _ �. .�' . - - � �. � . " �; �'. ' - �; � • R ' ..:_ • � � � ... � .... � * � : - � ��:�. � ��. - � . : � .. : "t .. . ' .�. ' !; > • , • • , -R � -. _ ... �.., ' ' � ::� • .: ,�j ' f ' �: .,� . . �..,,� ' : '� - . ' '. ,-,-.. � ' ... .,. ..:. �� : �,� � . '' f ^ � �� .� ��. :1 ' f; _. � ' ' �.-' . •,. � . _ . i �. � : ;" ' ' .c` • . �� ` '. . �: -. � �. � : .� . •.� ' '. � �. ' -1 .. 1 • -' , �' �' - i ' � .:. �-`. •.. - '�.. ' � f' � � � .� �. • f - � � �, j`, � �' ~ ' �' ' , � . �: (� " „ i, "' # , y`a _ r = a "' - �; f� �. - . r `� •�� ^ ' r. ii • +: ' :+ � • • a . • • � r �;� �, s �,�^ : •r � s � ! � s. , �; - � ' � ' �. r " [� . . . :, _ � � . � , ; �' : i . - - *, �r � �; 4 � �. '- � ' � • �. • �' ' :�:. � • i�. .�: � �' �'. ' /1 � . " •� �:� ' ' �� , ... .. .. � � .�.c ' ':' �' � :� ; � . � � ::-. ..... .. ., . .� �... � ,� � ,.:. . - .� . � --�. . -.: / �R� : . -' ' . . �- ' .�: . �R- �. - �' - � �i � - ' - �:,: ;' � �"�: .: ; �, ....: _. .- �1 . • .-: `, . � i ' _ i. ' f „ , � � � . ' ' ' . , �._ _. . - ._ � a.. .: � , '�, f : . . . • � . � R. � -. . ... . . � 1: " �' • • �' � 4: �� • 'Y �' i� � • . • •: � ' " f •�. - •� � . � •'� - � �' - - � � -: . f . . :�:. ♦ r'� �' • � . . '�,� ' ` � !. • i; , _ , .. .. ..� �' � :i •�.' � :� ' !�.' • � -'f- • a s' i ft � •:•" R��- .. _., I, ,,: � +_ : . � .. .. � - �--: • • .:, . . .. : . . � : . . ' •� �� ' ' - � .. :� ._ _ . . � � �. � ' !.. . � ' � . ',. � `. � . . l. r. �! -t ►! . �, �` . • �� ' '_ . '� • ' -�, . � `�'�. �� . ^ . ' " ... ' R. , : ' :^.' .� 1 ,�! ^ �. . #� � . : � . . . �. • :. ,�, �' " '�. ! �': . ' �1 �: .,'. ' ! r• . • - • : �.` �' �: .,: �. ��• i. , �, 3:. 'l. • • ' • *. .� ' � � �:,' • " �; � � :` A ' �i � �, � - } �� . , i ' � � . �■ � � . • '., 'a- . .�t �- • � �' .�i .�' i: { _ � �-. : � -* � ". r! � � � �'.. ^ �:. � '. '� �� : ' ��,. : �. ;. ! � t.�. �; ��. • : �'�' • ;� � . Ordinance Page 12 .. — '.i r'� _ . � �� __; . —� �� ;� - ;._ � �r .: �: :. -�� . [ � .: • -� r �. � �s . .� .� .� , •� .i r: �. `.i r '�i _ �� ".> .� .. ��-�! • ' ��:s • -� 11 �: -� " r, r. ' ,.. r� • ,. ::�' . ,`,,. ' " -� Ci�- � :� . �,.-- - *, � i,;. � i. �: � *' t ' � . •+ ` -� '� `� : �: '� • " ' :�1. • .' � ' �� <�: • • • • • .. �: ` • • : •:� �. • . !, ..:. r, 1 �" i._ � : .. + �; � ' .f, . �.. � ' � �.. . �: , . � - .�, �, • _ _ • a , • "� �" �� . � � •` �. �' � ? � : ! � � ��. ' !:. .; •. : f: .. • '�. 1 �. ' • /. ^. - '.: � �! SECTION 5. This Ordinance becomes effective thir�y (30) ciays after its pubfication in fhe officiaf Cify news�aper. Read by the City Council of the Cifiy of Mounds View on fihis � day of , 2003. Read and passec4 by the City Council of the Ci�y of Mounds View this � day of �, -'� 2003. � � Jerry Linke, Mayor ATT�ST: James Ericson, Interirra Cierk / Administrator (SEAL) �--*� � � � •- City Atforney .:"; '* i �: � � ,�� , °E 325F.73'1 Defiin�tions. SubcEivision 1. Terms. For the purposes of �aws 1981, chapter 333, sections 1 to 17, the following terms have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. Precious metai dealer. "Precious meta! dealer" means any natural person, partnership, or corporation, either as principal or agent, engaging in the business of buying secondhand items confaining precious metal, incfuding, buf not fimited to, jewelry, watches, eating ufensils, carKtlesticks, and religious and decorative abjects. Subci. 3. Precious metals. "Precious metals" means silver, go1d, and platinum. Subd. 4. Item containing precious metal. "Item containing precious metal" means an item made in whole or in part of inetal and containing more than one percent �y weight of silver, golc� or platinum. H I ST: 1981 c 333 s 1 325Fo732 L�censeo Subdivision 1. Requiremenfi. Except as provided for in subdivision 2, it is unlawfu! far a preciaus metal dealer to engage in or transact any business as such without having a vaiid license as provided in section 325F.733. Subd. 2. Scope. The requirements of Laws 1981, chapter 333, sections 1 ta 17 do not apply to the following: (1) iransactions a# occasional "garage" or "yard" sales, or estate sales or #arm auctions held at the decedenf's residence, except that precious metal dealers must comply with #l�e requir�ments of sections 325�.734 to 325F.742 for these transactions. (2) Transactions regu(afed by chapfer 80A. (3) Transactions regulated by ihe Federal Commodity Futures Commission Act. (4) 7ransactions involving ihe purchase of precious metal grindings, filings, siag, sweeps, scraps, or dust frorn an industrial manufacturer, dentai lab, dentist, or agent #hereof. (5) Transactions involving the purchase of photographic film, such as lithographic and X-ray film, or silver residue or flake recovered in lithographic and X-ray film processing. (6) Transactions involving coins, bullion, or ingois. {7) Transactions in which the second hand item containing precious meial is exchanged for a new item coniaining precious metal and the value of the new item exceeds the value of the secondhand item, except that a natural persen, parinership ar corporation who is a precious metal dealer by engaging in a#ransaction whicl� is no� exempted by ihis section must comply with the requirements of sections 325F.734 to 325F.742. (8) Transactions be4ween precious meta{ deaiers if both dealers are licansed under section 325F.733 or if the seller's business is lacated oufside of the state and the item is shipped from outside the state to a dealer ficensed under section 325F.733. (9) Transacfions in which #he buyer of the secondhand item containing precious metaf is engaged primariiy in the business of buying and sefling antiques, and the items are resofd in an unaliered condition except for repair, and the items are resold at retail, and the buyer paid less than $2,500 for secondhand items containing precious metals purchased wifhin any period of 12 consecutive months. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 2 r ... . . , . + Subdivision 1. Appiication. Any precious metal dealer desiring to engage in �� or transact business as such in any county of this state shall file an application for a license for that purpose with the auditor af �he county ir� which the dealer desires to do business. The appiication shafl incfude the applicant's name, dafie of birth, resident address, and locations of the proposed principal place of business and branch offices within the county, and other locations within the county where fhe app(ican� infends to holci secondhand precious metals. If the person in charge of the business or a branch office is someor� other than the applicant, #he name, date of birth, and resident address of the persan in charge shall be stated with the location or branches indicated. If the appiicant is a corporation or partnership the name, date of birth and resident address of each officer and genera[ partn�r shali be stated. Each appGcation sha[! be kepi by the auditor �or a period of no less than #hree years and shall be avaifab[e for inspection only by emplayees of the county auditar, #he county attorney, the attorney general, or by a peace officer. Subd. 2. �ee. Each applicant shall pay to the treasurer of the caunty a license fee in an amount determined by the board of county commissioners of the county to be necessary to covsr the expenses of administering this lice�ing function. Subd. 3. Business Iocations. A precious metal deafer license shall authorize the p�-ecious mefial dealer fo transact business only at fihe Iocatian or locations designated in #he (icertse. Subd. 4. Term. A precious metal dealer �cense shall be valid for a period of one year fram the date of its issuance. Subd. 5. Branch offices. Each branch office shall be operated under the same r�arne as the principal office. Subd. 6. Posting o� license. Every precious metai dealer shall prominently post the dealer's license in a conspicuous locafiion at the deaier's principal place of business and a copy of the (icense in a conspicuous location at each branch office. Subd. 7. Posting of prices; weighing. Every precious metal dealer shall prominently post [n a conspicuous place and in fetters exceeding one ineh in height the minimum prices per ounce or pennyweight #hat are currently being paid by fihe dealer for precious metals and a warning notice that unless o#herwise informed, the prices offered are based on the meltdown value of the precious metal, rather than the value of the item in its existing form. Precious metal ifiems shall be weighed in plain sight of the prospeciive sellar on scales approved by the division of weights and measures o# the department of commerce in accordance with sections 239.011 and 239.09. Subd. 8. Public record of licenses. The county auditor shall kaep a record of fhe licenses in a book provicfed for that purpose. The book shall contain #he same information as required on the appiication for the ficense; pravided, fihat the applicant's resident address and date of birfih sha11 not be recvrded. The book shall be open for public inspection. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 3; 1986 c 444; 1991 c 198 s 11; 1 Sp2001 c 4 art 6 s 77 325�.73� Identification of sellers. Every precious metal dealer shall require a seller of secondhand i#ems containing precious metafs to present to ihe dealer af the time of the transaction an identification card of the seller containing a picture of the seller and the seller`s address. H IST: i 981 c 333 s 4; 1986 c 444 325F.735 Records required. Every precious metal dealsr shal! keep a book at fhe dealer's business location in which shall be clearly written in ink, in the English language, at the time of each transaction, or as close thereto as possible, the following information: (1) an accurate description of every secondhand i�em containing pr�cious metals bought, including the type of item, number af items, brand name ofi item, if ar�y, engraving or other id�ntifying features of fihe ifiem, if any, and a description of any gems atfached; i (2) fhe amount of money paid; (3) the date of ihe transaction; and (4) from the identification card containing a picture of the seller, the type of card presented and ihe seriai number of the card, if any, and the name and address of fihe person selling fhe item. The book, as we11 as the it�m in the possession of the dealer, sha(I a# all reasonable times be open to inspection by any palice officer of the ci#y Wherein fhe business is located ar the sheriff or any deputy sherifF of the county wherein the business is focated. H1ST: '(98i c 333 s 5; 1986 c 444 , -.,. .. . .; . .- .. Every precious meta! dealer shall keep in possession af the dealer's business locafion ar other location within the licensing county from th� fime of ihe fransaction or as close thereto as possible, for a period ofi no less than 14 days, every secandhand item containing precious me#al purchased by the dealer unless the item is purchased or consigned from another dealer licensed under section 325F.733. The ifem shaiE not be altered at the time of sale and shall remain unalterecE during fihe required holding periad. H1ST: 1981 c 333 s 6; 1986 c 444 �.�, . .. . .• ..; The sheriff or a designee may by written notifica#ion require a precious mefiai dealer licensed in the sheriff's county nof to sel! or alter a secondhand item containing precious metal if the sheriff or designee has probable cause that the item is stolen. The item shall nof be sold, altered, or removed from #he licensed premises until authorized to be released in writing by the sheriff or a designee. The chief of police or a designee may aiso exercise this same authority for licensed businesses, within the chiefs jurisdiction. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 7; 'I986 c 444 325�.738 irading. 1t is unlawful to trade or barter in a manner intended to avoid idenfiification and recording of transactions under sectians 325F.734 and 325�.735 and payment under section 325�.741. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 8 ':i j � �, j�. .. �: ? � � i ' ' �f It is unlawfuf for a precious meiai dealer to purchase a secondhand item containing precious metals from a person under 18 years of age unless the person is accompanied by fhe persor�'s parent or guardian wha is identified and whose identity is recorded in accordance with sections 325F.73�4 and 325F.735. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 9; 1986 c 444 325F.74�1 Paymern# !ay checP�. Payment by a precious metaf dealer for the purchase af a secandhanc{ item containing preciaus metal shall be made only by a checl<, clraft, or other negotiable ar nor� negotiable insfrument or order of withdrawal which is drawn against funds held by a financial insfitution. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 10 325F.742 Covernrr�erntal subdi�risions may regulate. The provisions of Laws 1981, chapt�r 333, sections 1 to 17 shall not be construed as prohibifing, or in any way limifiing, or interfering with the right of any governmental subdivision of the state to regulate or license precious metal dealers within its jurisdiction in a manner mare restrictive than Laws 1981, chapter 333, sections 1 to 17; provided, tha� transactions described in section 325F.732, subdivision 2, shalE not be � regulated in a manner inconsisFenfi with Laws 1981, chapter 333, sectians 1 fia 17. HIST: 1981 c 333 s 11 325F.7�3 Grimir�al per�aliy. Any person who violates any provision of L.aws 1981, chapter 333, sections 1 to 17 is guifty ofi a felony and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more fihan three years or to payment of a fine of hot more than $40,000, or bath. HfST: 198i c 333 s 12; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11 325F.7�4 Civi1 penatty. The attorney general ar any county attorney may institute a civil acfion in the name of the state in the district cour4 to revol<e, deny or suspend for a period o# time the license on the ground that the licensee has violated a provision of Laws 1981, chapter 333, seciions 1 to 17. For this purpose, fihe attorney general or county attorney shall be invesfed with the additional powers cantained in sec#ion 8.31. I# is no defense to the action that the sfafie has adequate remedies af law. HlST: 9981 c 333 s 13 u's/�4/�UU's U1:48 NA� BY27�23646 CANON �orm Pto. a�ai5 (9-2�-91) [�j Q02 � � �ha �,�s�. �e��x�n. I.iCF1dS� �id 1�B�d �1� � ��r�� ' � �� _ � � ��►S�. � tam. t1t�, 8S c.w�v� �°P• er aru�� ldid90 foe 8a�d in behalP ot �;�;.�. e� rwu .o��: u. �. � � �=u � K g ��. ¢� "� �'�°' %�) hexeby m�kke �pptica[iod pursuan& to the �faavisions of 1Ninnesoia SBatutes, Ctiapt�r 325F, for a license to eagaga an or tr�nsact business as a Psecioua Rqetai Dealer in ' County. Suciness N�me , Princlpal Business A�dre6s �SYnC O� QVdUCS' 6f �S9[dC�� aGS��1eS5 fdami� af ManagesliPaopeie�ar of Prira�ipa! �usioess � . ,; � � , «: f l�� : i .: -: . , � � �; � i1. _ .. _ � :�,. ,,.�,a.: y► i..; : ,. ,:, f -.-.� ,: � 1. Brat�oE� Offlr,e �ddress � 2�Ia� of Ownee olBusiness �JC��eat ) Ida�e of Ia�anagerlProprietar af Businass %f applicant is a partnership or corporafion, iise name, �oSiliOAltlfle� datc at bdrth and Qhone onmber o� all individaats: � � '� ..� � _ I swear or af�um undar oath, under pen�ldes of perjury, that all statea�encs made in, the above epplication are true and correct. . q�a� Signature • � rrm-n�ue��ssa�ss,n�.oaa��ouxarne Snbseribed and swom e� befos� ate� olais � �y og� . i9� s€crra�vae o� xaranr �istx q� rn� o�. . ;; uaiL4izuu's u1:98 t�Ax 6127828848 CANON ; `y -; r . , < � :. ." . ° � ' . .�o„ ," . ' � y� , ' . � ' ; , .. � i_ F � — l�joo3 R , -. ,, :. �.' . � ' ' � i ��. ,. � .'.., � ... ` y_ ___ . . , rr: .. . . . � � ...,.: � ....... . , + �. �.. � � - � � � a � � i .� . .. . a ._ * r . . '. , . . . . , . . :,.� l � ': � �. ♦ l�� _ � ' • ' . . - . . . � . i • - ' •' - .l. .,_ �:. �,�.�■ ; .. -'. �-y � , _ .''.� ^• •' ��.�, . � : � "?: �� .'#� + . �,-, , � � �� ' �- ° ti � ��, �� r - f �, � • - ! � . t �: • . ,,, r .... „ � � .. !" .: . �._. - _ �� _ � .; . � . , � : , : , .;, .. . .. . ,. y. � ' : . � �, - ; , � �- i - �' +.'.: - ' �: -.. � Dep�i$[ii�n4. This auihorizaii�rt si�ali �xptce or�e y�ar from its date. L� Copy �� Li��nse Applic�ti�n A�t�.ched i�rinied �arn� (Incl��i�g Full �liddl� Nam�j J -� Sfgnatur� _ _ _ � � ��u��l� � V 02 �� : � ..:. � �' � ...� 4 �: I ::. � � ��' ' � - N1i�n�sof� Siatut�, S�tiora 1 i�.�2 r�qutr�s �ver�r ��t� an� I�ca9 lace��ing �g�r��y to v�rithh�ld the i�uartc� or r�r��eal of a licer�se e�r p�srr�tif fo op�r�t� a�usines� oe �ngage in an activi�y in �lnn�sota until the applicant p��s�r�ts acceptable �vidence �f campt�ar�c� �i�h fhe 1lVork�rs' Comp�nsa#aon insuranc� coverag� �e��irer�i�nt of MSS Ch$pt�r �76. The infot°rraation required �s: 4h� n�rne of the instarancg corr�pany, fh� p�licy n�mber,,and d�te� vf coverage or the perrn� to s��f-ir�sure. 'T�ais °srt�ormatian �rfll be c411ected b�@�a� licenstn a etc and re�air�ed in thei �ies. �`his'inf�rmation is requfr�d by law, �nd licenses �r�d perrrtits io op�rafe a business may noi b� l�sued or re��wed if it is no# provided a�tdl�r is f�i��fy sfa#�d, it may r�sult in �1,(�0 penalty ass�sse� against �h� app'icar�t �y th� C�mrnissior�er af the Departmene df Labor ar�d lndustry. ' � ir�surar�ce G�m�aa�y Alarne: (hlO� the tnsura�c� ag�r�A) Policy�#: Dates �f Cover��e: �o t am not ��qe�ir�d to h�ve �1ior�cers' Campen�a#ion Ii�bili�y coverage becaus�: { ) I ha�e no empioy8�s ( ) ! am self �nsured {includ� �ermit to self-insure} {) t have na �mpd�y�es w►hv are covered �y ti,� VV��e�s° �omp�r�sation law (ihese it�cla�d� spv�se, parents, children, and certain f�rr� employe�s) I certify tha� the informatlar� p�ovided abov� is ac��raf� and compiei� and that a valid VVoa�cers' C�rnpensa#ia� policy wll! be kepi in eff�ct at a11 tim�s as req�ired by �aw. NAME: (las#, f�rst, middie} DOtNG �l1�IN��S AS: (bus►ness narne if different �han yc��ar s�ame) �USIN�SS A�D�ESS: C(T!', �iATE, �li�: � PHONE: ( ) , - — ; �� . ; vo.`4..c�uo vi:4m rnA o1Glgzati4iS L'ANOId C�joos �OC717 ��e �� . �� Pursuant fo Mirre��sota �iatu�� 2✓f3.72 °�ax Cle�r�rac�o 1ssa�a�tc� �f �i��ns��P ihe lic�nsing �uthorit� � r�q�ired to prc�vide ia 4he Min��sa�fia Commi�sior�er of R�v�r�� Yo�r �innes�ta t�usin�ss t� od��t��ivn n�tmbe�' �d 4E�� so�i�l s�cu�iy nu�b�r of e��h licens� apptican�. l��ot�r t�e Minr�esota Goverr�rraeni Pra�tices A�i an� the �ederal Privacy Act of 1974, we are required to advise yesu of the f�lfa��ng regarding ih� us� af thi� anforrriation: �) Thi� info�r►a4i�ri m�y be used tca deny the i�su�nce; renewal �r �ransf�r.of your lic�r�se in the e�ent you owa the flAi�n�sota i3epartmen� of R�ve�ue detinquent t�xes, p�n�Bt'ses or intea°est; �he lic�nsing authority �viH supPfy �i or�ly to ih� �) Upon r�ceiv€ng thts #nforrr,ae4o�, i�iin��s�t�� Depar�m�e t�he fl pa�tme t f Re�rerru��r�r Y, �PP�Y �'► s inf�rma�ion to fnforrnat&or� Ag ee � the lntem�l R�v�rrue Service; 3� Failure io ��ppl� thi� ar�fo�rnaiior� may jeop�rdize or deiay th� proc�ssing of your 4icensie�g inst�r��c� or re�re�eal appll�at6on. , � � - . . : � �: .: . � ��.� . , . ,� - : . -,�- ■ � • :� _ : � � . �, • : � , �. : � �� . � � � �r. � _: �. ; �r =.R '"�_. !. :"" � . , �� ► ..., i 1;, ._ ' • � ` �. '' :�-. ' . � . � � � x: .�. � ^ . � . *' ' ` %. '� ; ,... f � �'. 1 ` 1 i �.� � , �°il� .St21t� ' �� SOCiAL S�CURIiY �: � � �. i� � . . _ �. . � - BIJSINESS NAME: ; �s�- City �ta�e �4p u �,: �. * � - -; �- � ' , �t, _ _ _. s_ . , ,- .- �. -. • . . - _ . ' SiI�iVA7l1��: ��i�� P120C�+ �+ 1)II�GS OI' '�'I�E+ lr/IO€Jl�tI)� VIE�3' PLAI�iI�III�1C� COIVIIl7ISSI�I� CIT'i� �I+, NIOIJ�11)S �IIEVb' . . S� Y L�4./1`VT�y j�"�Il�[1`VL` �7��1-1 �te�u�at• 1VIeeting I�at�c� 1.9, 2003 li�louia�s Vie��r City Hatl 2401 �Iigbwa� 10,1VIou�ds V�e�, I�IN 551�2 �o Calt to Order The meeting was called to order by Chazr Stevenson at 7.00 p.m., 2. I2oli Call Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: , In dex Commissioners Sco#ch (excusec E� Code,for Pavanshops 3. Approve IV1an�tes ;, Zwirn., Miller, and Johnson Pabe 2 ; 4 Citizens k�eques�s and Comments on Items li�ot an the Agenda ; Nea1 �inser addressed the Co�nmzssion and explained that a�i error on the City's part has led to a stop wvrlc order being placed on the home he is building. He further indicated that the home is consn-ucfed of concrete and ali but a small portion of the concreie walls have been erected and it wouid be cost prohibitive to move ihe home bacic out of the setbacic at this point in the project. Mr. Zinser asked the Commission to consider the extenuating circumstances and grant a variance when heard at the next meeting. l�/Ioean�s Vre�v Plaa�uing Comtniss�o� �2egular 10�e�tfng Commissioner Zwirn aslced how this happened. I�arch 19, 2003 Page 2 Mr. Zinser iz�dicated that the building official had signed off on the plans and granted the ! building permit but Staff had later learned of an additional setback reqt�irement that newly constructed homes not be any farther forv�ard than the forward most home o� tlle block`and that is the setback requirement they are in violation o£ , 5. Discuss�on pertafni�� o � Code Ainendme�at t� of Pawn Sbops �a IVlounds View. Colnmunity Development Director Ericson asked the Com��liss'ioli to "i dzrection to Staff as to whether they felt it necessary to include langua; metal dealers with this amendment. Mr. Przetycici indicated he holds a precious metal dealea•'s license in I] simply a$50.�0 fee he pays each year to receive a cet-�ificafe lie,l�angs business. He then indicated he intends to file au, application ��ith Ram $175.00 for the license. He further commenteci that he did noi thuak it: include the requirement for a precious meial dealer's Iicense. ; Chair Stevenson indicated he the licensing fee is. Miller Mr. Prze dealer's commen #hat it is avvay to have', check with Rams�;y there and provide ,rning precious n Coitnty and it is wall of his unty and the fee is be a bad thing to io see what the benefit of for furs. be,applying foi`'a pavvnshop license as well as a second hand � covered with one of those two licenses. He further ta talce in.,many, if any, fur pieces. tllat this license is much like the federal iire arms licensure in ;s registered as a way of trackzng if there is a crime committed. ir Sievenson aslced if�awnsl�ops talce in guns. Przetycki indicatedthat some pawnshops do talce in guns but others do not and he does not to do so as it xs nof``something he knows about. asked if Mr. Przetycici would be iaking in boats trailers or cars. Mr, Przetycici indicated he would need a vehicle dealer's license to talce in cars, boats and trailers. He then said that he could only take in what can be properiy stored an his site. >' , � Commissioner Zwirn specifically aslced if Mr. Przetycki intended ta talce in large items such as vehzcles that he intended to store outsid� zn the parking area. , ; ; ;� t , IVlounds Vievv Plannang C�mmission ReguIar 1VV�ee�ing Marcl� 19, 2003 Page 3 Mr. Przetycici indicated that he did i�ot have, and would not have, a fenced storage area so he would be prevented from talcing in the Iarger vehicles but said he intends to take in fhe occasional snowmobile or ATV that can, and wil1, be stored within his storage or retail space Cominissioner Hegland aslced for an estimate of the number of expects per month. he establisk�inent of tl�e busiziess vithin a 3�ear of opening. ,., �arged to the selier of the iteins. Mr. Przetycki indicated the number would be dependen# but said he expects to have 400 to 600 transac#ions per n Commissioner Miller aslced who determines the interest Mr. Przetycki indicated ii is not really ai� interest rate but mon#h. Comrz�issioner Zwirn asl:ed whether Mr. j eweler. Mr. Przetycici indicated he does expect to handle r pawnshop like a clean, well-run jewelry operation operation wiil be 75% jewelry. Commissioner Song aslced stones. Mr. Przetycl�i inidicaie procedure is that item� his operatioal. He furt ensure that ihere is no jeweler and businessu nd j e glass fee of 25% per ewelry as he is a ;aid he intends to run his thei� said he thinks his certification of precious he would do; appraisals ori jewelry for customers but tlie narmal sell as i`s and lie will only be offering the nicest items possible for sale at er coaruneriied that he would be verifying the diamond sizes a�id quality to ake j ewel��y beii�g sold at real jewelry prices as he is a very reputable ui and,intends t4 i�zn a reputable operation. issioner Song as� �etycki indicated issioner Miller ix ;r it was necessar Mr. Przetycici would he talcing in antique coins. talce in older currency and trade it for new currency. icated the Roseville sample ordi�ance was very detailed and aslced to have the Mounds View ordinance as detailed. Directar,Ericson indicaied it was up to the Planning Commission to determine the extent of the detail to be recommended for approvaL He then indicated he would contact Ra�nsey County for further infonnation on the precious metal dealer's license. 1Vloe�nds View P1annYng C'oa�nmiss�on Y2e�ular IVIeetsug I�/Iarcl� 19, �003 Page 4 Commissioner Zwirn indicated that Mapiewood has had numerous issues with brealc-ins at �heir pawnshops especialiy with the high-end jewelry and asked Staff to contact �hem for informatioi� on their ordinance requirements. Chair Stevenson asI{ed Staff to determine what 5ection 301.03 in the Roseville,oidznance refers ta as it may l�ave further usefizl infornaation on the precious metal dealer's license Cornmissioner Hegland asked how Staff arrived ai the recomrnendations for fees: Director Ericson indicated he looiced at other City requirerri wo�ld be required by City 5taff in tracicing the activity of tl Commissioner Hegland aslced if Staff contacted other cities costs are covered by the fees cl�arged. Director Ericson indicated he did not ask but said that it':is r than compensaie for the time involved. He then indicated tl ordinance for review afi the next meeiing. Chair Stevenson aslced wiiy Mounds View;Square is a B4 p is not. Director Ericson indicated it is based;. on the size of tl�e c across the sireet warrants the B� desiQnation to linut the 6. I�1e�t �I�nnfng 7. Adjournmeni; There being no iurtliez meeting at 7:40 p.xn. (The Respectfully sulimitted �' �, �oin�ission,,IVleeiing: Ap�-ii 2, 2003 da and considered the worlc that,; Wnshop. �ctual costs and whether those estimatioii.that the `fees wiil more ; Staff would put,:together an area acrass the street �pment and the �imited parking to keep parlcing in check. .'the Plaruling Commission, Chair Stevenson adjoumed the imrnediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) evelopment Director Txanscribed by: Joan Lenzmeier Tir�aeSaver Off Site Secretai�ial, Inc. i � I ,'.� ; ; � �`;� ,w . A<. ,` Y` f�� ; � � c � • � � , s � " �. � _ o r �; -�;.r rz � &�. � "�° Y _� �"� k a ' :,. k ° x� � s�; � � �; � By Stepben Svete, AICP Ma�er� 2oos AMERICAN 1� P!/aNNli�lG ASSOCIATIOtV llrrat�is plazrt areu is the foeal point of the cammaenity and the settit:g thcat generated the iraitial cancernr �tGout formulrt restaanants �nd ._'.'.:... j tbefr intrusion into a local hdstoric district�—MIKE 1ViULLEN, t�RCATA, CALIFURMA, PLAN�IINC PROG[tAtvf MANAGGR mong the articles of faath that many urban planners 1-cold as self-evident is that Iand-use planning is a tru[y local endeavor. Many even espouse that a town's general plan can influence quality of life through land-use regu(ation. This theory has been at the crux of the New Urbanist argument for revamping development codes. But a fumiy thing happened on the way to urban design perfection-11.merican-style corporate capitalism. The �IcChora of the chain coffee houses, stores, aud rescaurants devouring space in the neo town centers—the very projeas tliac collecr awacds at APA conferences—are at rislc of turning these develop�nents into carhon copies of one another. The result is noc a new type of community at all, but simply a new version of a shopping mall, uleimately conerolled by the same corporations that controlled the old ones. And while the vasc majoriry of inunicipali�ies are still thrilled whefi Starbucks talces up residence in their downtowns or rheir revamped subucban centers, there is a small but inte�•est€ng posse of cities that are going a dif�erent dircction. These towns—call thcm anti-formula business tocvns—have raised die bar on development, transce�iding the rypical discussion about facade creatment and sales tax revenues. They have the vision of remaining a place that cannot be replicaced; sa£eguarding a communiry where retailers and hoteliez•s—like residents—are unique ro rl�at place, and whea•e the geography is somewliere, They are Fonvarding that vision t(�rough the use oF the police power of zoning to �acicle deeper issues of commu�iity econotnics and social ecology. ' f� �I��s�a� �� r�s�� ``'in tl�e last decade, other progressive effores at supporting independenc establis6�nents and fighting fonnula businesses have caken root around the nacion. The Bou[der Independent $usiness Alliance (BIBA), a membership-supported nonprofit organization in Boulder, Colorado, with a sustainable mission of "strengthening and supporting locally owned independent businesses" has supported Bo�ilder County's local businesses since 1998 with joinc rzzarketing, consumer and policymaker education programs, and more. Communiry economists in Ithaca, New Yorlc, devised a local cu:•rency system wirh a"regional boundary [to] Iceep local wealth re-circulating within the commurzity." Since 1991, the progzam has grown co involve some 950 merchants and services. Catled Ici�aca HOU€ZS, the currency is the equivalent to the average hoitrly wage in Tomplcii�s County—$10. H�URS notes bu�r plumbing, carpentry, electrical worlc, roofing, nursin�, cliiropractic, childcarc, car and bike repair, e . o ��a�� -J�� °�-��,�� l//�tlfY �0� �i�i�(L��O d� Prom April 14-25 go onlii-�e to participate in our Asfc the Author" forum, an iuteractive Featux•e of Zoning Newc. Stephen 5vete, r,rcn, will be available to answer questions about this article, Go �o the APA we6site at www.planning.oeg and foilo�v the links to the `Aslc the Auchor" seccion. I':�om there, just subinic your questions about the a�-ricle using an e-inail link. The author will reply, posting the answers cumulatively on rlle website for the benef t of al� subscribers. This feature wiil be available for selected issues of 7oreireg 1Nezus at announced times. 11Cter eacll online ciiscussion is closed, the answers �vill be saved in an online archive available i}�rough the APA Zorzing Netus webpages. ;;: ;';s' , , ': :i S ` :.:i ;a .,° :; it ':; i E ;� i ... .1 SE�ECTEb 5ECilO1�J5 O� YFlE 5�,N! FEtAiJCISC�. CAtIFO�RJIA, REC�UIt2EA/eEB+��' �OR ,� COPdDITIOPdAL USE PE�tAAIT �R8CES5 SRE�fFIC TO CO�PE�1°EOUSES IN TFIE tdO�tiF4 �EA.Chi f�iElG!-lBOR#000� COR�A�ERCIAL �I�T�ICY ' S@C. 722.I. NORTH BEA,CH NEIGHBORHOOD (C} Beverages served in disposable or non-disposable containers for GOiVIMERCIAL DISTRICT consumption on or off rhe premises, ' North Beach's eating, drinlcing, and encertainmenc establishmenr"s remain open inco the evening to serve a much wider trade area and attrace many tourists. : The balance benveen neighborhood-serviag wnvenience scores and cirywide '- specialry businesses has shifted gradually, as some convenience stores 6ave been ieplaced by bakeries, ice cream parlors, a�d restaurancs, ..The Norxh Beach :Disuict controls are designed m ensure �he livabiliry and at[rac�iveness of North Beach ... Small-scale, neighborhood-serving businesses are strongly encoucaged. ' SEG: 722. NOR'FH BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ' AI$TRfCT ZONING CONTROL TABLE, SPECIFIC PROVISIONS 'NOR!THE NORTH BEACH NEIG�iBORHOOD COMMERCiAL DIS'TRICT NOR'I'H BEACH SPECIALTY RETAIL USES Controts: Rerail coffee s�ores defcned p�rsuant ro Code § 790.142(n) (editor's note; see below] are no� permitted without conditional use authorizarion excep[ `to the excent qualiEying as specialty grocery permicted pursuanc �o � 790.102(b) : jeditor's note: see belo4v] SEC:'790.102, SAiES AND SERVICES, OTHER RETAIL. A xetail use which provides goods and/or services buc is not lisced as a separate ianing cacegory in zoning category numbers .41 nc�ough .63 fisced in Article 7 of this Code, including, but noc limired to, sale or piovision of the following ;,; goods and services; :(b) Spec'sa[ty graceries such as cheese, confece'sons, coffee, meat, produce; (n) ,Retai[ coffee stores. As used herein, retail coffee s�ore means, ;(1) A retail drinlcing use which provides ready-to-drink coffee a�d/or other nonafcoholic beverages for consumption on or off che premises, which may or may noc provide seating. Irs in�eiided design is no� to secve prepared ready-to-ea[ food Foi' consumpcion on or ofF the p3�emises, except where a conditional use'ss granred Eor an excepc'son in the Wes� Portal NCD pursuant co the "Specific Provissons for the West Portal District." Such use exhibirs tlze following characceristics: (A) Contains no more rhan 15 seats with no more than 400 square feet of floor area devoced to seating, (B) A limi�ed menu of Ueverages prepared on the premises and able to be quicicly prepared for consumpcion on oc off the premises, Arcata's lead. Still, there is some evidence that concern is growing about che effects of corporate retailing on Iocal economies. For example, in nearby blue-collae Eurelta, the counry seat and the largest city in Humboldt Counry, city leaders are deveEoping an ordinance that would require an economic impact rev'sew for aew retail escablishments of more thazi 4Q,000 squace £eec. Chris Kerrigan, a councilpersan elected shortfy aEtec Eurelca citizens defeaced a 1999 rezone action promoted by Wal-Iviart, says "We've spent millions and more than a decade trying co �urn our downtown aroimd. We need to protect that snvestment." $ut tlie cransferability oizoning protection fi•oni Main S�reec to rhe rest of Amer€ca remains problemati�. San Ftancisco's Jim Davis, cfzief pIauner in ehat ciry's neighbor600d planning uuit, says chat n�imeeous attempts to pass similar local business protecrian and anti-cox•porate laws in tlie progressivc Bayl�ea metropolis have _�� . ; __ _ Instinice foG� Local SeIF Reliaoce (ILSR), tivww.ne«�rules.org Boulder Indepeoden[ Business Allia¢ice (B[.BA), �vwtiv.boulder-iba.org l�6aca I-lours Local Cturency, �vww.ithacahout:s.org Jo No�le, Associate Planner, Ciry of CaGs[oga, 1232 �Uas6ingron St., Caliscoga, CA 94515 il�Iichazl ldullen, atc;i>, 1'lannin� l'rogtams Vianagcr, Cicy oEArca�a CommLmity Devdopmenr Departmenc, 736 F Sneec, Arca[a, California 95521 Jiin pa��s, City� ofS.ta Fr'ancisco Pl;tnning vepartmei�t, lCCO Mission Scree�, Saa Francisco, Catifornia 94103 Sidnie Olson, ,�tcr, Seniur Plancter, Cicy of Eurcl<a Plannino ane� Developmnir I�epartmene, 531 K S�rccc, Eurcica, Californi:� 9550I (D) Severages are ordered and served at a customer service counter, (E) Beverages a�e paid for prior co consumption, (F} Public service area, including queuing areas and service counters, which counters are designed specifically for che sale and dis�ribution of beverages; {G) Beverage3 are available upon a short wairing time, (H) Equipmenc co prepare beverages for consumption, (I} Limiced amoun� oFnon-prepackaged food goods may be served, such as pastcies or similar goods, Q) No on-si[e food prepacation, and no equipment �o cook or reheac food or prepare meals orher than �hac connected to beverage pre�ara�ion, exceyt wheie a condicional use is granted for an exception in the West Portal NCD putsuant to the "SpeciFic Provisions For the Wesc Porra! District." (K) Coffee beans, tea, syrups, herbs and o[lier beverage-based produccs and equipment to make and! or reconstituea beverages or consume coffee, tea and/ or orher beverages may be soid. lt may include any use permitted for specia(ry grocery, as deFiied in Section 79�.i02{b), but ifso, sucl� use shal[ noc include accessory take-ouc food activiry, as described in Section 703.2(b)(1)(C) of this Code, excep� co the extent permitted by this Subsection 790. ] 02(n). Ic is distinct and sepa[ace from a small self-service or large fasc-food restauranc, as defined in Section 790.9U and 790.91 of this Code, or a full-service resGaurant as defined in Section 790.92 of chis Code, (2) k sliall be conduc�ed in accordance witki rhe following condixions: (A) All debris boxes sliall be Icep� in enclosed scruccures, (B) The operator shall be responsible for cleaning the sidewallc in front oFor abut�ing the building co maintain che sidewalk free of paper or ochei litter during its business hours, in accordance wich Article 1, Seccion 34 of rhe San Francisco Police Code, (C) Naise and odors shall be contained within the premises so as not co be a nuisance co nearby �esidenes or neighbors. failed. The strongest proteccions that San Francisco has 6een able to muster is a 1999 requirement for a canditional use permit process speciFic to coffeehouses in North Beach, a measure that appears to be targeting the Starbucks chain. If a trend exists, this creative foray into Iand-use rulemalcing may prove most successFu( in communities thac meec a unic�ue set of geographic and social criteria those that are celatively small in size with tourism-based. economies and progressive- thinkiag citizens, Regardless of the isolation oFthe formula business ordinance trend, communities with them are sho�ving how zoning powers cau address vexing prol�lems. Anti-formula towns have taken a gianr leap roward understanding urban Form by acicnowledging the corA•elation between the built environment—either on A�ain Streer or at town's edge—and the social and economic problems that manifest as a resulc of it. In so doing, formula business ordinances are more tlaan basic urban design protections. They protect community values. r' :', Znning Netur is a monchly�ne�v�lecter published by che Amerfcnn Planuing Associaeion. � SlIhSCfIFI[lORS R[C 1V91LlIfIC Fur �GO (U.S.) and $82 (f'oreign}. W, Paul Farmer, n�ce, Execa«vc Direcror; WiEliam R. IQein, �vcr, Directnr of Research. ZonirryNews is produced ar APA. Jim Sc6n-ab, Aicr, :vid iVlichael Davidson, L•dicocs; l�arry Bain, Aicr, Cay Dolnick, )osh Edw:ads, Sanja}� Jrcr, alcP, Megan Lewis, ,ur.r, t�larya Vlords, ,�iCp, Roberm Requcjo, Lynn Ross, Reporcers; Sherrie blxahews, Assistant Edi�or, Lisa ISnrron, Dcsign and Prodi�c�iou. Cupyright OO20Di by Amzrica�i PlanningAssuciscin�i, l22 S, ib(ic6igan Ave., Suitc 7C00, J�;-`� Chicagu, IL G0603. The Ai3icric.ei� Planni��g Assocrdcion �also 6as ol6ce� ac 177G �fassachuseees � A��e., N.W.. Washingmn, DC 2UO3�; rv��tiv.planneng.org � iUi righrs resecved. Vo p�arc uf cl�is puhlicacwn may �c reprod�eced or i�eilized in any for�n or hy any means, elec�ronic or tneclianical, including phoeompying, remrdi�i�, or 6y any inFormacion smrage and teu�ieval syscern, withouc pecmission in wri[ing froin �he Ame�ican Plannin� Associaeion. Prin[ed on recyeled paper, iacluding 50-70^/n recyeled Gber aud 10% pus�rnnsumer wastr. IVIO � VIE� PL� G CO SSIOI�T April 36, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes a. March 19, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda C1TIZ��iS: �EFOR� S�EAKING, PLEAS� COfVI� io �HE I�O�IUM, AR;D GI\!� YOII{� FULL Np.Ni� AND A�Df2ESS FOR TH� MI�lUTEa� 5. Consideration of Resolution 724-03, a Resolution Reconamending Approval af Two Ordinances Related to Pawnshops, Zoning and Licensing in Mounds View. Special Pianni�ig Case No. SP-114-03 6. Review Proposed PUD Amendment Regarding the Properiy Located at 2442 County Highway 10; Pla��u�ing Case PD03-001 7. Consider Possible Amei�drnents to the Zoning Code Relating to Expansions of Existing Muiti-Family Dwelling Properties 8. Announcen�ent: Renumbering of Pla�nii�Ig Comtnission Resolutions Adopted Apri12, 2003 APPLICA�liS: YOUf2 ATTENDA�IC� A7 i°HIS MEETINC 1� R�QUEST�D. PL�ASE NO°�I�'1( TW� COMMUNIiY DEVE�OPMEhJT �EPARTiVi��lT AT 763-7'I7-�020 IF YUU AR� UtJA�LE 70 ATTEND. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: May 7, 2Q03 10. Adjouinr�ient to Agenda Session AG��A �E��I�N 1. Review Minutes: Aprii 2, 2003 2. Review 19�8 Cornmunity Survey 3. Staff Reports 4. Chairperson and Plannii�g Conunissioners' Reports N:\DATA\GRpiIPS\COMDEV1PIanning Commission�PC Agendas�2003�04-56-03 PC Agenda.doc `: i Item �lo: 5 �lieeting �aie: April 16, 2003 'fype of �usiness: Discussion f � I I� "' �:��. � �°o; Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, lnfierim City Administra�or Ite�n iitle/�ubject: Consideration of Resofution 724-03, a Resolufiian Recommending Approvaf of Two Ordinances Related to F'awnshops, Zoning and Licensing in Mounds View; Special Planning Case No. SP-114-03 � The City is in the process of amending ifis Zoning and Business Codes to allow for fhe regu[ation of Pawnshops in Mounds View. The Ci#y Council adopted an Interim ardinance an February 27, 2Q03, which directs the Planning Commission to reviewthe zoning implications and fo reCOmmend applicab[e provisions. The Planning Commission has discussed �his issue afi their March 5th, March 19th and April 2nd meefiings. � .. -: '�, The Planning Commission reviewed m detail the last version of both the zoning ordinance and the licensing ordinance, respectively entitled Ordinances 719 and 712. The license fees, because they are established by Council resolufiion, are nof reflected in either ordinance. They were discussed at your last meeting, and ihe fees being recommended to fhe Cauncil are as falfows: o $5,009 annuai fee o $750 investigation fee o $1.50 per transaction fee o$10,000 per�ormance bond in force for the life of the operation The only changes to proposed Ordinance 732 (Licensing) from the version [ast reviewed are as fol[ows: 1. Gamblinq. Language has been added to Subd. 1 of Section 5i 6.14, Prohibited Acts, that prohibits gambiing. The language is similar to thaf present in BurnsviEle ordinance. 2. Siqnage. Language v�as added to Section 516.11, General License Requirements, fio require signage conspicuousfy posied within the business thaf articulafes to the public who can pawn and under what conditions. The language is similar fio that #ound in the Plymou�h ordinance 3< Disposition of Articles. ln the version last revi�wed, Section 5'i�.14 required that the licensee, upon requesf bythe pledger, disciose to the pledgerthe name of the purchaser ar the price for which fihe pledged item was solc4. Mr. Przetycki objected ta this requirement on the basis thafi it is foo restrictive, that people buying a CD or movie may Pawn Ordinances Report April 16, 2003 Page 2 nat want to provide their name. I reviewed some of the oth�r ordinances we have on file and determined that while the requirement is common, (Roseville ar�d Golden Valley have similar requirements in their licensing provisions) other cammunities, such as Hopkins and Plymouth, only require this if the item is sold for $75 and $100 or more, respectively. If the abjective of this requirement is fio alfow the original pledger ai� opportunity fo buy back his or her ifem after the iicensee sells ii to a third party, simply requiring a"name and purchase price" would be of Eittle assisfance fio the pledger. Hopkins' and Golden valley's ordinances require the licensee to coliect name, address AND phone rtumber, but oniy if the sales price exceeds fihe indicated amount. As a compromise, staff add�d Subdivision 19 to Sec�ion 516.� 1, Genera[ License Requiremenfis, which addresses the Disposition (saies) of pledged or purchased items. The subdivision requires that certain information be collected on ali sales, and fiar items sold for more than $50, a name, address and phorte number shall be additionally required. Thus people buying a DVD, CD or VHS movie would be excluded from having to discEose their personal in#ormation (unless of course, the value of such item exc�eds $50. } No changes were made to draft �rdinance 711 regarding the zoning provisions. , . . Staff recommends the Commission discus� bofih draft ordinances and fihe proposed changes and if found acceptable, ta consider approving Resolution 724-03, a resofution recommending to the City Council adoption of draft Ordinances 711 and 712 pertaining fo the zoning and licensing of Pawnshops in the City of Mouncis View. �Q.�-a� C��-rn. James Ericson Interim Ci�y CierEclAdminisfrator Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance 711 2. Draft Ordinance 712 3. Resolution 724-03 '� " "�� °��- �.' ; ".; : �� !: f `:� . � " �::� � , � " � e, `_ �� ;.. � � : � �.. � � c, ; , �,�;�'' � � , �_..: .� � ; � ��. � �� , . �. .�..] . _�� : � - �� ,_ � , ti� ,l , ' : _ .` , ,. . . "".,,. *. � . ...' i �: . �. + i. s L_ . � -�.._ �� -�• �! ^ ` ' � ,' �. � � THE CIiY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTIOfV 1: Section 1102.02 og the �lounds View Zoning Cod� pertaining �o definitions is hereby amended by adding new definitions as �nd�rlinecl to read as follows: _ .� . .�. :. -�.:, .-,� . .. : , . .-. ., :. ..' . ... . . - : .- . ....-. . - , ..: - .. . .. .. . , _ _ _ . . -..-.: .... • .., .,, . � , : .° . , . .. . . � .� . . ..- . �- .. . . .; . ..: .,. _, . . -. . .; -. . -. :.- ... (b} T'tae foltowinq are exernpfi from ihe defir�ition of A'parn�nbroker°': any bank requlated bv ihe sfate of Mirsne�ofi�, the corr, t�rol�er of the_ currencd of the lJnitee! �tates the Federal !�e osEt l�s�ranc� Cor ora$ion th� bo�rcf of qovernors of the Fecierai Reserve Sv�fiern, or ar�v ofher federal or siate authorit anc! their afFiliaies; any b�r�k or savir�qs and ioa� vvhose depo�its or acco�nts are eliqib[e for insurar�ce bv th� Federal Deposi# Ins�rance Corporation or ar�v successoa� fio i� and all afFiliates ofi iho�e ban�s aa�d s_avings and loan as�ociafiicansq an� �tate or federallv char�erecf �reciit ur�ior�tl anv industr�al Ic�ar� and thri�t cor�npanv or req�alaied [encier �ubiect fo licens�np and re_ ulati�n b� the depar°�rrr,�n# of commerce. .. .' �..: • ��- -, •. -._ ��- f ". .' �� ; . - - : r. , • • -.: ; . .: . � . All existing subsequent subdivisions within Secfiion 1102.02 are hereby renumbered as appropriate. SECTION 2: Section 1115.02 of the Mounds View �oning Code pertaining to Permi#ted Uses within the B4 �oning Dis#rici is hereby am�nded by alphabeiically inserfi��g the following ur�c�erli�ed uses: � �,. .• ! ' !" '. ..�, �� ' .�: �' �! � �� : � i 4 ` •..;. '�..�, '!- �•:� �^' . SECTION 3. This Ordinance becomes efFective �hirty {30} days after its publication in the official City newspaper. Read by the Gity Council of ihe Ciiy of Mounds View on this 28th day of April, �003. Read and passed by the City Cour�cil of the City of �/lounds View fhis _ day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: James Ericson, Acting Clerk / Administrafior (S EAL} APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Aitorney �� .�. � � ' , �, � ..: - ` �� !_ � ; � :' � '` � ' ', _ j � -_: � � .. � � � �'��: x. � r� � = , �, ` . � � , ," � �� `�. ! � � � ` ��, ::, a � ._ �� . : �� '�. � �" . �, � � � :- ! l : : .. ,:; 'i� - ' l " � �, _.. , • �, �, �': "' � _ ._.. �- . . . . .- , ; , .� %. ,- � ' . � i - . �'' * .� ' . � .. .� '. � .. :: i ' : � : '.:'.. ♦, ._ _ �� , �_ .. . � . .'.,- �, j_ , � ... . .. . . , : . .. . � 1 ., • ;.. ��' � 1 , .- . �' " , . THE CfTY OF iV[OUNDS VIEW ORDAiNS: SECTION 1: The Mounds View Municipal Code Index is amended by alphabetical(y inserting the following car�derlined �ex�: . ,� �. � �� SECTION 2: The Mounds Vi�w Municipal Code Table of Contents is amended by inserting the following und�rlir��d text: - . . , ,: . ; ' ., SECTION 3: The Table of Contents for Tiile 500, Business License Regulations, is amended by inserting fihe'Following �nderfined text: - . . . .. SECTIOiV 4: A new Ghapter 516 entifiled "Pawnshops" is hereby added to Titfe 500, Business License Regulations: Ordinance 712 Page 2 � y; ' � � � �. r � '' • • + 1. !'-, • , .: 1 � � . 1% �.•� s . ,. 1 �;. a '�. �r !-•. .. 1 ., • ' �. . i � i: : � s � �r: �� .� . ' 1 ' � � � � i r R - . . : _ . • +' - � - - � ; � � �_ i. � � � �. : ._ . i ' i � � ' _ �. r � rr • �-!. �, _, .. . - _ , , � • � = '• . . � 516.01 PURPO��: °ihe Cgt Coua�cil of the Cit�p of IU[o�nds 1/iew fir�ds that parn�nbr�ker reg�af��ior� is aptarc��riate becaus� such acti�oties prov�cie ar� opportur�itv f�r fhe cornrnission of crimes ��d 4heir �or�ceafinent becaus� such b�sir�es�es have �i�e abili�y �o recei�e anc! transfer stolen propertv ea�i6v and quicklv. The Cit� Council a&sm fir�d� �hat consoar�er protection requlaiion of such activities is warrartfieci b�cause eustomers of scach businesses frequenfily seek their services durint� tirr�es caf desperate financial circ�mst�ra�es. To help €he Ci#v ofi �to�nds View to better requiate curreni ar�d future ��nrr� businesses, decreas� ar�d s�abilize cos�s associated with th� re_ �alation of the �awn industr�, and _ increase identification of criminal aciivities in the pav�n industr� throuqh the �im�� coflectior� and sh�rinq of pawr� tra�sac�ior� i�forrna�ior�. T'h�� ch�p��r alsca irr��ler�nnents ar�d �s��bli�hes �he required �ase o� the ��aior�atecB Pa�►r� Sys�ern__(AP� � , a� � • � � - .�� . � �� ,� . �� . ,� � � . �� .: ��. . ., �.. += '�� --, ,- i,`. ,. -.,.. -=.. ,- � .- �i � • � � i �:'�: ' .�'� � :� ♦ 7 Ordinance 712 Page 3 .: r. i;. i , - y ,:• ._ ;. `,, ; . -.:., � �: .. �...� • • �.. � � , � _ �, ,,s :;, r. �., ��..�� i. �� .' ° -• �, �� +' ; �_ . : , � . • • •, ; , r :r . -�'. ,�.- . •�• �. :. .. � �• - .• -. '. •., . �'. -. __ • ^ _ -� r.: ' �.^. -' ti_; ` , . �. • -s: �, ; •, - - i.- -,. + �,> - -!+ r - � ,. a, • •` •• � . . • � • • - ' - �., _^ - �.y `-�-�' :'i, .� �� _, r._.. �� ° - - i a� . ��1 � ' a . . . ''i•' 'r , s. • a. : _ . ..." , ��, . � * f � ..s- r, + �; •' !':= •, r•)• � •: '• � i" s•sc-. i. �. 'r ��y ��: � . . . . , i ,. � s:, r* , ._. , . , i. : i . �; ., - ' , ' _.: " .; , ` ' • ' •,. ; . ' i . , • .,. .� � .� � , . . , _. � � �. , �; � _..' ,._: � , � .. - � ' .l • '_._. � ^ " .. " � � .� -. _. . ' �„ '. � � , ,::.. �� '� • � �i • . ..t .: i . '�. � �: � � �: � • a �' ±. Pp,�lN�ROKER° A person er�qaqed �r� �vhoi� or ir� pari in fihe ��s's�ae�s mf lendi�g mor�e a� the �ecurit of led ed oods left 'rn awn or �r� the busine�� of urcl�asin 4ar�c�ible personai �ropertv to be I�fi �� pavvn or� the concfition that ifi m� be redeer�aec! or re�urchased bv the �eiter for a fixed price within a fix�d period of time. The followin� are exempi from fih� ciefinitio� of "pa�vnbroker°': ar� bank re ulated b the �ta�� of IVlir�ne�ofa the com �roller of the currenc of �he United Sta#es the Federa8 De osit Ins�rar�ce Cor oraiion the board of overnors of the Federal Reserve s s�err� ar anv oti�er fecler�l or �taie authori#v arod their affiliatesq anv bank or savine�� a�d loar� �whose de[oosi�s or accoursf� are e6iqible for ir�surance by the Federal D�posii Ir�surar�ce Corpo�afior� or any s�ccessor fio it anci ali affili�t�� of '�hose b�nks ar�d. savinq� and loara as�ociatEOns° an siafie orfederafl ch�rtered cr°edit ur�ion• ar� ind€a��ria� loan and thrift companv or requlated I�r�der �ubject to Bice�sinq and requtaf6on bv th� departrrteni off comrnerce. � : �; ■ _ - � �: . : r: � . . • . . . . • - > • s: ,� - - -� �'� � - . � _ ' �. r�- �-'�. � , _ , ,_ •• • . r . _. -� .: - . . • .�: � � ... . � ..: � � ��: :- � ' �'. • � ��. • . �..: ' �, '- ' • ' ��. _!: • -- ,__ .! f •�� . •� . � r. , .. . i !�� . � .�_. ♦ � �.l� .f �' . �. ' ` .' � !:� : . . � :i '. ,.. � .. ��. - ' • �. � �. • . . � , ... . . . ,. � i � � . � . .� � � � � =� ��. a �� ` � � • i` ' . ,. , _ : � ��> � ;. � ._ • �.�:� � •:�:.�: a �� .. •� �.: - E . �. i` •.. �� ; • . s _•.. , r. - . • , .; - � ,:.,. • . :. � . , : - .' � . . •': _. . _ ..,. , . � • .. • y � �� - �. s� - . . - ,� � . . . . �� .,. �� .�: �: r � � - �: ..- � .. � s � _ ,.� � a� _ �- ��' s �; �� ♦ . � � � .�. � � , � �• _.' ' 1 - �. ." - • ; .'. ° : . � • ' !� • r- r �. .�. .� �. � -��• � �- -• �. r. • = � . • • . i a � • • i • - ! � - �:' - �;' • '"�-' '-: '' ` �' t` '• '�i' i -• �r �. �'• a �� • � �. � • � • ,�,- r. �. -r r-� � '• � s �- � l ' •- ' " � • �-. �:• ! 'i • � ! �'.• • � '�: '� ` {� ` �i. �-. �. 'i • - �, -- • i_ � •� � -�, - • ,. • ` ,i: . •. �I ' /� .� ' • � f '. `.. a ,; _ ^ . �� : �: �'� [�. ♦ . #:: ' �: � . �� !- -� � ' �; • '!'. '. }� ', • ' � ��. • :� ^ �- .� .. r . :... + �� , � �: � �� ' t • � � * �. �i • ! �� .!i : ' �: •'. . � R: .: �R I •- ! 1' !�. � • f ' �'. �.• f ' • ' f f. - �. �,� '.:•: �: . 51 �.03 LI�EN�E REQU9��. No p�r�on shall �x�rcise, carry o� or b� er��a�ed in ti�e trade or busir�ess o� p�wr��rok�r vvi�hin the ci�y unless s�eh ��rson is ce�rrer�tiy ;� licensed in accordance wi#h thas ch�pt�rtc� b� a paw�brok�r. Pavvrtbrokers �habl �Iso _� main#air� and displ�y at al� firne� a�urrer�t and valid �re�io�s �ietal D�aler Licer�se issueci b R�rnsev Cour�tv. _ _ .� :� : `� ,• � � � �' �� , l �: . ° .ar .` • �: _ .. �. . �:•: •.��:� ♦- ' •� i . i • - • • . • f��:� • • � • .. !� • ^ � � ' :� �� • � f' �. ' �. F. �., �. � � • • : ' •'. , ' •�. ��1� • � � �i i-� . ! •� -�� ► � • •�� -' . ♦� X, .- �� _ - � '� . � � - �, 4 •- •. � s t _a�: .•:�! r' • �. • �- '• -�f . � � i• s ' �� r' •'':� • ,a'; • . • ., _._�; .. •' . �.' ^ f :!. � `- .�' _ �. - , �. > ►: • l •; " .� • ' �: ! • '!' , _ • � � : �: �: ♦ I f � �� :�: t- �� ' • .: �� .� • �- � 1�, " Otdinance 7i2 Page 5 �< : � ^ �-�� , � - . �. _ a� �- � � , . -�� . - •� *'�. •:. . - - , '• . , - . - •- _ .- s`:: . . ., , . ,, .- - - ._ . , .. , . • - :. � � • . . �. . . . .: + � _ _ . , �; ; .. � .. , . _ . ^ . - - �.,.� .�. .* � -. . . .'.,. i • _��,.�-� . • �;• .:� � . �- � ��- �• .�.� •; �- ��. ��_, .,.� .•'�, . � ^ : •` ; � : - ' - � - r , . � r: : •: . . : . - . r, _; .. ...- ' --- • •,: • . i � ' . : •'�. a ' •. �! ' : �i; ' . ��. � ' " � '. ' �. � ! , a' ' 1'.. •: �• � ., :a " '.� . � �.. � • �.-. . . • .�._. � � � .. . �:" i _ . ' . • .� .: . . i. :�. � � �: . � �. �. � ' .�:: �' • �: • • _. � .. � ' • ..,. ' � !-. � , � . �. . • ' ' +: ' �': .. * ' . ' .' . ' �- • � �'' ' .: ' . _ _� '� .'� • . � . • ., '' � � � � . �_ � ,: • �- � � ' s�:,. . I ..... . . - ' ' ,: .,. . �; :.: R: ` .., ..;' � ' . 'R� � ' : �^ �. � � � ' . . • � � �: � * . ... . - �� ...� ' ...�.. . . . � � � , _. �: .. . ;,� ��. � " � ' :! '- :i . i l. � . . .' . .� .. � �i � , ' , '.. � .: .. .i ' : ... f. ! ':' � -- ' �' :�� - '. : } , _�'�. *,.. . .� .��: ,. �. �.. .... � . ; �S "r_' .�.. � ,/. ,.. , . . �.� �t' i. R, " . . !: �:� .� r '.- ,� -� :� " !. • � : �: ��:� ' • I• ' ' �'. . � .! ��. �. . ...._. , � �:� . ��. �. '. .� - , ;�. . ;i: i`. i' • •" , . ;� . . __. � �_ f '__ +- . ....* . �. � .. � � - '�' - �. � �j: �i � � ��. . : ' : .. . � �.� , . �. . � .. : . ' f� .. 4�� )1 �f � �� -- � : �_ . � �. �. a . .�> • • ' '. •.. • �� ^ ' .::,: �, f'.��. �. ` .. .... � • ��i � ' � � �- � .l:,. . ':. . . � � , , � Subd. 2. Cos� of Inv��ti ation. Ar� ir�vesti at�oro fee sh�lt be collected vvi�h eaeh appiic�tion for� a Parn�nshop iicense #o cover ihe ex ense of an �nvest� aiior� needecl to assure corr�pl�ar�ce with thi� cl�a fiere 'The inve�tiqaiio� fee is establi�hed bv reso€�stion of the Ci#y Council. If fhe invest�qation and verification proces� ws conduc#ed outs°sde th� s�a�e of Ntinr�eso�a, additio�al �ees mav be req�ired r. � ::�: �� i �� : .. i' ' " •, . - _ _, �'. ,. . , � . - . ;. _ . . . . . , . -. _ � .: . , : , - -. . - - � .:. � ,_ , , .- -:� . _ .. _ . , __ - . .. . ,. '-, . . . � ;. . �. ,,. � �. .:.- :.- -. . - -_-: , ;-•� :,, .;•- - - :..� . �-,, , ? .. _ .. . � . . , ..,; , . ..� , . : _ . -:. ... - . ,. . . - - .; 4. � ;� . - . • : • ' . , .. . ; .t _ .. • ty �;' : _ . �:. . r' • • '. " � ' . , r .. _._ _ .. � , . . ., i: �; ' : � � � i: . � : . . : .... " � � - .: . . '. ' �.< ! ' ;' . . : � ��. � �. a • '�. � . ,a� �.-�', '� • Ordinance 712 Page 7 � . . � - .' - •. � ' - •; • r '. • :, • . ` "r, � -- :° r ' • - �i 4 , ° - r � ! � .� . � .., �, , � � � .� � ' � :��- ./ �. � �.•• ��'� � ;� � �� • �•� �{1, �," r r�; �F •�i �,, : r.. ;# �• • !• -• • •- -�':r • a . �: • : :� � • . � �: ' € t � - - . . . _. _ . �. � � i., : .. ., � , �,. � � . �ie y' i_� a�� dr: � . � "- i_�,, � '� ::: .�:�..- ' -: � . ,: .:• ..,_.; . � .': . ' �-''" . ' ;! •, I" : •..�: y .. _ .,.: . . .. • t, ' •�. : � � �: ' � � # '.�i • � � '��. � • �! ' . -. . .- / - .. • •. �� : • �i '. �: . . ��, � .. , �. -. . ,� ' i �� • � � i !�'�. .i' ! " • �• .``. � _a, ..��' l.�� • -'- '" •a�.�-..� �� r�� r !"�• �'�� ♦ :� : •�. • • � :l�� r�' !;: a.:' ! ! . . �, . , i .,.. .. . ', , �,. . ,;� .. ., �� ` ' . �� :�� .: � .� : . . f .:' r .:.:- � .. � ,! . . �.. �. :--�: � " -,. � • :f '�' .... . � •` . • ;- � :. . .. ..,. ' :�: . � �� . • ' . • - . ... .. I, ;. : . , .. , �. .. : �. . � � �'. � � ' • • ' I� ^ •�� 1 • �. '� ! •� : �. ' ` •: # b Daie And Time: The date �r�d iim� the iterra of propert� was r�ceiveei i�� ihe licensee. and th� ur�iqaae aipha ar�dlor ra�arneri� transactio� identif6er that distinquishes 6t fr�rrr� ail o�her tr�nsactions in il�� licensee's records. Tr�hsaction icie�tifiers rnust be a�siqnecl cor�secu�ivel�� . ,, . �► -- . ,.. .- . . .- .� . � s • - s' •'; a `9 ) ` • • •, *,:: �i • • • !. ;' � � • ,�: ' ' • • ' • • • ' �' i �.�b ' . � . .., ! .. • ' � ,� ^ i► .._ ... ... ., ♦ ' . �: � •.. :. . •_ . ,',. ! , . - . ' . • . .. .. � �.�: . •: �� • --. f •. .- .. - f . • . -: ! . � + '. .. .. �.. • :: - • ' : � '�. f 11•�'' �• i # i �- �, i', s' • ' �'' i' - �, . .*.. �: �' fi !`. ."t� : ! � i' " � �' ' ,. _r. • i] ^ , f; ' ` ►; . � .'�..� . .. .. '_^ � . .. . . . ;. � . � ;... � . . ..., (� .. � .a. , :. `... .. '. . � ... ' , Ordinance 712 Page 8 1 j ,. . .,�:: � �,. . ,:. . � . . .��. _' f' .. .,: • - , . �. . '. �. :,. • !�. :� ' ' !: � � r. > � � <� � ' �` ��:'�' ' ��: : I � � �. :� �' • !"� � . • � ..: • �� , � ' • �" ' • ��, � . ..._ _ ,.. _ �.: :. �. -:..�, �� .. +, .. �: • � �., .i' i � - . a' �� • �.; • • � � t ' !- � •� ' • �' � ' i . - i ' ti � : 'l: ` • ;. �{ •. . ' #��, R ��. ! � :i: ! ' � • ' i •' t !: ' �. � .(. ` ♦ � l ' • �; ' ' 7��. , � � _ * .� . . .., _ • , •".'a .-.�'� ' �.;��:� ' . 'i`:^ : ' .'... . ,.� ... . .. .:� ..: � .. � . .. ��:+ - .� :� . ., � � � •� , . � . � ` .y, . , i _ �.: i: �'; ' .: �. ' � . '. � '�,� •�.}�• .�� •' . � ' f�� . -• "': � f:� • � •� !� .� ..:R .! ��:' . ! .� " r � ' „i_: � � � � •� ! • * • :.. ,� � . _.� _ - . � � �'- a � ', • �,'•a , • ; �.- y' y`� - ' # � ' ,'• i .' s.: • r '�.. . - � 'R: ��'�, � � • • �: ' , ! - �° • - a � •� � - �- ,. .'. '.' _ , f..'. .. .' •' .::�..�, -`..._. ..':: + ,._..a y'• �: • • r.i . !"._' F, �: ,� �' . � '. ,� ' l�; �il � '� . ,:�' i , ':. , � . .� . • ' �. � ' �.,� ��. �� \�. :'- r :� � �� • �, y: � -' / ^ f��. � �-: f � ' � ^ --. i i' :. .'. � • •�: :.. �;i '. ! . � ' � ' - -- � r .�i �' !., �:. -.f! • � �.. ,. • • _�= � � � �� Y '- )i � --J � �� ' �� • � �f ' • ' �'. , � ' R` i •- ` • � ' .: '�) • ^'. •�� ':� •: ��i' • . • f�' �� a' . •i • � �; �• � f: � � •- ` �-' ��. ► • • • • . : '. '' :�. " f �.� � ^ ��: � . • � �: . �: � �I :� E .: , . �� '' � • .,.� . '. �' •: ��.•. • • . ^ �.• ` :�: ' � � � � ' ., � . �, -, _.. I• ! ' ��: ��. �� • . !i " • ,. .: + , . ! � -� - f �� •� �� . •." • . �. • � � i r.►� ' �. � �. • . i � �..f . • ^ �' '.�' • l' •� •.,. . • ' '. !. •� /�. •�. , '-'.i: .i� '. ^ �; �': � '• f . �!� • ... • - �i �: .� � l,. �; ' i; � � - .• .. • '� - �:�: � �: ' • : :• � �� . • ' • ,•�- 4 - � ' i • ��- ��: ^ � � �- . � �� : � ��' � f . �� : .� � =. r; - !. ' • • ,!i ' !: � , i. ' � i � � ' �: ! }� :!' � 1 � �: ! !� • !. .-.. � �', a: 1. �� : � �. !: , �: ;, . ;.. } ; ..., _ : ... . �: . , . , ... ; ,: . .'. . . , .. ... '. �i .. � ' � � ' . ��. ♦ . : . , . �; , " � � E' f ..�l�_�� +� y; � .. • �' : '!` �" ':� :! ' � f�. ' �: '. ' � �. � : � • �` . Ordinance 712 Page 9 � ' ;, - � . i: ' ' - � �_ . ._ • . _', ' � � . . . � � r _: _ . : , . . E _ `_ � � � �,- �. ; ,. . . • � . _ � - �� . :� _ �� • � �: �' • , . '. • : • - *,., � - :a � .. - �`w � . ' • • -' . ^ • -. , �,. . � < . _ • �; ` s • f: �- ' � . . .. • #.. -. '. :•: � � �, .� ' •� �� • �� - � ' 1 .� ��. . � . ' . . .. �. � � : .: ' �� ' �� . �.. ' ' �'�� • • �� .: � �. � ��? � � ! .. :. . � � � �.: j. - � �: . � ..- . � _.. ,- � � .: ., , � -. • , . , . � � `�. i . . .� � •��: .... �-. i • .� • � • .. '� , . • ��-� . � �,� � � �.. � �: �� "� � � � �f � ! . • ' .� � :� ' •; � . /�. . � � � ,• •. , � . : � . � . -. ,� ;� ' : �. .� �: . � � ' � � . i � � '�:� • �' ■ -.. .... . , �,. � . .. � � ,. .� • �: . •.:^�. � .i � � ` I. . .�' � '.. �- ' :r, •'�. .��. � . � + .� � � . _ � - . � � .. � �. .... .. . • � : . .. . ... • . ,�� • .:.. . •' . • - � . • . - ` , y - r r = .: ., " * ' ' r. • a - s ; _ . ;,. ., . �' ^ , . - • - � ` ,. _ . _ , ; ; .. : ' _. �: • . � .... ^ - .. . . . . _. ; c . � . .. , .: R _, • !'� '��. R�� 1 f .:! ; . .�. . 1" 1: � . , � ; !- ��. y ;: . � � •:i �. , �? . : � � �.. , R,• "' � • •! •` •`. • � �'. i !' � �` a f � . - � - 1 ' ' . _ _...^ . . . • •-� `,, • " ' •: R '. ,• ' � . ' R - �; s ��'- ' • : : ^� .s • i..� • � .: � • -..:, . • ' �a: � :. ., . ... - � ' � ' .. f ' .:..: ` • ' . � i '_ � �... . �. • •. ,., �'� . • •. .. � ... � . . ... ' ' � �i ��,' . � • •� a- -� 's •- � •`. • ' - �: � - ' � - � . . . , � . :� . . `f • � ' • " ". . - . .... . . ..� • • _._��. ' "� ' i' . ' - �� - • � �� . �i .: � ' :.. , �' -•: � .. s • .: �. ' 1 li -.• • _ _ _. • • - ^. r, - �- , r - .. � �;�.'. .�.:. � ':'�' �' i. �. •' •� f;' ... ^,. " .: _ .. . _. -.... �'... .. �, � . . �' ,.�.. . �,.:: � �.; ..' • �:..:. � �: � ..:7 � :.: ' .-.: . �:� •.��.. • • • (�; �r : ..� .� ".s�" � :.':� .�.. � �� .: .+.' ' :: • �. .'�. • •'1• .l�. '+.... _�..... � ,, .. . . .. ,. .. : '• . ' 'f,.' . :'•. "4 ; � � • � .� .• . . . �. : ... . � .. � . -. . - '. ��, � c '. ' ♦. • � } • � � •. �. +� •-� � • . • � 1' �• •':�. . l 1: � ( '��. �' �' . � ,�f ��• • r '� • � � �'! � r - c � ' ;�i . .:♦ � . .• • ., s: �. • ` -�- • • r �'� ` - • �. • f "� i � • ��, ., � :: i • .� s � �. lf � ;� � Y � •. a •� . r -a: ,ri �'.R:. � e � � �;i •f !( ` ^ a. R �; i # • � � - r� � •- 's• ^ �' �' t Ordinance 712 Page 12 � � • ` � ► • ♦ ;. _ �: ' � ; .� . . - a: .:• � � i • • • �' ' •'; '•' r' ' � ! � i: r . • - : . - s � r : , • - . . . : 1 1 1 _ - ' , , ^ : •: .: • ,r; • r • 'r - y ' � .: � �s' 4.-.:, � '. ��,' " ` ?: : . �:' • •' ' .! � �. .i �- .� f �� ' � � '- �� f i ^ ' �: ' �' ��- � .. . . . . ... , � . .._ , ... . . - - .. . � , _ . ._. :: -. �� : • . _ �� -,,; � " � , �: ' �.. '� �- ; •: :�. - • < -� • �� -. , '� ': : �: #'. ':� � _ .�- -.. ' �' ,:' �" . -, :� '. .. : ,!� �: '�� ' � •. '�. � 1. �- � �- � . �- � . �' ;: '. .':• _ ! .., • , ... � .: ..: :! ' -: ,. � �� . �; :i �� ! �` � • � � " # � •:: - �- •�. • :!i � !- � '�1 ! � i�. . -� •� # � �: 1 *. ' �1 • � i ' ��: , •: ., � ... . :• • ' ..: .. !, .�i ' • � i - ' '; • ' . � �. . • . ♦' f. -: � • ' ' I • • �i :'. ::, �. ' . '. f •- .' • � • ' ; i'-. �: �, i� .',. ... , . �, � .:: • � Subc1. 2 Notice, Hearine�: Except in the case of a sc�sper�sion pe�clinc� a hearir�c� or� revo�ation, a revocat�on or �u�pension bv the Cii� �ouncii sl�all �e pr��eded� wr�tter� not�ce to the Iscensee and a_publ�c he�rinq. The_written notice ��►all q�ve �� least ten 10 cia s notice of the �am� and lace of #he h�arir� ar�d shati s�at� the nature off the charqes �qainst 4he pawnbroker or precious metal dealer. The Gouncii ma wiihout an notice sus �nd an (acea�se er�d�n a hearin on rev�catior� for a pereod not ex�eedi�q thirtv (30) days. The notice m�v be served ut�on th� pawa�broker bv United States maiE addressed to the most recen� adcfress of 4he bt�siness in fhe lic�rase ap�licatione •' -. j: �' .! .;�' ' 4_. . �; .4 � ��I � . Y 1 r �� " ;�: �^: S. . . •� -• � : .. 7 ' �: �. � • ^�'�:^ i: •r. �, 'f� �� +i � ;��. ^ � Y` f � • �; � '. i R ' �: • l f .#s � ' `a ' • ` �. � �� ! ' '* Ordinance 712 Page 13 �' �:.' , _^: � • �: .: • " f : :,.. ' • ' s � '� .. .. : , , . � ., : . a' R �C � ' � �; ` � A. �' • • � � . ` . ' ! �. ,�� ': l: � .. ,. '. _ _ .._ , ' .:�. • � � ��}' " � � �: • �� .J � a :- a - ... , + .,. ! �, �' R � f . ��: ' • :� '.• ' R ��i ? ! :�. � •- • .F: " :l�� .- � :�' `, :�.:. : �s' � �'. .. .tSs. . ' _t " • ' . �' . � � :, � ' �: 1�: � • �.- �� :. .. ! ' �, • � . �.. . - � � .. , � .•: • _ " ..� !€ '� � s, :_ . � ' i '1 • . : � ; �' R '.. "' ' ��. '� ' • . �; •�> � .. r. • � � " I� •�- .. �: `��:: � � ..��. . '� . �� •: �..: f � •` • -. .. '. ' : - � .. �� .'. � . �.:.. ,�. ,. s � •, .� ,: a' , ••- .� - + : •: ♦��. s l: k � +" ♦: �. •�, 1'��. � • � �: i. �' . . �.;• . .: •�- • � � . • � + �� :. ' � .: - �� f •; . �' ; ' .: �, � " ,•. • � �� - � f: ', . . .�, � � � �: �� . �... . �. _.. � :�' f . �:� • ' :�: ! •. �. . ,,•� .i ; " �. <�� • .•� . . _ . � . .. .., . + .. ... : r� � �. _ • �, • , � ;1!'� ' i1 .� �i �: r� � ' � �a s ! ,; �� . � � � ` �. .... . . � a � �� '�� ' � �� ' :: � �:-" : • - r ai � �` � � + ' ; r r �. � � � • � � ,; "'`•: • �i �: • • • � �' �. . •: - • -. � - - s: :�: . a s • " � - a r • !• ^ � ' • - � • • � s • • � � . • ! . • �' :• - y �` SECTION 5. This Ordinance becomes effective thir�y (30) days after its publication in the ofificial City newspaper. Read by the City Council of ihe City of Mound� Vi�w on this 28th day of April, 2003. Read and passed by the Cifiy Council of the City of Mounds View this r day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Nlayor ATTEST: James �ricson, Interim C[erk / Administrator (SEAL) Ordinance 712 Page 14 p.PPROVED AS To F�R{VI: City Attorney � � � i � �' ' � r � 1: : � � �� ; � �=; � , � � ��' '� �� ',', � ��' 4. " � '�,�� ; " " �' c. _; — , ." �,' �'- �. #;., � � � ."..`�� . , • �.... 11 :'_. , � . � ��_ � ! .. : +�-_'� . i �� 1 ! '�� . ' , � � . �� . � = . �� ' � - � �� : �� : �: �. . � . _._ � , . t � . � ` ��_; �� ' �, ' , � � �: i . • r `. : a � , , � ?' f' . `" 1 .: ;' �IHERE�iS, on January 27, 2003, the fVlounds View City Council adopted Inferim Ordinance 709, an emergency interim ordinartce reguiating the presence and siting of Pawnshops and related establishmenfis within �he City Of Mounds View; and, V�HEREA►S, Ordinance 709 directed the Mounds View P(anning Commission to conduct a study of this matter and make recommendaiions as to the adoption of amended afficia[ controls or regulatians to fu{fill the City's legal obfigation to adequately protect the public heal#h, safety and welfare of ihe community; and, 11VH�REAS, in response to said direction, the Planning Commission studied this matter at fiheir meetings on March 5, March 19, April 2 and April 16, 2003; and, VVHER�AS, throughout the process fihe Planning Commission has encouraged interested parties to provide comment an the topic; and, VUHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed ordinances from neighboring communities, ordinances from communities in which Pawnshops have already located and review vario�ss sections from fihe Minnesota State statutes, ai! of which helped form the basis for its draft ordinances relatir�g to ficensing and zoning requirements for Pawnshops in the City of Mounds View. IVO�, iHEi�EFOR�, �� iT R�SOLV�� thatthe Mounds Vievv Planning Commission recarnmends approval of amendments to Title 1100 and Title 5Q0 of fihe Maunds View Municipal Code respectively represented by c�raft Ordinances 711 and 712, attached hereto as Exhibii 1 and 2, respectiveiy. Resolufion 724-03 Aprik 16, 2003 Page 2 �E IT FINALL.1( R�S��.VEC➢ ihat the 11�ounds View Planning Commission directs stafi to forward this resolution and the two draft ordinances to the Cify Council prior to approvaf of fhe minufies. Adopted fhis 16ih day of April, 2003. Gary Stevensan, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Inferim City Administratar (SEAL} N:IDATAIGROUPSICOMDEVIPIanning CommissionlPC Resafufions\724-03, Pawn ordinances.doc � �� r��79 �l��o ;, u — �i ., — - .. .\' I ' `� I � 1� ' L Jim Ericson City of Mounds�Iiew 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Jim: I► ' 1- ; . ' - " ` ; • r� `_ � i. � .•- ' �•.� • - !► " '. ;: ', ;: r � � e 'cl.� �� .. � . : '. April 15, 2003 Thank you for sending me a copy of the proposed Mouttds gliew pawnshop ordinance. Frank and I have reviewed it and have four primary concerns. 1) O�the eight cities rve investigated'�, seven have �old times for purchased (as opposed fio pawned) items of beiweeii 10 and 30 days. 'We �vould like to propose a hold time for purchased items in A/Iounds View of 30 days, which would allow ample time for �the police departrnent to review any questionable ifems, and still prevent needless cost to the licensee from holding unproductive inventory. 2) Section 516.11 �ubd. Ii and Subd.19 impose a significant recordiceeping burden on Iicensees. VJhile we fully support comprehensive records of all items received and the persons wk►o sell or pawn il�em, requiring a record of all sates would seem to serve no useful purpose while adding a subsfiantial cost in staff time and record storage. We would like to propose t�at if a purpose is identified for keeping records of sales, those records only be required for items soid £or more than $100, sunilar to the Hopkins and Fridley ordinances, In addition, we are concerned that requiring disclosure oiF a purcha,ser's na.me and address to a seller would be an invasion of the purchaser's privacy, and could even compromise lus or her personal safety. Two fizrther notes — these two secti�ns se�tt to contradict the speci�ic exclusion of sales from ihe defini�ion of Reportable Transaction in Section 5 i6.02. Also, neit�er Golden Valley nor ]Plymouth has any pawnshops, ax�d the Roseville ordinance is new, so their ordinances are currently untested. 3) While it is uuusual for pawnshops to handle handg�.uis, none of the eight cities we contacted banned the pawn or purchase of'sporting and ga.me rifles and shotguns. We wonld like to propose that Section 516.11 Su6d.17 be amended to prohibit the purchase, pawn or sale of handguns, iuily automa.tic rifles and sawed off shotguns, bat not rifles or shotguns that are popularly used for gatne hunting. 4) The Roseville ordinance inciudes a provision (�eciion 311.09 O.) which sets out a hoiding period of Lwo weeks for items received under a Precious Metals Dealer's license, `We would li�ce to suggest that tl�is provision be included in the Mour�ds View ordinance, since esiafie jewelry wilt be a large part of our plarined business. In addition, we would like to suggesf that passparts be included as an accepiable form of identifiication under Section 516.02. City of Moundsview p. 2 We appreciate your giving us the opportu�ity to participate in the planru�g process, a.nd we look forward to working wit.�i you as the City of Mounds �Iiew moves forward with this ordinance. Please call me at 6i2-229-0555 if you have any questions or comments re�arding the above. Sincerel , _/ � � �� David M. Przetyclti President TJ1VI, inc. dba The Jewelers � Spring Lake Park St. Paul Columbia Fieights Coon Rapids Fridley New Brighton �laine Maplewood 30 days 30 days 10 days 30 days 30 days I2 days 60 days 10 days `i , Citv Andover Apple Valley Blaine Bioomington Brooklyn Center Columbia Hei�hts Coon Rapids Fridiey Maple Grove '�, `` ivlaplewaod New Brigt�ton New Hope Piymouth Richfield Roseville Spring Lake Park St. Paul Pawn Hold 30 days 90 days 120 days b0 days 90 days 120 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 90 days 12a days 90 days I20 days b0 days 64 days 30 days 90 days PaEVnsl�op Os'dinances — Comparisor� Bue�Hold 2 days 10 days b0 days 30 days 15 days 10 days 30 days 30 days 34 days 1 Q days 12 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 60 days 30 days 3 0 days Firearms firearms altowed with federal firearms license no firearms regulations store in locked, opaque containers firearms may be purchased but not displayed f rearms allowed with federal firearms license no handguns, automatic rifles or sawed-off shoiguns no firearms reg.�latians no firearms regulations no firearms regulations no firearms regulations firearms allowed with federa( firearms license firearms allowed with federal firearms license no firearms regulations no firea.rms regulations no firearms re�lations no handguns, automatic rifles or sawed-off shotguns no firearms regulations , _ .,... .. � _ �i � �_��_ � �.'� _ � - ' � �° �M. �� " _ � �. :: • _ -:..- . : �: ' �': ^ '` � �; � . �" � : ' ^ •` ��.�; �_: ' " ^. -� .: •-. �' �," . _. �, :� �. •��. �1: �.'� ��', � �� " ��-i� r �� " - - - � � �� . . . � . �� • .` � � �; �. �',. - _ . -�_" '" �, * �,- � • , * R. � - . � � i�'� � . _!" ,�' � � �! � _�:.� ` .. � �� ' � � � _ , � , . , i t . !: : ', . . ' � � f . �` • . • i. �: ^ : ��' r: � _ �. ' — � " i • � �a .��. �: � ':. �' �� ♦ - � = . . ' `.� , `" - %� _ - � . , �� ' ��`�.. � j' .. . -� � �* '' .� . * � �� • , � � -. �� - .j � � �: � �_" � � r- � . �' - - , � _ ._ . . • .� . , � � � ` • . !. � :�: � � `� �.. ' . �. " . .� s�.. � � � . . . �: � �-... . * .:. .' * . �- � � �: _. � „ ,�. _ �� . t . ... , � f�, ' � ,� ,�. � :... : . . , . , . �� , • ��...'.: :� �. �. .� � . � � . .� ' : �. ^ �'. � ^ � �' � . � i �� ,. .. '�: �, ' . A� r' #, • � ��"r ! . 1. ! '� .� ' +r�:. ' .� R. ! ` �' . � � �'� • • ..; . 1 .� - �; . � '' � � :� � . �i � ,!� ! - , � " ,,; y. �.�. R_ �. . ,.^ ��_ e_ i` � :� � / • i • i •.." �.*' *. � R• f � • ` • . �- . �� ! !: . ► � ' - �. � _ � + _ :3, � ' , .: .. .. .... � ..�� . � .... � .��. l.�. � �- � � • � �.. � �., �. � �- ' r� �: '. ��, .a . :. � ^ ' � � � ,� �. .> ' � :!� . ��: !` . • 1 •a �'I�s amouni should be e��l fio �I�e �ghest %e cha�ged b� adjaeent m.�nicipal��ies. 516.07 �- License Fees � °� an��unt shattld be e aI to t�.e �.gYtesi fee cha�c�ed �y adjacent rnux�cipaliti�sR 516.0� � �ill.abie °Pran�acti�.on Fe�� • '� a�ouant �hould �e equal to the i°oig�.e�fi f�e chax�ed b�r ac�.�acent :�ur�..c3paliii�se 5160I 1— S�.bdo 1d � See cc��.�e�ns abo�re �n 5� 6.02 f , I. � ii . � : _ , � _ , ); . ... :� ''a� � ,�1�. ' ��:l� _ _ � , : . - .- -. _ � � � �: � #. �. _. . . � �� . � :. _ ,. _ _. .,. ��, � ,� . � . ... . , ` . . ' -. ., . . .. ..� ,. ,. .' ' .. .... ' ._- � :_'� � . � �� . ! �,. • � `� . t "� ' " , � � ' • ._ � �� _, ��. � . ,� � � , _.-. � �.. ,_ _ s ^ �� -� - ' • , _� � ' � � � � � - �•,`-""• �= - ��-�' ._ i _ ,. . ° '�. :� �'�.. . �- _. ,, �-� ,. -��-1, -.... . . .. . . _..... � , � _. . .,+. - � �. , �'� � ` r� .. .'. � . . � !� '' r ` �# ' i: � }. ��'. � � � �! � � a' ' � • • - �. •� �� - �_' � �. ��.' � � i: ' !` � !n ' � � � � • �� ."- �' �:. � i � i � � �� . ! �� ^ �:. , f. �� i � S' � � � .� � • . • '. :�. '! ` � � �. � } - � � -: >f �" a ♦ -: '� . � �� i, i �`� !� "� �' _ . � ��. r �� i. � � _:.__ ,.� I�em i�o: 06 �6ieeti�g Da�e: April 16, 2003 Type o�f �usirt�s�; Commission �usiness / : /.. ..i:: � . :.�: , i io: Maunds View Planning Commission Frorn: James Ericson, Acting City Administrator [tern TitielSubjec�: Review Proposed PUD Amendment Regarding the Property Located at 2442 County Highway 'f 0 . �: . � On May 19 , 1998, the Mounds View City Counci[ approved Resolution 5226, a resolution farmally approving a Planned Unifi Developme��t (PUD) agreement for a theater develapmenf on a parcel bounded by County Road H2 to ihe �outh, Long Lake Road to the west and Highway 10 (now County Highway i0} to fihe narth. The PUD agreement esfabiished uses for the site which were as follows: � Multi-screen movie theater � Office uses • Parking � Restauranis � Retail :�� The PUD agreement was specific as to which us�s would be focated on which iots. Since its approval, four of ihe seven parcels have been develo�ed: The theafer, the parking lot (which is its own lot since it is separated f�rm the theafier by Edgewood Drive right of way) and an office building. Recenfily, Jake's of Mounds View entered into a purchase agreement with the developer to improve the second of the #hree office lots for additional parking to serve Jake's. (The remaining office parcel is aEso being considered for addi#ional parking by Carmike Cinemas.} The only twa remaining undeveloped lots then are identified by the developer as Outparcel "A" and Outparcel "B". Outparcel B is the undeveloped !ofi next to the theater which was pfanned for use as a restaurani or retail, or a combinaiion ofi the bofih. OutparceE A, ihe parcel within the PUD currentfy being considered for amer�dment, was originally established for a restaurant use. Since the theaier opened, the developer's representatives have marketed the site to pa#ential restaurafeurs and franchise groups, however they have not succeeded in securing an appropriafie restaurant tenant, which has prompted them to consider alternative uses and, this PUD amendrnent. In addition to tF►e restaurant use, the developer would like to add "office" as a permitted use far the parcel. � . An amendment #o a Planned Unit Developments is processed as would an amendment to an approved Cor�difiional Use Permit, which is to say that the procedural requirements of Section 1125 of fihe Zoning Cade would be followed. Section 1125 requires �hat the Pianning Commission review the request, taking into consideration any and all potentiaf - adverse effects of the proposed ar�nendment. PUD Amendment Report Apri1 16, 2003 Page 2 Based upon its review of fihe adverse eff�cts and analysis fo determine consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission is to prepare a Finding of �act and recommend such actions or condifions refatir►g to the req�est as it deems necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code. Such recommendation sha!! be forwarded to the City Council along with fhe recommendation of City staff. Potentiaf Adverse Effects: 1. Relatianship to Munici�al Comprehensive Plan. Mounds View's adopted Comprehe�sive Plan identifies the Theater PUD site as a Regional Cammerciaf PUD. All of the idenfiified and approvec� uses withir� wi#h #he PUD woufd fall infio fhis future land use designation. The proposed office use on the corn�r of Long Lake Road and County Highway would be just as consis#ent wifih the Comp Plan as wauld the PUD approved resfiaurant use. 2. The q�oqraphical area invofved. The site is Eocated on County Highway 1O, the City's primary and most irr�portant commerciaE corridor. The parcel is a corner lot bounded to fihe west by Long Lake Road, a higher vofume traffic arterial. A wefiland and woods separates the parcef from the other parcels associated with the Theater PUD. Rice Creek Wafiershed District approved the devefopment and stormwater ponds were eonsiructed to handle fuEl site build out. 3. Neiqhborhood Impact. As menfiioned eariier in this report, the original planned use for this particular parcel was a restaurant. A resfaurant however would generate more trafFic and �, would have a greater demand for parking fihan would an office use. While there's no der�ial `_ " that a restaurant would be preferred, an affice use would have fess impact to the neighborhood and would be less fikely to generafie fater evening disturbances, 4. The character af ihe surrounding area. As indicated above, fhe parcel is separated from #he other Theafier PUD parcels by the intervening woods and wetlands. Across fhe streef to west is Wildwood Manor, a 40-unit multi-family senior residential complex. Beyond Wildwood Manor is the Silver Lake Woods Townhomes. North of the parcel, across County Highway 10, higher density commerciai has beer� developed. Thus, the proposed office building would no# be out of place and may even have less of an impac# to fihe neighbors ciosest to the parcel, Wildwood Manor. 5. The demonstrated need for such use. Resid�nts continually comment that it would be nice to have anoiher sit-down type of restaurant in the City. (There are many restaurant optians in Mounds View, however mosfi are of fhe "Fast food" variety.) The other most wanted uses residenfis �end �o idenfify are grocery, hardware ar�d medical. It is my understanding fhat the proposed office building on Outparcel A would be marketed to medical practitioners. Onfy one such use exists in the City currenfiiy—Sifverview Chiropractic in Silverview Plaza. A specialized office developmeni on this site could fill a niche nof currentfy met in the Ciiy. � Based upon the above review ofi potenfiial adverse effects, it appears fhat there is sufFicienf _ basis to accept an amendrner�t to the Theater PUD ta allow fo� an office use on Outparce� A as an accepfiable alterr�ative fo a restaurant. f'UD Amendrr�en� Report April 16, 2003 Page 3 r, ,,..- ��..:- .,�:�� Discuss the proposed PUD amendment and consider any po#entia[ adverse effects associafed with the amendmenfi. If the Commission concurs wifh staff's position, Resolution 725-03 is avaiEable for your action this evening. Ifi the Commission would like to pastpone consideration of this matter pending r�eceipt af additional information, a tabling actian would be in order. �C�.-�� C-R-i�-�.�. James Ericson Interim Cify Clerk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Developmenf Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Resolution 725-03 ,.:.� ,�'��"'�°' �,Y;r�� w iE �r t;; r �"'J �'��`�� ' �`y; *tl �., � s ,�z��.:. i �. �;�,;3,�7 �1;� rv.� 9' �� 4 �i�,y.� ,. �'EiR'L�i.Ce;�`t4� COMMUNITY DEV�LOPMENT DEPARTMENT :.-� 1 - ,_ . ,�, ., ` . , .: 2401 County Road f0, Mounds View, MN 55112 t��3}7i�-4azo Fax (b5I} 765-1660 Please 7ype or Prinf Information - Complete Both Sides of This Form A�pt��ar�t In�orenation Name of Applicant �•�� ° �'�� °°� ��m�� {��lephone � �� p ��' � ` � Address (� l � � ts� . �� Fax `� • � � � ° � �°A ttv� �� . � � �� 9 E-mail: '°�'��,� ,� ��r��G�t'°e�>�,��. I�teres� it� �s�o�s�r�y (check appropriate box) Owner of Property ? Contract for Deed Owner Lessee, Operator, Manager Agreement ta Purchase Other (explain) ,4pplicanrs must provide evidence of interes�in propertyat fhe time ofapplication, and if you are noC fhe owner of the property, you must either pravide a Ietter of permission from the owner giving consent �o the filing of this applicai�ion or ihe property owner must sign fhis application for it to be accepted. Prope� Des�riptian/Praposal Address or General Location Legal Description Property Fdentification # (PIN #} # of Acres Current Zorting ,- . _,, .; ? � ? � � ? � ? � � � � . s : r , _. . � _ ► �, _ ►-, ,. , _ +� • r..... �', � , ,�_� , � -- . .. - Camprehensive Plan Amendmen� Rezoni ng Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD} PUD Arnendment Conditianal/Interim Use Permit Va ria nce iext Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Deveiop Review/Site Plan Wetiand Aiteration Permit Wetland Buffer Permit Other C �'`�� $250 �500 $50� $Z50 75 $354 R-1, R-2 $150; afl others $3Z5 R-1, R-2 $156; aIl others $325 $15� $125 $125Jacre; min $125 max $759 R-1, R-2 $150; al! others $Z00 R-1, R-2 $25; ail others $100 oZt-d 3(� l�le�t�, • ! 0 � a`� �f � i�s �y� �k.1�.�s `� � 1 � .� ;3�,o s j7�°o�°�� c� �� p��e�°� '�°�-2..� �3q�e•�S P��-c��— �drza � ��.�.� 1 Mounds View Pfanning Application Present llse af P�°op�rt� . �.�.� � Psap�r�yy Cla�sa�`ECat�o� ? Abstract ? Torrens Deser'i�tom� af �ro�os�l {attach additionai supporting documentation if necessary) w ;.. ,. � ; .. Page � Please IVote: Applicants are responsibfe for all costs incurred associated with the filing, review and processing of this applfcation. 5uch Pees are to be paid in escrow up fronk or upon receipt of statement from the City of Mounds View. �ees may Inc€ude but are not limited to costs for Consuitants retained by the City, mnsultant p3anning services, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposlt may also be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and staff time spent in tfie review, research or preparation of materials associated wiYh this application. The appiicant shall be responsible for all reasonable Incurred costs in excess af the initiai deposit amounY. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the appiicant within 30 days after consideration of the application is completed. Payment o€ park dedlcation fees is required with subdivision applications. EDGE THAT I have rea f! of the information listed in the Planning Applicat3on and fully understand that I am for alI costs incurr y the ity related to tfie pro�essing of this application. P .�� Date , t. � ti �s : � � � :t� ._ �,5.,. ,� � ; , �' . _, __ . , .- � ; . � � � �.... .. � � ,�, :. � _.; — ,�� , — .� _ �`_ ' �' i �, y" j; ' Name of App Signature of Name of Properly Owner (ty� Signature of Property Owner Address of Owrter $ � � Phone Number of �wner� E-maiE � t°� � � _a a � � � f� _ � ..✓� � � �` � � � -� �� . . �-. : ., . �- . ..- .r . . � �. �_ _a c,_ _ **��K�k****** * yF * * **#�k* �k�K* * �K* 7K �K�K*�*****�k �K�k�kW�k* �K*��I=*�K***��K�*%k�K�K��k�k**�kyk%k�k=k*�k #�K �K �K�K�=* �k * �K** * FCSR OFFICE �1SE Of��.Y Date of Submittal .3°3 i �D�^ Date of Aeceptance: 60-day Limit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) Assigned to: Applicafiion; Park Dedication: Deposits: Other: TotaL• ��-�, � �,P �. . �� .v @ 'n�v- �1�.� Fees Paid �-�� . � .��a{-�.� -� � � c� -� Account # l� ��3�i��I . a Ch�ek # � �� 5 �� Receipt # �aroz ;(J-� � ��.�L�� f35t�� Zo��n ap �..� 17f�.:��f ��.'�,�.k S�y� �T{5l fCsC��4'. � V` . . �' � � �,' '. i� ��R . ��T`4 - ,+ �' � � . �,,rc i:. � t � t (��"� - -�� k A' ! i I,'1 •;• 'i' r F,��i r a%� :1: t " ` r i`7'� I �`"�i?h i._ . ,-. � , . ��{ �,. i ,. I i A�1� f I' ;., t ''{�� f��ti % t��'T'�� i �{ ��.ti '!� �� ,1 Wi7 y1 � ?fy xj� :� I h i�i' I i'�a„i' I � � t" � P d� ''}r l' �.,.�: -;�,.. -;7,{'.3i I 1 .� �= � � �' � ��;� � ' �'r E� ; t ,��, ri� .�� , � :� � . � . M t`* F „�^I �� I � C� � '� h f �' � ` c p � .:,, i rr� � f:� � �'�. �L ;. , { ;: � . i � �'��J �. _.. . � .. r '� t 1.y}_ .._ . , � � i; 3 � _ Y�'� £.?X„iC„��+'�� a � ,. .r � � � ��% � 1 i �° f: � r � , � �� ` � c� °t �� if .y� `�� ,� {�j r� ;j, o s _ �:;: . . - :. � _ . , f �� k t ��-� y r r ,`� �T � � r �� ' � f �i -f,c,T��,� -y�i � . . �„ �' -- t i f f T � 1 r�*4 � � � i� - "'`.y + ..... . , r-.. ., . .... '.��. � .. . � �y � ,�'�,r''ii�() �? 7�:J, � � r n, �, �, � � ,� t ` 4 � , ... ... . ., . .,'t rifii � t'��:e�i� � p � . �`� , r .� . ,. , _ � "" - � i � ;. � � � J . . �.6� f ? .. 1 '� � ' '�' i 1: F�r� � ,�� ;z � � � �� .J �'�1� L ! � I � � . fI, r�; ra'1 'r i,..''�..1 .'��Ji �1ii � , i I i� .;�.. ,ri �.-P,z � . � � 1% i LIBRARY - a ::� ;, � �'�;' � ;:, � � � r , � � r � � ��:�5 :� �',� �4 � t �`�-' � ' � , ��' ��° ��1 i -,..- ., , �. �:; .�; ' `� :� �., � } ;} . ,. : , ' �� ` :�. ,, �,�: �� ;I t COMMUIVITY � } A � , , ;; `' CENTER � ''� t=`�� E' � � ;` ;+ ��-� . . ., i . ,y:5 -�.i' �� i �i �..�� / I �1i - 1' f� I � ` (l �r �:'� �rY F �Ik :.� .. ..,. � '' �': .-..�: �� t.i " .. . . . '� f y �t F � �'� _ , ,� -- � � - -1 - u-, � � 4 .. - ; ;, � _. ' ,.a , {� �, _: � ,`' k , � � � � � � , � �;fi � � . ... . , ;.; ' � �''��"� � �� r� � ,�' l � i �,�.��,,��,.. �l OUT ' � �,. �� r WALGREEI�S ! ;; �� '. . ��E ` PARCELS � ' yF: 4 � f'i ' � „ E �� ': I . � k '.::. � f �� . .-..f 7 ....�Y: �-:,:� .. .. ,.�:�-\ ' ;F ' /iyp` (� ! I `'a / � � i �f ��r` ! ,� i ; � � � � � '�.�'� �, � ��. �'"� ,� {i S� I� ii .� +' - 4_F � � .r` �"� '.i s i'�'` p"`�.��` i �. ,I� ��.� _.�.__ ; THEATER �� - : 4;� �; r' �='� P,4RKING . r�,� ,;, ;, "� g� LOT . �;. Na : � �� ' �,: {, i : .;;... , .` - �;,r. � '�" ;1 fF„rJ� 1C` '-.,tif, � " C.�' `i � (`'j ` . �K `'yi 7 Ay'- • ; L^j i,; �� I� r�� `�' _.t N� 't .JA��S ,.. + �. �. i� � 1' , � � �; ..:.__ ,...:.,: . , , ,� �., _ . . _ . . _ _ � . . . �;,, �. .. _ . . _ . . . . _ - ;: ; > ' ,: �', _.._ 1 �:::...._...,. , '? -:__ C �C.§ '�S r � _�. _ _7� r " � .... ... .,. � t ,� � �' . ,r c.. � >r i� � c � � a I �� .. � r � a �. ^ ; �. L �`? 4 ) �+��U i � � ,',� � � � .. -�Li Ly� � L�4� `„i 5��i i � �� s � � � `1 .,[ d d � 1 1 .1- � : 1 3 i �. . ° 1 i� .. � sq �f i�.�a ��j=? y Y, i i� � � ,'.�� ; y ;,�;r t + .� r,�2 ��. �,�.� 1 � '� y, � � '�„` 1 �� t � + �,;; �r � � �; „� `t;s: � � ��.�r; �,��.,1'� �� 'v i�, � � � `� a � :,� � ,. �� --�- �� I . ' � �t G.+iy,j_� ��r�f� ,�^r�il ��i�;V��r ��-.f.�~.�)J � � �, .:a ',t, � � t�,�.,J t� £ �,�'�.r�J''_� ...i.i'�a�x t+�r� {�:., `- ; ��I � ; � � �9.�� , 1;?4 � _ �i, l � ;' r M r� ` p ` ° � _, � u , r -� s !.7 , ; � r � � ' , '{`" F., � . ) "y, :p. r+;. �f., , r ,?_ c; . ) � � � � )w. .� . . � � r. .1 -.? ; � ' �3.. •: � .�3 .�,'.� „ �1 _ . �. —+�. ,-:P� ._ . _ _ � I "� „r a. _ c.� _ "' '_ M.I t + . .� �D ,��. . � �. , , 1 � a � I /[ S ° � �� "� '',_ , � I� � I i� � 1 11 � �"i, !� `I - , �—� � � , �° A �D_ /i � � �� j' � �' ' � 7, I • � • I 'r � a... :1� B99 � '� l `� � �`.., ' �. � �, ; �' ,�� '�� f �� . � g98 � `�O \ �/' �\ \` ��.�r"�„��¢\ � _ �e '! ��Qb � � / � � �I , . _ � ,� k I �� _ � — —� — �f_.�_ _ -- -- — _f--� ,. a___�___ — _�—r ° ^ r � � SEWE� �ASMEN7 � _ � — � — � � _ �__�� 5Al3tTAR �_�-�—�� _ _ '� el - --- — �.— � ��e�m�v �m��_�.�W�.��_��m��s�m�e�m�. n � � � 1!J � � c fi � � � z i� H � � o �' W W � O A � H � � � q � � r� � 0 � � c a� Q Q � > N � c � � � � c � � m .` � O � G �� C7 N � � � N � `� � Q c'�i cri � � � � � N G � � �� r y � � w-� o � � N o a O N M � E � � 0 O `t co � � � Q � c`� � �Q a� m a� � N Q � � � � � � G N N U �Cn�� , N C (6 . :r U �G "� t4 7�c`�a�ia� �OcL�� ` '� � � � � � ;w c � U vyi o u b� � C ,� .�? \ � o w `b N d O O � '° Li ,U (p �°^ .,., ' � � � .�. � "- � -Q o � � C4ro�.�.. > y�� o �o��,o� as ��.Q� � Q � E � `° ym��.c�� ` � � � � y � � � � � D- � y O � � o � � � �. p � � � N '�- � �� O � � � fi y �'�a�� y ro > 4 Q � ��y��y � "�"fi�o�� ro�� h e �S .�' co m m'� o c� °�•y� � o�°'��,��e� �..-e'�,c.c��o °' '� .°'n � � ,� .� � c �� b �'�- �� ° � � o � � � Z O 1 � � � as � y y�'�� o�C C Q� y�� O Q � O w, v.. Q.t � C� � 8?� �a� :�o�m��tr �E U N> N�� O 0� � ca � �a �a � ��y�a� : ro '`oro°�'°�.'�� d Ln � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � U U ` �... L ti ` L U U U U U U�� OQOM� �CONO d°MONI�� rr-rNr� N � � � a� .� v � °z% � � � Q � c- CV M Q m�{n +' N � N 09 � c� � U U U � � .:-. c��6 I-��o00�a�� r U � � Q1 � C � .-. � :? O G � � O � O �/1 r tQ . � O -� � C _ � �' (�'6 � � � L d'1 (ll � C �. N � `i3 C � v° M � O N >, U � � O � � � :� � � � � �v�� O "° t]' � � � N � � C J�� r � c o �� O� N � ' N � .--, ,� .-� � � � Z n o' o O � �n �� z��a w�o � � � C7 O ~" U � � � �E� � � � � � � O � � � � Q H � � Q W O � � � � � � 0 � a w Q � Q o � � o � � � � 8 a � � '°°' � W W � C�ND�.. i � � � �' E-' O � W A� � .� � :1a H ,'�] � zA O� � �4 C � �1 � � �q (�b � '� � N �.�� N lO h .� � ,C b N �� h O � � � b � �� >� �.CZ .�c�a�y�, o.��.�� o, � � � � � � U C'�'.1 � � � o �� a i� � m O '�? � ,� � W `-�.�� o vi � �� ro�b � ,U O y � ro (0 � 0 O -� � U � � � 's �s ,� � � � � �� OI :� � -C .� �i U 4� 4� � � O � � � � o > � �� o �ia o C»'� v„ ��va ��ia�>o� y ,o� ar � '� �° m v" i O � (0 � � � �� 4 Z� c�� a i -�'� � ro � -C � v� � �r � � � L r � Q � � o N � �'"� �/1 L¢ te_. �S � � � � Q � L � O N U � � � Q�� o��, N�r oo > ON � b-p � �i-M O �� U `n r d � � a� s � Q � C7 ,� tu �- o � �' O O � � � � � r N N � {i 0" `� t" �-° m m +n �n � � ai `- � O O O � � �N° � � O a� f... t. � N d�- U ��O.Q� y � Q. > r N ui w i�J V U � ��ro�� n. � ca..v v� us �n ..c�y C 'A) r 'c'° �' y � C � � a�'i � +-�� t4 � i N V N « � � o �i � 0 0 � M Try C� � � � U U U U U U ro � � � lII ca a�o 'd cpY! N 'd ti c0 CV di a0 ao cD � fU Q � O � � � G N 'v 't3 � 4.��+-' � 0. m Ip fU � � U � � �� dy � i L -�.' � (p Q1 � -"� O 4�Oh C Qf � .� � � (� � � � ❑ �ca � � � U Q � � � � V � O o � E y � � .� �, •� E � °3 �'�.. a� �� y O-�` � Q � 4' � � d U ti O O N � � � � � C '� O � � � 'b O � � N b � ,Q, � � � Q` � cy .� y �C y :� � � Q �� fU G �"' U N �C � L ` � .`._ � cII � Q � d � f�5 N u1 s � � � �� C �C C C C C �� .-. .� s� s-� .-� N � N N N�� N N N � N N � "- � �-ww.� w 04 0000000 �coN�s°N�n�N ro Q � C � � � �� N � A o m �� L ' �m ��Z U � C � � 2 ro � O cn � � Y ,� J � � � U� N � � � tQ v {6 ,� � ro �� C:. � � 7 d a � ai �, � � �� o�� o ��..a � � `> ; y � 4 0 o � � � Q.0 U�. N ,Q � � � � � � � � V�.�� ,� � � � j � � �' CL � '� `1 ti � � � ��d� o�� Q > ro y N O �° � U � � � � Q � � � � N "a O � � U Q 'v,°, �..Q O � � C C •C � .� � � � Q? `�' �- �.- Q � � a �r� � N � � �I � � m � C � � � Y �� ro O m � d N ro EtJ , , -a � � � � y � o fi � � ` � U � �`�a�� k � � � � � np tq i �.-�.. C v� C C � o �U ��a� y �� `oe°'� �� "� C � h � � y �� p ` h O-� � � ��c`o � � b7 � U � ,C IO N � b � q > � C � O � �S .� C� q� � (�0 `� � tl5 � � � ��ro p C � � � aLi�� Q � � ,�; O h � � � � j � � �� A �� m � � � � � .-� � � �' � � h b � � ..��, � � C �0 � c� 4 bl � � v� `U y.. g � � o �' ;U a� � b b fi � � m 4 4 co0 � N � v�.. Q? O � � � � ro O � y � �� a�i io � � ^-\ Cl' � tD � � � C? O � C � U � � � C 0 � `� � � a3i .? � tD � � � .� .� .� � N N �j�w w�- ,��N� � Z � � ` ro � � U N � i w � mhO� �� O� N 9� � N � � � � t� "'' � � n �zo � o � �� z ��o d�+�. C�O� Ca .w � �-�° W ��5 � W � � o � � � � �"� � � Q Wi w �i F-4 � A-� O +W-a w � � � � � � �' � � O � R" O � �.,° `�'W � O � O N P. H � �' P� �, O G� W W � o � A�a A l�w E°S �-7 � z Q o � � a � C � � O ��LI° � > � U �� w Q. R3 � C�� N L � � C p � � p � cri � � � � �� C �lS O � � � � � .e-. L � � � � C � o � e. — � ffl � N .i 0. W (0 �V "d >+ U 3 � O � O � C � -�w'� > i � U � o y � � L � � � a c��i° V � � G � ` �? U �6 � C � U �'y O a� 7 — �y U � t/1 � � � � c� � '� U 0 �� c � � -�� wW j;.0 � � r�- X � � � °W.� ��; � C Q �O Z '� N � � � � � N��C.�U �yT�� s�nc � o � � C t/J i0 � � G C � � O � cu �. Q. � d SL "_' � e-. � � � � � C � � � U -� � � � LL c 3 a'� .... Q U U � t,= � �`"•�°' G � C ��`G O'� p � Y C -a (II � r � �y Q V � � � U � � � � � 0 � QlZt67 �C >C=�a� � o O 9 � � � '+d ro-� �. � � � � O � O O � N N Ul N � N � �— � !�' C�d n � O � .w` � .� .� C „� LZ- Y (b X d y L � y�- O �.�� L u' s � � p G a� c � 'w � Z7 � � � w."�-� �'� � C .� ca � O � O � Q 'a � � N g � � .0 O � O � vi�u,`�> � � c � p � "� C'�O O � "� � � O m � d W �. � z c o � tn N vi f� y � L -p af (U � � � CJ C.1 � � �, � � U � � a C 7 � ti Z � U [2. � � � V � � � .II 0 � ..a � C2. '� � � � � �, �a- ` C � '� � V) �. � `r O � � Y O 4�.� � E6 O C`� � p V-�- � o� C�`." o� � N � � � � � �� t0 � tiS V1 w LII � p�(d w.v CVlU Q. � O�`C7 R. � O � � � o .� � �� Q! � � c� .-� � � o � ` o � t1. c� ' � �p a ` u� � >, °- � �o .� a a� .c m '" � � •� � �7 ro O � � � (� � � N V (ll U ` T7 .� �U �t c� s d � ;�-•cu ro•��- � c.� a�i � O O-� o L � Uj � y? �� U v! {U � � �" C-�,C-°�.,� � � � i4 �, o p U� !a N�n '� � U R � � � � ,� .� SU C G � � � N � V � � �w � � � � O N �> tQ C�a- � fn t0 � � � � W a � o � .� m a�i � � � � � � C � o ty �ai a� � e ro Q o iII cu ` � � � � � °o � .� tLn � v 'O � � � - � � � N U = l0 U) o � � � N o � � � C � (Q � :yv o U O�,, U�7 Cl, �(II o> i �;x��.c�roa��-.E�°Q �y � -c c � � � vr in o � � o Q1 7 fII @ o�� (0 a3 E° v) +d � � � � � w � � N '� � � � O C��?G C� f�.a-�II �� C w� eo C�� N t� � u� �., u� 3 ia �� O C lf� Q) N N C .V! .� D.. � p � � � .n*,,a?�� sv� � O C •— ui Q� 00 U N Q��E fII p C�9 'L Q. � ;a� M o � �,Q �� ? � -O X � � -� � c w ,� � in o s 1/1 -= � V ,� ;+ C '� — � C �- tff N �- {� fti �° �.-) � � � � cfl — ca��v � I� � Q U ,� Q ..0 [� � U) (II +d .a+ U/ 1n V) °�°' � Q C � c� ro � ��a.� c � CO � [Q � � U � C o(Q �00 tII� cU j N q c` � v� 7) � � � �-' r � °a" Q°� f� r Q� C �� O �� 63 N � Z Q-� Q) � �'o � v� c� o � Q p � � � � C Op � > � N � � � � � � U N � Q� � �--Gi.C�.a w � � t � �"• � (i1 � �� '� y d�..�� i � � � U � a w~ v°e �'+-�� 7 � N � cV � � o � N N � o � .� � � � N � � � � � � � w � .� � v � � U � � �U � ��.� �i` � '� (0 .... � � � � u� ca �+ �•� C O Q�.� „� L UI 'Or � °� � fl- � � � O Zi � � � U (6 �� W � �•U N � N uf '�? � � Vl s.. •- N 7 y` `' � UI (d � � O � � N � N 'J � � � N ��-+ .N t� �� a� � �"= v c'a� ° � N � V � �� p) o.� �� p U O �i � �- N � �i (� C � U V) � O `� (U � a�i �� U �� u� o � � `- � � O N N-Q C�� u9 ca � � � � O � N � � � w � N �y � > L � •��„ � Q� •�- � O (— � � U av O � U N � � �C A �?, ul � v- O 'C co .0 �, L 0 � � U N �~ � " N O ro o � • � o � `� � e `oU� a�iU cu � a�i � � L °' C U Q. �� > w O (II t6 '� fl N � � � �� O `J �- C � C ��._��>��o N C G � � � ` .fl .Q Q. ❑. � .� 3 '� � C � o � Cn (�6 4�S � N.0 � t M � b,o n� v L p� c N ro �� C°,C o�� >��c°ma��'�� O � � O U � O � '°' � Q, (II � �7 ` �' C � (�a�� N a� � 3 � CU� fl �.�c ��.N .�.ro �� o �� .Q b°' .et- o � O .D �o-� N � .iJ c ° E°° `� � � o�r � � O O � � -p n. � vl � tn U> "p R � V � � � N vr L7) C— O� fU �° E U C C(� � C) i O C � � � � � N � Q7 � N' {� �O ��5�� 60'N � � � +J p�Q D� c��o�oa,�nu�;�. LL � L U tn � � � � C {� °� � o ,,,��,, ,O p C Q � � � `Q O�� U d d� U� Q� � � � � � � � � `O1 � O � Q. O U(i Q'D :a.�. � v t9 � C O U � � c O V 0 U U � N C � � � U U �. � � � N i �+-' 7 = o 'ca O �'t° C 3 f0 g. N c c� U � � (O � o O 'p � c°v > � c- a •� r C fl- � o � � V � U Q3 � � � � � ?y � f� C � Q "B C U OC� o � � � ,C C C � v �� N � '-' n '-°' �° Q � j � � o .-� "� � In � U � � � W tn o �`�>, � o �` � U � � �' .�-+ W Qa �S � � W � � o � � C/] � � � � -nW- 0 � � G�r �` E� w a O � W W p � Q o � �r O w �� `°' � O N ��-, '�� l � � �°' O � a W � � � � A ; 1 a, H -`"� � zA � � � a O s � >,o.� N .� � o � � � I�4 C y p '� � � � � � -C3 � -� p� L (U � • � 0 � 7 � d N >+ � � � 6.. L1 U'a w� O (0 `�' .� C O� VI w (A N� � i%� "d � .-� y "'' � C �'. � L � O w (II � C U�'� C N N G p"_' � Q.,� � � �.� Id � `Q N � � � � +� � t0 -°' � C c�U "0 � � � � C Cl. � � • � �.� � (IS C N ..+ f/1 � °� f� � O � � Q° � N.tq � C O"f3 R� 4? � tfl �� o� U� � � N � d ` � � N � � � � � � � �y � O y� r Q 0 � C N�i O � L2. �> � � ° c� � � .c c a�i rn `o a (] Q � � oi n, � a � � — ,� � '� � ,� � � � � c U�� rn�� a? (o � C3 al � a� L.0 N �o � p � 2 a� a -° � � a� 'in M- .� � �s v C U v� a� �` v a� ,� � a� ��. ,� C ��.00��E� �°o�� 3. �p -w Nw- � @�' 9 � o � � � �u1 � Q�1 '� � �° � � C � U w. ca O� o ro � E�� t� � a o :C >, o � � � � U � t� � '> :� � �U) � �- Q. i � V � � � -� � � � I�/f 7 Ui �3 ,� (U � � Lfl (U ��' � �' � ��'*'..�..� QS (fl.G ` � �'J i � � o � N � V �� ,s v� C,C .e a� �,� � c-m vi O U {� � O .,... CA � � �? � � UI +�°-� �` � (C � �� o:w � � � l�,U l� Uf N N � -C '4- v a� _ ,'� c N c� �o � f� `" .� a, t... �,-. � L'� Qi p� p a• N N� ��Q ,C O N � y� ��0 �^��°`�'n� �r� � (U � O p '0 � � �° � � � ro r O C � N�e-- � Ci �,, C d fn � N o y� t� � � �ca� O> �. � o ta Io � � E N `� � °- � O C =-'' � �'C 3 � o � � � � t � � � 14 Q° G W O •A � R 4.- � �i s-� .� �-"° � Z .1� .�-� .� 7 = il'a �. � C w N Qj •'° 'a O al G t0 N � '� � � � �� c6 N � � � � � O � N � � O.. � ` � C ;�, � � � O N O° -� vJ � •`° U O `J' � Q� O N"D � Q) '~ C > O � � C � > Q (4 N `- �+ 0 � � � Q? >. -� N � U � N `� ` � �.. CD ,> � • L � > � C�' �'V O fl O U � •U �1 0 C +� -� Q � G C � � � � C � �CV C 4- so- t4 � `+° O O Q� L-� CS � ? L � � L C � 7 � Zy N O W 1� � N p G ul � >' O o t0 � O�� O t� � `d U � � !L � � V 41 O � u► � L`� o w�� QG..� �; 7U ��''?� O � � V � � '� rry � � "� � t!1 O�,i- � O � � (� ar .e� � i"' � 7 o(� N o Q � � ` o �� o C� uj 'cly o�. '+J C �- ` V3 � � -� f�° L�., O.� L o O� O l� S` �� e � o o °� ��°� �� U a �-" .O d � � ul � � � g U � p) G � � .f] .� ,� � � � C o� w �— 3� N•� 'C ❑-.� .r � � N � 7 � N � � N ..0 t.. � O �° Q� y�'� Ut O ti. U� � C N � � c� � � � Q tB •"' @. N •� Q� � C O`0�� U � L � � .,. N ��°00.1]� N � o p � 03 � V C Q N O o � ` � '"" U � U � > � � � � o��Y �r- C � a� ati�N� �.�� U � � +/f � o U a �� a�it� af ��o.C� � Qo.�+ �� - � tU '� ..� $ Z � � C l0 � o � (Q � W � � � � � L � C z � � O 0 0 � � N �� .0 �L� l��U � � � � � N « � �3�"�"� (� L (n . � CL��Z r L � Q1 � �a-, �° �- Q L1. � O Q � d O � C � rn N � •C � • C N a3 � � � � � "L' � � C � � L .� ,n p C b � � > O C� C� f� C Q u1 � � '..+�- � p � � N � � � V � a O �.� �(6 C o� f�Q G� t6 Q � � � O •� � � � N � � C �4 � � � C � � `� ��-a °�� •-• . .N � N � � � O .L2 � �a��,`��a� �`�;�aas c�L `� � m c� � Q- � 4- m � �� f� y j � V � �� t�/1 O o � `� N � � � v- � � � "= � C y� � i "� � 16 � � -d 7 � � � � � Il1 � C � � ° L o tl1 N ,G N�� vy O S� w O N°0 O �'�.�.�+ Nt� (9 U � � � ` � � o^� j 0 C� 7 n a�-�'os o ��s�,� O � p ltT � � � � '� C� 'C3 � � .� �' �i : � c �� a�� `�-° � (6 O t/1 a3 � � � � d � d N C O N � "'° C C .� Q. � � � � � .� O O-�N AV � �$ �6 � G lif O ,a; V � °' VI � � Q° � � 'B N �� C y N'a e� C u�i � N�� Ll N °nni E C� >� � � � N Q-�" �_ � t0 V O O.a Q� �p C N Q. 'iA Q > � O. G N(U °rJ '� N�� w � o LZ �(�U tII � L A � tJl '� !�/i r�°' � •' G �° � � � tTi � I4 � � N ,�!1 � �� I�6 Q..0 � V L � O +� � j � �, � p _C v � � � N � U � [L 4 �_~ C L� C.0 (� C o`= t9 � � O N (ti o � ;� � � V `� > � � w C �w � � Q! � � d� �� g' V � ro �> U �? � � V � N > � t '0" O U! C �.. +-� !1) ,p .� l�3 t0 L. � � p � N 7d G 'A � o � � � � p � � i � � � �% � % � f� V O � a O � fJ) �� C C � N Ql � ' �(� lII C N Q Z7 � y i� W � "_' � -Q � � B N N � U � � N ¢ G � c c�a � � � a`� � � � � � � c*! o a� t� N �� ffi� y � y �_�� L � .m.� O d tti � "-' � �X � � i] � C � � °3 � c co `� � aCi > cu � � u� � °� � °� � Q � �w � �',�' Ew�° � a�,i � � U � L � � C p � � .� > Qj � � � � v'' � N � � — o � C (.�°'0 � U 7 O� N f�fl �..0 c4 0�� .:y---- �j Q i� U�+ .1] 7'L5 N Q i]. •- o-� �i O O � C 7 '� N '� N N N � G I� °� � � � � a � O � � >+ > � � � � N � � � C y � G 7 :.� A ,� U� .sa O� 0 Q C � � � O � � � � � � � � �% U -� 7 �'° N i� � � U� n3 � N N � � B �C � p. .aC > G 'II � � � C.1 � k-- �•U.0 � � � � � .� � � gl � � p � � � � � � O Qi � � �c � m � � �Q � � U � � �� °B tn � � tU v � •` � � m � '� � � � ...� � C cd � Q a � � � O� N O� �',. N � �n .� ��1°O� �n � � O n a U -�•o� f�l C/1 0 � � � � � ~ U �� S ��A �WW� 5 0 � � � � � � � Q W � �4 � E--+ � L�a 0 � � Q .�-� � � A �-+ � Q.` O � i1i �°' P, � � � W O � O N f�-�. F � � � E--c o �� W � P, W O A a E� �W � Z q o � �I � O (� �, d' N � '� � D � �, c -o .� c -v�� a�-�o tu c� o o� E— � v� a� � u � � a� ._��iv�°�e�a�ai i �`�a�i�e�N��a� C � � C� fD � � .�C 'UI f4 � +� tT ..i � N w� O ad t�0 C�.� � � � .0 lII � [B rr � 'y iQ � O � .." � A � � �N �'C� p�N (6 � o ''� e� rn � � � �n o � � � � �"°_ � s-+ � d% (ll � j d} o�(F1=i L�U,fl � � C � � v^.�:._� � p,a, � 'a N � `� � � � � � N � o � � X � � C L Vj � o •r (iS � o � � �, 'ty .0 � O � ed U �" "� O ,�p, O � � Q1 � -w -� � � o � C Q. � '°' O . � � � � L � � � � efi L (6 (6 � c^d6 d (U N'` � i O Vl f: o� � �c�"�a�ca�°3��c� :er � � L o L � � � � �� p o�� y � Ql � t4 C `� � � 43 � � �� +�-� � � O a � C� Qi — C� C°a �`� •� C C'6 � N o :�r �P�O �~�^e.��eY� N�L� �° Y% -1.•+ � `tl •Y �% �i � � Q3 '�..C° U C � � � — C� � � � � ..0 O p) �y N � � •N C � U ��'a.�°�'�-��3co �Q�°�o.s axf� ot� v� c� � � � (�p �'�+��+� '� � � � � � .�.. � UJ .'� N O �'z � Q � � � C C fII �, .� � Q� � 3 � Z O p O �� p y �° 9" N� L �y � 'Q � 'C O d�� N �� cU p � 9 .0 U � O � � � � � � y U O � � �- � � C � O ��..N �L �r� N U N O� d_� '� .� (9 �"'"' "r C � � "� tA � Q � t�il (� � � o w � 7ti � °�p o ` N �i � Q 7 � � U ��i4 'D � U r-. L1 C L C (i.� � p� N� � � ,87 � N � N � y O > � � o � � � � a '� � w w �9 (II +n ��-- N � O .0 O � iJ K°° -w p S O� C� ��.0 O � L a � H v � � U � � � � �w � �^ �'�� ,C °p N ��h�� Q.� c�a � C N � .` •� � � � . � �- � C � � � � � O � �� ,�+w � •L •� ❑ � � LL � U U -� � O � � .� � � 7 > � � � � � .�.a �. '� . � •� � � O v,�o� Q1 L � �q � C � N ,J O �, Q� ay �+ � -Q G C 'e9 O � � Q L O ,C � ` � d. Q E ��_ � i � � �� N .,-. e.» � (a O � L � ffi � ` N v � � � 0.cQ� � vEi-a � o E� c� ��c � ° v' v� — � u, � ro °° � •� c ��.�s��o � � � Q � "� i�4 � w' � � N � 1�.� U � O � � p � � U U O 'Q V � � � (4 � L C N�� e6 � C O� � � � o +�+ � �� ,� (D Q3 U � w ro � � � Q � C � O ~ 1!� � � � U�1 W t!1 � �� L C N C o N � `L`i � �i � t/l � ,i {U s.+ . _ � � V� ��'j C� �- jn A C � �� V � � � tp o�� X Q�4 � Q' y � � � � � � � 6 � N (t7 L1 Y � � In O � � � � � � y � � a Y � � � "J [y U � .O � � O '� C G � cn .� ,C U (B � QS Q1 N p��(� � � � � ,�a, � � > � � � � � p C � � � ` v � � � L � ; y •� V � L b � � �� 3'a �.'.. .� p j U7 �-p �� N cn -a o vi a N U � C � � E « � uism oc��co� � h° a� a v c� ..- �.. a� -a � o 0 0 ` � c a. � u� � � � N� i .� � — w -p N � � [0 � d O .� �Z N �vl C N N y � � ��a�.+ �Q d � (Q L�1 Ul � N�� N c� V� Q � .� � _� Q.� � � Qf� � N � � � °� .-� Q^ .... l� .� �� O IA +� C r �� a � N j,�H �� L � O'a Q� C ul � � U � � � � �� .� 1�1 B '� N � � � o ��ry O > .r O � V1 p "'' � � � d �" � ,i � � ,� N � C Q, d .G N � N C "� � � 0° ` � � N ' p C .� t4 'II w � � •N N �- N � CA ."�°_" � G o � � � N � C � 0 � Q..�-� � • � � � ( � � y � �� C v! � w- � c49 V� � � .m C � o r� e +. N .� � ro � � � � �� O O� 7, Vl o� C tti .� •°= � � C � �� '� � N � Q � �1 � � � N � � � � C R �Q,. O� Q° C� � C� U tC! � Q � � � � � > � � 'r O �N � � � 'a � o � a�,h�'�-yc��ctica h o�� °a�.�^.� o >, '� N Q O � � � w-� � � N Q � C '� � C'fl O � �. '� � C .7 •� � � � � C 0 � � O �.o.. U� C. � C u�7 0�.. . � � � L � N O '` b, � o � 0 0 � t m �. _ rn� C �c � �RY i G C .� .� E � � � o � � ; � g <11 � d � O � O N � � � •= N � � A�.0 N � O N � c v � � C � � � � C � � �> C O Q .� � � � � .0 � � � � O ca U� �=- N 0) � � �� c U w p U w � i'ti 'L O v�l N o Q- (�U � C] °- E C -� �O G O � � � � U +� C � >. � .0 "� w � � � � ul � O '� « Q� � ¢ N � � Q� � � � a � � � � -Q � � � C �+ � oO L G 7 � � � U � � � U�� C o.. � Q� I� � � L. G p � � ,� U � � � � Q� C�j g "� � � ro � N � � o w � w 1p�7 f0 �� N � c� � � O O �' N � � L � . � � � . N � � � �� (Q � OL C � � � � `J CO � � tn �.. � � � `� � �� U � � Rf � i Q� a � ` 3 � � (9 4-° o� N o� � Q° � N � O G uj G�� C3 � �- N�+r O: � ' C � � O �•� v �� Q��L� �� f0 Q(U G(U i4 -r N�� Q; c� 0 uJ -,� Z� r� ca �� rn � � � �y � � � � ,.-r �OZ"' �oO ��'U z�� W b O � `� ',� � 0 ~ � U F� � � � � � �i � � W � � o �� Q � � � q � P-� a � f°°� � � 0 � L� � Q � � O � � � O @i W � � 0 � � W O {!) ONa l H � �" O � a W � Q Q ,..� ;�-' � a � Q 0 � � � ri i� L.� pw,� N U1 � uf � �C � � 8 � ow af �� c e� U C C � N � '6 � J O' �:r,L• '� N f�6 � � p C ..Q � C j (0 � � O 6.. .Q U C � � Q? ?. w� � � cn C � � � L � G � p � y... c o .c � �- L � o L , � � � � a Q� x � � � � � � �' 6- � L i3 � � O � .Y�.`O � �� $� .� fD ,.., y � � US Q} � O ..�.'� � � � � .� fn� �1�"D V G � U � d°' O � � � � � 0 � 0 V o�a� rn�V� � } � � N C � � � G ,� (� � (U ^ � 'i � N � � � � � � � � Q � 0 � � � "� � �� 'O �N N � �� . � in 'p � X (U � t0 � C � �, � v � L m � U � � � O N °�-'.��vJa�c�� U" U � O l6 � � � � � � � U fL/1 � ��E.��a�a �° v� ay v :� � � -'� � C � "8 C C V � � h � uy�i � c°� � � � U � � � � � A ?� � .0 � � _Y � O � � (0 6. N �°i a. � c tn a� �o,.. .c��c F- � ' U � � N � � U � � � C �? ❑. r I6 (� O C .� � O a�i�v~ `o m c � �° � co +r O N � o �.� � � � � � � w��`o = C L aw � � O U: Q w � � C .� +� � � 41 . � N � p � � � � � C C � � � N � O «� U! � . C N ` Q� Vl � C��U �a�o�N� c � �tn � U l� O i6 � (0 � ,Q � � - o � ,�c � � a� p N � v � �, v� c � U � :w '"° � y-`+ "U G C N U o O � O � � � z V N.,-� C �.cc�co d O N �i � N Q, a� � (0 � C ,I2 � � ,w � � � � � '°°` L ' .�.. � {�-C � � a� � G N �~ � � N .� � � � � � � � C N �' 9 v�! � `Q (� O� � C�C�� N L t6 � N G '� � � � -�p O � � � � � � � L � � � � � C N �, U � a-� '� O � � .� w" ny � N � CfJ '� ,s�, v � '� � U � 3 � '� 'N -� O c°3.� � � •°� � .� � � � w ° v, o¢.��;� a�E•�,��o � � v � � � � � N � � � ro � � � .D L w � 3 � o � > C � 8 � ,� O ,� A� N � � � � � � � p � � c�`�� o �,�. c d�� O C � C '� � 'e+ � N �11 N �. _ � (a EO �� i � U � (� "� f�6 � Q C � � .Sa N �o ° � �' � c ❑- o � a� .a - C .�c °� L ro a > � -�'o�eccaE U.� �'- '� 'C3 (p C� j .Q p� � V t�11 � V � ��QO � o � .� � 'Q C ` N � � ` � � •� C O p � � � � +r � � p � � Ill .-. N � �� p > � p C �.NM a� PJ � CO � (fl � > �- C .� � O �' � � � .a.. cs� °c� o � � � .c � C 'b.. o L s (lT �—cu�wo�� tl� � � � .0 � QS � � o � c� wa � � � � � � t], � '� a°' � C � � m � �Q � o � � u- � O � °� a� � ;� �n > 7 g O Q d1 � tR � N � w �7 � � o B � O � � � � � ,� c � cn � � � ca � � � �` � o o, o.� � "'2 tn v 7 4l '� � QS (� �. • � � 'w� C O �C C '� al �, � � � d N p (U � � Q1 .� � .� N d ..� � u�i o .N a�i •y L�� QI .0 G � � G .� � ;�, � O C � � ��"� � � fII N O � � -« � N Q� �+- � 'i3 d 6 ~� ` U7 $ (j � p o � � (B � N Ql � �� ' G t.. d) - e+ � � O C � � � � � L O � - y � y � "°" °� � � � � � � � � Q (p �° � � j, ;. � N f�0 I� ` � � � � � � C o.c o� � � �� G bi U� F- O � � � N "' U � � U V � N G � � � � 16 � Q1 � '`. �w�caa��.N C o � � . �Hc°�Q°��.n° N � � � � s- C "d C O (II o � � � � N U c� � .� y � � � � � �4 .� .� � � O i N O L�~ �� - �- `d- � � L � �VI w Q O � � p .0 � � �,� a�i rnE � 7,c � � Qc o v �n� � fl' >' �� ` � U � c � �� C N'0- tp �' al O fa lU (6 = N � N C+� � N �i O � � � V) O C � L f6 ` w' � � G ,a, C C � O � �tA � G � A � �UI � E c o mo� E� ,� o �U� a.iat� L > � �.L C O C � � �� >°�Q-�� G ��oce c.e a`s a� -o s -o �" a N�- �� a� F- C� ur � u p `o � � co � .� a •N � � � o � C � � f0 'C7 O � O � � �7 � � (�6 � �J � d' O tT !! .-� E wr � N p � � ro ' V1 (6 � � � � � � 'p C Q� � ¢�j �"+ i .� � � f� � '� {� � = � � � N U i°�il � O � � � E 'iB �-' t�fl � � � U �/j � � m � O � C� � � c�u � Cs� � o o� � c6 O Q y �Ui�U7 a� t��Qa �-r O �� c � c� Q. � � � � � � �� o (� � m Q. C (� � .i � .� t0 � � � � � a � C � -� "a � °� U O t0 N C � �� 3 O L � '� .6-a �.. '°. � � � p N O '' �sm � �. �► ?y •� �tn o0 �-Qi:C � � j � � v°° O U � ` � � � C - �` i£e ea •� °? �� L °o � I0� �. � yd� Q.E O tB � bi � L � Q L � � � N � a � � C �ofV.� m 0��=0 `�o��o� t�s > �� v � y, N I- a��3�Q �'hwU i�� N O �? 3 '�:. � � �; C � �3 � cL0 Q � � � � s N w N � (U O p � (ti � � a a> � � Q � b � i � � � U cs o a- �n a � �n � 6� � � � U '� � N 3 � � � � � � 0/ � � G � � N � C3 �1 � � L a.�� °>� � Q � � �� rn , � � P-' „-, � � � � d n �zz ��O � '°°� � O � U Z � � o � ¢ � �.., C7 O ""` � � U �� r-i � Ry tyv � � � � � o ? � � � Q f--� � � � � 0.�i � H � p, 0 � W W Q E� � O p � � � a W � �* O � x � o W C'7 O�� W G. 0 � � W z 0 � � � W Q F� � � a-a a � � tU W � � � o� � C � � d � f� .a n�cU m � � ,o � � ~ t� U U O � � N � � 7 o � � „_, -a � :� �3 0� > ; czU c �,� ��•�°�-� � � ` a � � aN � U �' o o � C "J o � � � C � � .� N � � � � � � i � V ~ � � � .� � � � � �� ° o N -a o � � � � U "a oC O O C � � � � � lp •O".L U (0 U � C '� Q� � N �j �iq � C) Q� O �'�,>� C O+' .� -� 'Q � ,a � V � N "S2 � (U � Z7 � N > U �. � `0 .� L � � � � c o ��-o ro °'c� �-° c � c o��nEooc��o .r.�'��"d � � a�i d � � � � � � � � � N � O � � O N 'D � � 61 � o '� C .r � � � � O° O � C L � �- U r � � v�.� � � (6 � � ro � a� w o,,n c � -' O �� U u? � -r.� � � t� c �;�Q� �� tt3 r O � �� G ..., � :n�� a? Q� � � 'Q E � N � � � �� '��. �� t� � > N �,� O w � � Li. +• � U i3. �� E �'°- �.O ❑ N � C � � N ea a> �a-�� 4a.. � � Q1 o � Q �� U � O � ti7a. U� � �� a� o �' � E � � c� 9 �y � Q. `� � (� � �° �s�~� V � o N O > ��-�CO � o (�4 C � o �`°C�'� � c� a� > <e �� U��' � w � � � � � � Q � OJ�� t�Q � �� oo�� N�,��.� v°u�o� V � C � O U O � X w �"c�v�� c� cvi L C R � � � A3 4T � � f6 � � �' 0 3 � •,� cn � e U 0. � C o �� t�ii ro � U� j': � � � L o c � y U Sll � �w .c �y c� c o� •- ��._�� '� C � � Q .a L6 > � O p � � Q � � � � � � � a�-��' �_�� ._ ca •— ta � N � O fn C � �1 O �- � � -❑ C <°' Q � �_ � A � ��-• C � 6„ O a3 C ro � � N m � t � � G ' q� a tn Y7 � � � � Q1 X E '°_ � � � w Q c�/! pU 'a ,� � � � � � C o. a> > E a��L�� °� o �� w� 7 � .� � � U �°� � N � �� Q� "'�'" '� VI U i v- O ta � �- O C � �. (� '� � � � �� -�o�N °,��G� � m y•�"D � � � -� .n � � � O o N a�c�"d� � � B�i U p � > '°'° °" � � a � � � '�v, � � a'> o U � � � � co~�°- � �� L � � o �ea� � ��` �Oo�°-' �� o � 4� � �� VJ� i > o w. �. a� ` � �. �. a`�°�oo � > � �� a � s � Q- � � A � � � Q � c w � � o .-. U Q C :N U C a� � �°.��a � .�Q � O cU3 F� o .G c o � �� o � � V � C � �y � � (Y9 C .> �-- ?, �- Rl � 11 ro fn .--. � L w�—, ��.�0� a m 'o '� � .� Na.n�o o y V � > � V � j O "-' � U � O Q N � (6 � � �" � � �,� � �� tII O t6 � a (II � Q � � � � � d m � � � N b � � L d U � O 'O 0" � y � Q� (6 � U � � � C6 � Uf N .� ,� � � � L � `°' � (V.Y � � � .SC � Q � m L � u� ° �.� aaUi o � v�i t� °� � ` � � C C U � � � � � O � � N � g G � N C ��°D U O .0 tII C U w � j-- Q. c0 IO Q .� 'a N U � C > � � e�'�oo �a�a�Cc w � .Lw o N � N � ,a �O �� c`a.5`� � c� � � U � L N m '� a°"i � u � G U) y... v1 0—�.� •"= � °C Q t4 tA � N O �.. � �U C � U c i� � .� o sd Q � � r-. �, ,� � O G � U p C 'a��Na`�i 0 � co �� L�y,.nc .0 Q� �o G � C � � ` � � � a�� C Q2 Q o O w� Q� U O j�+'C-' N� Q�� V p � � '�ry � � f� •= Rf � � w c'n 3 'U `4- � � � W fU o � N � 2 e -C > ��o � y g ,� � a hc� �w.� O �� a- = °O � w'' f0 � N F' � C C �• C V � A c�`a � a� ` � �. -� � � C�U o � � �� g cb U C "t7 Q � � X O � U 4 � � � � 7� p� �. � v � L � ,�N `C C o d �-, � � a. � o � ,�, d � � Q � � '� ."�-,m.' C �,�r, -� G O � �.0 � O Q C Q. C� d Q1 C � W '>.�' � �� 1�ry N � � '� C � w � (0 � � 4= � c��-oa�� o.� o o� o `o �n°� �� i� e .�: ❑ o � � N o C 'UCl a, � � Q �- � � � � � 9.. C (ll t � v Q � � � � � N �y l0 � � � w A Q y O L� a�i ia ?' O a�i �� V`D> � �L�'�'��nQ e o o tNtl..� ` C� f�`0 .e-. U � � ' C C 7 "(S p (0 Ul � �N pro� � � U ul p � � � � >, t6 �/1 U N p � ,r m sc�i��v��U � � U J � >+ m W (d� "'�' @ f�A C� N � U} � C C L' G .L-+ .� � � � O tII �, � w- � � � V .-. p d .ad �'°o > a°'i m�~ c ��A��L'� � � � ��w � � � � N � G1 p Q7 �� C 07 � V �� +f�t �'>� v r� c � � .. u� � � � � � °°�'�� j�v�i O�� O Z o L� tn '�om�a,�oo� e.. �+ G � 9 C +-+ � � �� O I— � ro G°� Q�i U Q- N ?. N o�°Q a o �1- �2 c� ��n �n--o�-o�'�a� N U � � o C � � N�'�� Q..Qn U �w �� N � ' � � �' �n d�° Q n � o O w "' � U °zo� O �� o U � ~ � Pa R�+�C� � W � � o V] � � � H � � G� W O P,' � � � � at 0 W W Q E-� � Q Q W ~ � � o � w p., (7 0 �� o� ONP-+ � � ��' O P�-r '� L�d � R, � z., � Q `:'P-� H �a }.-� . � � A o � �l Ae � o � � � � Q '��' ?. � � � N o � (Zi � L N,� o Q. � � � a� � � -es >,�� C °� � � O � � u C � 3 r-�• O � � ,M � � 'N � N � � �g p '°'' 'V� � � V C C .� h° � v -�o (a cr� G ° � ,Q'c � d � � � C ��oa��U asc��, �� w mv > GU f6 -e o � � •J a., � s � � � � � � � � � O � � >m..gv , o '�n ..� a� O ¢� � � � � � � L Qi �Q1 0 � � N Q °y O � (II � i� ,+-e" 3 in Q a cn a� � i� p C N � � � � (� c. � •� eZ a •p V N� '�w�•�C7 �� r+�� « N 'b M W o � � � a � � !/! �•�� d � '� �-- ce � y �►o° oy� � °° � ��zo.� -�s ° �re�'� D� � �,�U 0000;�° H O �.VUE+o� � 06 a �. U) N� e� � o o� Z �i v► m°�4 �•°•« a jC LLI�� 00.5��0 (1� z ar o �' i3 W o ,�-� 5 � ti' ,'��` ; . � � v„C u� u ,L � � a+ pp,O � OD � O r� ��C� W �j G� � e�.5 2 ��,� v�w {-- a� " � y • i oro d�o�b 7- +' v v� � ,� �n 0] c � ay... o � Z '� d A.0 +�i� o a � � ��., m � m $ � � �� g�°�" l� J '~ � � � �p a�i � � �Q �ArN � �°nC7� �°ntn L-.. � Ui o a � p �g Z L w, tv�1 ao c0 � �, p � � � � V � �� O � � � � _ � � � o C � p O � '� � :.:, � `� � C �i(¢—°.a''`"�a'� o � � � � � \r � � w � � �,� �O C�h,� a� e O � � U � Y � L � N a) v C � �?,� � � � � �' a � a3 O � � C oQ.�� o� a� o-� a�o �� o �i •� 43 � ,C � � � Q- �' v a�i �� v�i E�= �� so ° v'� �-�.� � C a �., �v/ � Ri �l =V � Q � v � � � � � � O ` oS� Q) �� C � � j ,r� � � O � � o � � � ,��, � %� f�.. N �' tI) G � .'�-� N � � di � ,r- N � Q° w� - � Q C � � � � � �Q1 o� ?. � Q�� Q�-. p`� V Q f� O � � �- � C �' � i � o OOQ,� � �- �.� � U rr+.. � � C U> O � � ,«� L N � o � O� e � � � � Q N� a� � �ra �m v L c � .p a °e3 N ; N O U �'" y' 2 � U Q � O � � � � � QI v-' 'i1 � p O fi7 � � G N � Qi � L�cii 6� "d (ll � N f- r > � � � T`.d�� C 'a a ` •� L N�+' (�a'i?� N � c�6 � � � �� c ro°',g � �ro� � �- c�m o �n e �° cq � � � '� N .0 a�� ON co m rn oo � u�°� � '� � O � Q L��O d z O � � � ��a u� .� �- a.��o� 'a o V � N � � �.0 � � [� cv �'� y,° c � °Ar ( 0 • � N �7 � � � Q � .� � � � L W-� � � o i� � 'Z3 � iJ Lil > C � "� U) e0 :� O C .— T f%� � (0 � U C f� � N .N O O .Q � � A � � � � O � d c � v� � o tti t� v � G� � a� Q l'�' U L fC � � O '"' O e � c N � L. � '� � �� A Q) c�P � O � �I N� L - p v z ,� O a I 0 �_ -D .w '� � r/� C crr o t � � NL r � � � � O C � � '� � C � � � � C + � N r.�"m (6 � e��9 C�� ,C U �p N 'a 'fl � � Q' "a - p y°' � A� m�� j � C � G �� py � � �` > •� v+ o � � a � •� N � G N � � y Q o � �=G�a��u � � N�Q� 7 �° � � �n vi � N ;(13 wL-�^ � � C � w `� � a�i« O �,rc:�� +a O ;o-, � � � N"O.: o,i C O7 � C C C3y � 3 C � � Q) O = D N � � N � �1 U ,}S O � � � � � �i.i � w i37 . • � � ro � � N `� � o � � � � 7 � C � o' �,�,c��o N `� N � � -D � U y M - � � .� � Q) C�! Q � � � � � Z � � � .� O � � C4 � O � W Z � � ,0+1 W Q � � � C Q 'a f0 ".' N � � N � N � � C �S y O .� � '� 47 U � p > N L � � � w � � _ � � � .m � N (� V .°-'�' � N « .,� +• � '� 7 � g� U a ` � � d � ��,,, ,.� ca � � � o eE�-�ai c a� •- � -rz O .L � N O ��c�U � �ra�.a� �`��.� � a� , c� [�� o G � Q 7 0._ �j �4 � � � � � � � � N � a� +-' N .0 � � � � G N � � � C � � � � O pu��a.� Q1 � • V � .G � � N Q N � �a.- [] U� vl f/J d c Ql � � cn � t�9 r�� O� N � .'-' n '°"' � � � o �ry � � Z � � � r°' .""' � �(-� � U zo� W�,O �� L7O� U � ~ � ��/� .1 � �r] G,r�� Q � O � �. a �i F°� � a� 0 W W � � � � 'L�'�' di O Q � p�., '(� o �� O '� O N P-i H � � � L o � "� w� a W � � W F� � � zQ o� � t-a a T � � N ` ..� � Cl� v-- ,� O w I� >.� N ta :r •-� V O � � � � � � Q° .� � U � � � L � v .fl o � o e � � cu o -� c4 : � � FQ C N 0 C .� -� �� '� g O ��,G O � c- � U N ^ � � � U �� c � � a� � � � � p, � N � � C N .� � � � +' C .O � � d � � � l� '� � � ocnU � � � � N t a� E ,o Z �O � � a� .� v> � o�i J � A o � c E � ! U � I[S r r� N (�S � C W � � � � � c � � o � �O � � o � �, �U � o V � � � � 0 Z U � � � � 0 Z a� 1 � i! U O C� =C �j � o a� � � r U °' `= m � ��t _ "� u'� c � � � a� � � ❑. � `'�oc ��._ � � e o � � � �' o -� � u a� N � o � `'" L- O � � � � � 7 +-' ?� Q C � � o •- � � -o � �co �o U� a�i� �� U o � � � y C �UQ ° ��d o �d"�ai � o�� `o a w � � ca U v Q3 C l8 � ❑ � u� Q a � � .� .� -�, ¢ ac a� U � U � � � � � � ro L U � � r� r. r-� � O � w � z t� � W N � � � uJ � � � � � � OO �� O� N d� � N � � � � � � � � �n � O O .-� �n � � � o � � � O � � � C7 Q �-` U � � � H � � � � W Q�--' (� O [/] � Q � � � O � � � Q � 0 � � � � � w O ? � F-+ � Q° � ��o w � � � a�� o�a Lmeat�o�o "�outheast corner of I,ong �,ake Road 8c Hwy. J.0 ��; PUD (Plan LTr�it Development) ��a Approx�mately 2.79 acres/1.87 acres developable. �`��ffienis: .Adjacent to a new 15 scr�en Carffiilce movie theaire i� �_ , ANTHONY PROPERTiE5 • 127iff Coit Road, Suitc ] 170 • DatE�s, Te�as 752a1 • Tcicph��nc (972) 991-�1�48a • I':z� (972) 99i_��9�1 ; , ' � i � � 1s f. __�, � � . , , ,;, _ �� : i ; -�a,� �•�._�..�� _.- a '� � �' � � �� • #: *:... . = _ " �+ �t t �< ►, . �:� �� _��, ' � ' � .. '' � � 4� ' ` �� 1� �< a r, .�_ .� � �, � � � . .. ,i�., . , . ,, � � �! ` � - , . r ' � ;. : � ' ,: . : '` r � � : � } . '. ! . � : : � • 'i .; � - i �.. � �: �� "�,,' `-� � � _- . � ; �. 1 ' ' ' �: . : �, .. - i "... � [. �� . � � .,,. WH�R�A�q #he Mounds View City Council approved the Theater PCanned Unit Development {PUD) Agreemenf an May 11, 'l998; and, W�tEREAS, the appraved uses for the iheater PUD included a theater, three office buildings, restatarants and refail uses; ancf, �FiER�A�, the lofi located at 2442 County Highway 10, Iegally described as Lot 1, BEock 2; Anfhany Pi�operties Addition, was approved by the Council for a Restaurant use; and, WWEREAS, having been unabfe to develop the properfy with a resfaurant, the ' , developer wishes to amend the PUD Agre�rnent by adding "office" as an allowed use for the site; and, WHERE,4S, the Planning Commission has reviewed this request and has examined the potential adverse effects that could resu(t from such an amendmenf. NODU, TFiEREFORE, �E ii RE�OLV�D fihat the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following finding of fact reiated to this request: 1. The lot in question, 2442 County Highway 10, described by the cieveloper as Outparcel "A," is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the only allowed use for the site is a restaurant. 2. The (ot in question remains vacant and as such the developer has requested an amendmeni to the PUD to allow for an office building to be cansfructed on ihe site. 3. The Future Land Use Map fram the City's Comprehensive Plan designates this area as a Regional Commercial Planned Unit Develapmenf which is consistent with the zoning of the site. 4. 2442 County Highway 10 is within the Cifiy's primary commercial corridor and as such either a res�auranf or an office building would be a fitfiing deve�opment. PUD Amendmenfi Report ApriE 16, 20Q3 Page 6 5. The property is a corner lot, bordered to the norfh by County Road 10 and to fihe west by Long Lake Road. To the south is a wooded wetland. The nearest "improvemenY' is the 40-unit Wifdwood Manor mulfi-family residential development across Long Lake Road. The construction of an office bui(ding would have no depreciatory affects upon this area. 6. ihe original inteni of the PUD wouid be preserved in thaf the same architectural requirements and development sfandards would prevail for this lot, regardless of whether developed as a restaura��t or office building. 7. The developer has indicated that the office concept would filf a niche nof currently present or available in the community. 8. The improvement of an office building on this lot wo�ld have potentially fess of an impact tio ihe multi-family developmen# across the street on Long Lake Road than would a restaurant. 9. There do not appear to be any adverse effects associated with this proposed amendment. �� f°T �IJRT�iER f2ESOL��I� fihat fhe Mounds View �lanning Commission, based upon the above finding of fact, does hereby recommend that the Theater Pianned Unii Development (PUD} be amended such that the use "Office" be added to those uses expressly permitted an Lot 1, Bfock 2, Anfihony Properties Rddition. �E IT �ItV.41.LY RES�LilED that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs staff io forward this resolution and the two draft ordinances to the City Council prior to approva! of the minufies. Adopfied this 16th day of April, 2Q03. ATTEST: (SEAL) Gary Stev�nson, Chairperson James Ericson In#erim City Adminisirator `:::'j iiem No: 07 fVleetirtg �ate: April 16, 2003 T"ype ofi �usu�ess: Discussian I ,: i . . ;' / :_;. . � :�, . � ioo Mounds View Planning Commission Frc�rr�a James Ericson, Ac#ing City Administratar It�m iitle/Subject: Consideration of a Possible Amendment fo the Zoning Cade Relating to Expansions of Existing Mufti-Family Residential Siructures •: i�. � .t: ... Afi fhe Planning Commission's last meeting, f repor�ed that the City Councif was interested in having the Planning Commission review the Zoning Gode and make a recommendation that woufd either restricf or control the process by which an existing multi-family residentia! deveiopmen� could expand. I explained thafi the mefihod by which control cauld be exercised is by requiring all existing developments ta go through � condiiional use process to expand density (the number of individual dweEling units.) i . Last year, ihe City recently adopted a change to the Zoning Code perfiainir�g to townhomes ': and multi-family developments. The chang�, effecfivated by Ordinance 698, removed CUP requirements on townhomes, and instituted CUP requirements for multi-family developmenfis. The diff�rence between the two can be detined as follows: Townhomes are individually awned and occupied on individual lots, whereas multifamily dwel�ings are typically rental unifis on one parcel. (That does nofi preclude, however, townhomes from being rented.) Since multi-family dwellings are now considered a conditional use in eiiher the R-3 and R-4 Zoning districts, it could be as simple as adding one line in both districts which require �hat afl existing complexes go through a CUP to expand density: Mult�-Fami! develo ments havir� been construcfed riorto Janua 1 2003 sha!! firsf obtain a Conditional Use Permit CUP rior to ex andin fhe number of dwe!linq unifs orfhe principal buildinp foafprint !n addifion to the crif�ria ouflined in Section 1925 all zoning buildinq and parkinq reauirements shall be safisfied as a condition of approval. �- •��1�-. :.: , Please consider fii�e above language and discuss whether it or different language would accomplish the goal of controlling m�lti-famify expansion. Based on the Commission's direction, 1 can draft an ordinanc� and resolutior� for your action an May 7, 2003. �S�$ ��'�7L James Ericson Interim City Administrator I : � I / ; ': _ �, � Tae Frmrrt : Item TitIelS�bjecto � • ltem IVa: 08 �Iee�irs� ��ie: April 16, 2003 iyp� af �usihess: (nformation Mounds View F'lanning Commission James Ericson, Acting City Adminisirafor Renumbering of Planning Commission Resoiutions The Planning Commission adopted two resolutions on April 2, 2003: Resolution 720-03, a resolution approving a variancE for the home under construcfiion at 7741 Long Lake Road, and Resolution 721-03, a resolution recommending approval of a development reviewforthe expansion of the business at 28�5 County Nighway 10. • Bo#h of these resoEution numbers had already been assigned and as such need fa be renumbered. 0 � Resolution 720-03 becomes 722-03 Resolution 721-03 becomes 723-03 I would recommend thaf the April 2, 2003 minufies be amended to reflect these new resolution numbers. . , � , No action is needed; this is brought to the Commission's a�tenfion purefy for your own information. �C�.�� rfz.i.C.4.�►i� James Ericson lnterim Ci�y Administrafior I 1'l��LA��11'60.5�% �� 1� 1�'1� V 1'�� PY� �F I�ISl`tll`CA1V� 4.�1V119'3��1�1 1 CI'I'� OF IVIOITl�'I}� �TIE�1 ��.T ��V��'�y lrl��'�i �8gll��i �eetl%1� Apri129 2003 Mounds Vie� Cit3� FIall �401 I��ghvvay IO,1VIou�d� jlievv, IVIl�T 55112 1. Call to Or°cier The meeting was called to order by Cl�air 5ievei�son at 7: 2. ka�ll Call Members Present: Commissioners Johnson Members Absent: None. Aiso Present: Community De ; _. �1-_I' i Index, to` 11 Plannin; + Applicant: Plannin�:� �s No Parking on ( i�ag Cas� I�Io. Ii venue & Gretchen Davis ;ant: Greg Johnson �ng Case I�o SI'-114-03 �sion of Text Amendment to Code for Pawnshops 3. '' Ag�prove 1Vlinutes a. February 19, 2003 b. March 5, 2003 , ,<,_1. x�,�::<...�,.�. , Scotch and �age 2 �3 � 10 3'. I�1o�ncIs V�ew �i�r�ning C'o�nmi�s�os� 12e�ular Ii�Iee�itxg Ap�°il �, 2003 P�ge 2 MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Hegland. To Approve the Planning Cammission Minutes for February i 9, 2003, and March 5, 2003 as Pres�nted. � None. � Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Mation carried. Citize�� kt.�qa�esgs and Co�r►ene�ts on Ite�n� I�Iot an Public I�ea�°i�g a�ad Cot�side�°at�an flf a Reques# I2oad Community Development Director Ericson provided an explanation of tr the variance request indicating that the City had made an error when it isi and naw ihe sti-ucture is 11 feet into tlae "prevailing" setback. I He further struct�.�xe is made of concrete and there would be`a large cost.associated � concrete and moving the structure back the 11. feet to meet the setbacic re at 7741 I�ong surrounding uilding permit E that the ✓ing the D'zrector Ericson indicated he had gone th�i�ough the seven required hardship criteria in l�is Staff report and commented that it could be argued that tliere is a hardship not caused by the developer in this situation. He then said that granfing this variar�ce would mean that the Commission i wouid also need to address the total square footage of the garage and shed, which together '� exceed the zxxaximum of 1800: sauare feet. Director Eiicson indi additional :setbacl� �re� have been a problern does feel badly aboul Commissiorier Johns over ,the 1800 square Dii'ector Ericson iz�di ed that Staft'feels badlytnat this error occurred and said tliat if the rement had heen caught the developer has indica#ed that it would not niove the entire structure back the 11 feet. He then said that while Staff e incident, he is not sure if staf�s error along justifies a variance. many variances have been granted for accessory structures the City has not granted any variances for over the 1800 square Director Ericson commented that he does not see an issue with a conditional use permit request for an o�versize garage but does see an issue with approving a variance for 2000 square feet ' versiis the 1800 square feei allowed by the City's Code. He then commented that the City, in esse�ce, approved the size when the building permit was approved and said that if this variance is approved the Commission would need to seriously consider approving the other variance requesi. Commissioner Joluison aslced where t11e shed is located. � 1�/Iouncls �Iyew PlaeamYng C`or�mission �Z�gular° Io/Ieeting ��;12s 2003 Page 3 Director Ericson indicated it was located in the northeast corner of the property at the rear of the lot. Coinmissioner Zwirn asked if the shed was concrete as well. Director Ericson indicafied that it was not. He then said that financial implications for the City due to the erroz�. Coinmissioner Zwirn asked if the structure could be Director Ericson indicafed that the wall of the garage could would require new footings and forn�s at great expense to tl Commissioner Hegland asked for a cosi estimate for movirig the Commissioner Miiler referenced page 3 of the t�at errors be corrected. Director Ericson indicated that the req states if an error is made, corrections Y would be very costly to move the struc Coin�xzissioner Miller co this home being forward Chair 5t Directar Chair St nt is frorrz `tk�e be made: He nented that the homes:on Lo �those h.oznes causes a dxstra v far along the shed was: that the shed is completed. e puhlic lieaxing at 7:19 p.m. tl�e variance could result in : the error was found. bacic 11 feet but that er and property owner. who'makes the requirement Buiiding Codes that is a severe case in tlaat it Road are a11 set back farther and Neal Zinser from Hamiltor� �reek`indicated the homeowner was wiliing to expand the living space into the garage to bring the size of the garage into compliance with the City's Code. He then said that the problem is not as simple as moving the house bacic 11 feet as the entire struciure is made of coricrete and ail of that concrete would need to be removed and disposed of and he would have to start over with an estizlzated cost to do so of $75,000. he and �he home owners have a desire to work with the City and the 1 not have had a problem moving the structure back if the setbacic was caught on of the concrete. Comrnissioner Hegland aslced what the cost would he for the homeowzxers to tuz-in the extra garage space into living space. 19�oun�s View Pl��ning Co,n�zss�o� lae�ula� Nleet�ng A.pri� 2, 2003 Page 4 Mr. Zinser indicated the cost for doing so would be approximately $10,000 to $15,0�0. Commissioner Miller commented that $75,a00 seex�as like a lot io move a structure 11 Mr. Zinser explained tl�at because the entire thing is made of concrete all af has to be removed and he has to start completely over so the costs include rE ; redoing it in the right location. , " Commissioner Hegland asked for an estimate on the costs the lot. Mr. Zinser said he estimates the home to cost Commissioner 3ohnson indicated he has an issue with granting a of garage space but would be okay witl� granting the variance for Chair Stevenson indicated the homeowners have living space eliminating the need for a variance';c Director Ericson agreed that the issues with tY space. He then sazd that he would revise;tlie 1 footage would need to he brought into compli Bob Moore of 7777 Long Lalce forward of the other homes. _: Don Rossbach of 7740 Lon lines and aslced whether the Chair Stevensori inc Mr. Rossbacl� said l the house sticks out Stevenson asked indicated that were met. to the concrete �sai. and 1800 square feet space to ►e space is used for Iiving the garage square bad to have the structure the home seemed close to the property are n1et. 5,000 seems high for moving the structiue bacic and said that `from tl�e loolc of t1�e streei. back the homes are. the homes are 48 to 50 feet back. Terry Hi�e; of 7750 Long Lake Road commented that it seems the develaper wonld need to ` change t�e;doors on the garage to convert to Iiving space due to the way it is oriented. He �hen said that he is surprised that City Staff did not notice this before things got tl�is far along in the process as it is clear that the home siicics ou� beyond the others on the street. Scott Davis, the property ovvner of 7741 �,ong Lalce Road, indicated ihat tl�e ho�ne has a vvraparound porch eliminating the need to change tl�e garage doors. , , l0�ouncls jlie� Plan�in� Comrnission l�eg�la�° P/Ieeteng A�ri12, 2003 Pa�e � Mr. Hiye indicated that it seeins to be a quaiity structure but he is surprised that the garage was built in the bacic. Chair Stevenson indicated that the structure in the bacic is a shed and xt will Tori Johnson of 7730 Long Lake Road indicated she was c City's Codes as weil as aesthetics but has decided that the character to the neighborhood. She then said her only real since the structure is forward of the others and biocks the 1 expressed concern for the underground utilities, especially into whether there are any speeial setbaelc requirements frc Director Ericson agreed to loolc into any potential issues f that the in setb� is that ��there is a safe h�.down the street. ine, and asked Staff �eline. the Mr. Zinsex• indicated that someone from Lot 2 had been gzyen information'irom the City that the setbacic is 30 feet. He then said that a 40-foot se�back for that 1ot would dramatically affect the size of the house on the carner lot. He furtlier coinmented that they want to work with the neighbors and comply with City requests but this error would be too cosfly to rectify as there are 12-inch thicic concrete walls. Scott Davis indicated this was a� `; to meet them under less ominous said that he and his wife are willi resolve the oversize garage zssue; Mr_ Davis explained that lot of wooclwox�zig,equi fiu-ther indicated that the looking ai the bacic ��if; c move it back hac�':he kno� Mr. Davis indicated he a trees`were taken out for c Commission �ifivation and'told the z�eigl�bors lae had hoped id in no way wants to alienate them. He then costs of enlarging the living space in order to #he reasQn the shed is in the back is Uecause he is a carpentex and llas a �ment azid the shed was to provide a woodworking shop for him. He house is iocated where it is in an attempt to keep the neighbors from �f his house instead of grass and trees but he would have been willing to the safety cox�cern of tk�e neighbors but said tl�at before the n you could not see down the streei. to loolc ii�to the pipeline issue. �ommissioner Zwim'commented that if this variance came before the Cammission prior to canstruction there is no way it would be approved and lie does not feel it is proper to approve this after the fact. He then said ihat ii is unfortunate that the City made a mistake but the structure is `very imposing and there is an opportunity to rectify the situation rather than modifying the rules to allow it to continue. He furtl�er cominented that tl�is home affects what happens on Lots 2 and 3. I9�aunds View Planning Corntt�issio�a 1Ze�ular IVIeet�ng Apr°Xl 2, 200� Pa�e b Commissioner Jol�nson said he is not willizzg to risk the City having to pay $75,000 to solve the problem. He then said that in no other cities do they require new developments to match the prevaiIing setbacics. Commissioner Scotch aslced how this happened and thez� said she does not feel the developer or homeowner should pay a penaIty when zt was a City error. Mr. Zwirn commented that this is very similar to the Mezz� issues with that property due to a questionable variance tha Commissioner Johnson commented tl�at in many cases the subjective and he does see a laardship in this case. The Co�ssioners discussed other circu�nstances that allowed. Commissioner Zwirn aslced wl�ether the City Ir�ternational Building Code that even if it is � and whether that is open to interpretation. Director Ericson commented that � He then said that it is probably a d may not warraz�.t doing so. ��T them Miller ir �1 ihe cri Direcior Ericson coinn criteria. He then said 1 of time it pro�ably woi hardship for the devel c that;there is a hardship r.v ; is open `to znte� position but the operty and theze, axe ongoing �d the development to proceed. ; p; criieria ai•e questionable and ar to this o�e that were at the wording of the he situation rnust be rectified ion when you are an attorney. associated with the litigation �d she felt the Cammission should find that no hardship exists as �re met. She then s�id �hat the Commission is bound by the : Cauncil is not and`she would like to deny the variance and let ; Council' could allow it if so desired. that often times there is subjectivity involved with the hardship ed with Commissioner Zwirn that zf tl�is had been asked for ahead �e been denied and aslced wllether the error itself warrants the [e then said that, litigation possibilities not withstanding, he feels nmissioner Hegla��d commented that it is not as simple as whether the Commission would � appraved tlus if aslced for ahead o�time, as the facts are the building is there and it is cost ubitive to move` rt: Qmissioner Zwirn commented that he questions the integrity of this body if it does not make thai the criteria are met when granting variances. Cammissioner Hegland comrnented that justifiable criterion is that the building codes are for new construction and this is reconsiruction and the codes do not necessarily fit. He further '1 , 1Vlounds Vee�w Plann�n� Co�mzssio�► laeg�alar IVI�e�ing Aprii 2, �003 Page 7 commented that the error was made, the building is already there, the costs to move it back are cost prohibitive, and he feels tlze Commission needs to consider aIlowing the variance. Commissioner Hegland said he did not feel it would be appropriate to monetarily penalize the developer and hoineowner for an error by the City and he feels that as long as the k�omeowner is willing to assume the costs for adding additional living space so that tl�e Commission is not being asked for a variance far extra garage space he would have no problem approving;the setback variance. Commissioner Johnson commented that the Commission existing neighborhoods on lots that would have been too One of the neighbors indicated that the home is more no homes but he does not feel the homeowner ar developer move it. He then said he is not opposed to the variance. Coinmissioner Miller comn�ented that the Commis� determining hardship. Director Ericson indicated that One of the neighbors indicated that granting this far Lot 2. Mr. Zinser indicatec bacl� on L�it 2 woulc he lias plaiis to cons whether lie'�eeds to Chair Stevenson ask Coxnmissioner Zwir would be asking the he wantec '. mean thal .ruct it at tl come befa ed Staff to be ven consider �s for on. forward of the other � that laigl� a pzice to cs wherl that a variance would be needed work with the neighbors and then said that moving the home � house on Lot 3, the corner lot, would be only 24 feet wide but size and will need to wait to see how things progress to see he Conunission for a variance or not. Ed the Resoiution. that this is Lot 1 and there is the potential that Mr. Zinser 'deration on Lots 2 and 3. Zinser said the possibility exists but he is plannzng a 24 feet wide house on Lot 3 at this time cannot say definitively whether he would be before the Corrnnission on one or both of t1�e for a variance wirn com�nented that this �uould coine before the Cominission two more times. uould Iilce Staff to review the surveys. Director Ericson read the now therefore sections of the Resoiution. He then caznmented that Staff recezved the surveys for both Lots 1 and 2 at t11e same time and Lot 2 shows a setback of 41 feet but Lot 1 shows 30 feet. i � IVio�nds Vie�v Pianning Coin�assior� l�egular ldieeting t�p�°i12, Z00� Page � Mr. Zinser explained ti�at the house on Lot 2 was shown back at 41 feet because the purchaser had asked thai it be located there to avoid dan-�age to as many mature oak trees on the lot as possible. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at S:OS p.m. The Connnlission asked whether Mr. Zinser and the h tl�at if the home is destroyed it has to be rebuiit at the Mr. Zinser and tl�e homeowz�:er indicated they were aware with it. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Song. To Approve R� an 11 Foot Front Setbacic at 7741 Lox�g Lake Road as Ayes — 6 Nays — 6. I)fl�ctass P�opo�ed No Parl�ar�� 12eq��si on �1LrY ution Appraving carried. Community Development Director Ericson reviewed with the Coi�nmizssion the discussion from the Council meetzng concerning the recommendatzon to post Greenfield Avenue no parking and aslced for direction from fihe Commission as to how they wished ta proceed on the matter. Direcior Ericson indicated he had gone out to the'site ar�d ineasured and that it is possible to parlc three cars from 30 feet back from the stop sigri and keep them in front of the property involved. A fourth car cvu,ld be added butt not''contained entirelv in front of the business. Director Erii three or four feei or reafti: issioner Zwirn irii y the caveat has � it parking on the s ; would be allovwE ther the';Commission wanted to amend its recommendation to allow front ofthe business and then post no parking from that point to 350 xecommendation of no parlcing. it each and every time Mr. Farrell has mentioned worlcing with e would expand the parlcing lot as long as the City did not then aslced whether expanding the driveway to allow vertical Ericson indicated thai the Cifiy's Code would not allow t1�at but said it is a possibility there is a safe drive aisle. expressed concern for fire truck access. Dia-ector Ericson indicated that the fire department prefers 24-foot drive aisles but there ar-e some at 1� feet within the City. He then said the fzre department would need fo review any proposed site plan. ; =; 10/Ioa�nds `Vie�r Pianr�ing C'o�missiora �2eg�l�r Ii�Ieeting A�ral 2, 200� Page 9 Commissioner Hegland asked why the Commission would do this. He then said that Mr. Fazxell has not offered any alternative parlcing solution for off site parking as asked by the Commission and he does not want to cl�ange the recommendation_ Coin�nissioner Scotch agreed. Con�unissioner Jahnson agreed and said that commons : parlcing was not adequate for Mr. Farrell's plans far the Commissioner Zwirn indicaied he had spoken at the Cou that Council IVlembers had not done their homework and asked if Mr. Farrell intended to come to this meeting to c Director Ericson indicated he was notified of the meeting There was consent among Commission Mem post Greenfield Avenue no parking. 7o Consicieratio� of a I)eve�i 2�65 Cou�ty �i�h�ay 10 Community Developn�ent Di Comn�ission indicating that a depth of the lat it is unlilcely � the expansian would give the the applicant intends to dress MOTION/SECQND Miller� County, Highway 1 �. J vvas �o have di said he was shocked '` �ut the issues. He fhen to the �usine�s �,ocated at >n explained the development request for tl�e foot addition 'is sought. He then said that given the hboring'properties wouid even notice the expansion and iditional work space inside. He further commented that of the garage with a hricic treatment. ►rove Resoluiion 721-03, a Resolution Review ta Expand the Business Located at 2865 Nays — 0 frorr� voting on this matter. Motion carried. c��s an� 12evie� off Pr°oposed Code Amendments �o I�e�u�afe the �itnn� and ensnre of Pawn �I�ops rn IVlounds Vie� _ Community Development Director Ericson indicated that Staff had done a lot of research into the pawnshop o�dinance and then reviewed the proposed changes with tile Commission. He ihen indicated the police departmerzt had reviewed the ordinance and made several recommendations. They are concerned that the fees charged will not actually cover the cost of Staff time. 1�€our►ds iT�e� P�a�aa�i�g Coa�inissio� 12egulaa° 1VI��tiaag r��ril 2, 2003 P�g� 14 Commissioner Hegland said he does not thizilc the transaction fees will cover the administrative costs to oversee the business. Director Ericson indicaied the police departnlent had recommended that the liceiising fee be raised from $2,500 to $5,000 to ensure that the City covers its costs and the investigation fee be raised fo $750.00. Commissioner Hegland indicated he would like to see the to $10,000. Director Ericson indicated that the Ordinance would allow as a pei7nitted use. Comn�issioner Hegland aslced whether Staff l�ad inserted pawnshops could be located to each other. Director Ericson indicated that loca#ion information portion of t�e Ordinance and noted the spacing is 1, in B4 zoning close requirements Director Ericson reviewed Ordinance 712 wit� the Commission indicating that the police department had asked that consignment not be allowed as it would be difficult for the department to traci� as consignments are not a reportable transaction. The police department also had an � issue with bulk purchases of new and used merchandise so the Ordinance was amended to allaw - for bulk purchases only from an established busiziess with a permanent place of business. well Commissioner posted at the li Ericson indi � the general phs n�ust be would require tlie pawnshop to be on the requirements for pawning articles. of requirements for pawning articles would be �.s not already zn tl�e Ordinance it could be added. He then irements with the Commission indicating that video and/or se pawning items as well as of any items witl�out a seriai Ericson indicated the police depar�me��t had asked ihat the hold be lengthened to 90 er than 60 days, the hours of operation be changed tQ 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and that be: t�rohibited. Commissioner Hegland asked Staff to Ioolc into whether gaixzbling i�eeded to be addressed in the Ordinance. -- :�; Io/Iounds Vie� Plannang Conaani�s�o� �eguIar l�ieeii�g Aprat 2, 2003 Page il Director Ericson noted that other cities restrict cash checicing facilities within the pawnshop ordinance and indicated that could be added later, if z�ecessary. He t1�en said il�at Staff would make the recoinmended changes and provide ordinances for review a# the next meeting. Mr. Przetycl�i izadicated he did not have any issues with the proposed changes but asked the Commission to consider aliowing the hold ta remain at 60 days rather than the 90 �ays. Commissioner Hegland indicafied that Staff would need to research and provide a recommendation oi� fhe transaction fees. 9. I�e�t Pla��aing Co�nmission I�eeiing: April 16, 20 10. Adjoua°�mez�t �o ,Age�da Session } adjourned the I' I _, ,:.,� '. `i � f. . • ;' /, � _ ` ;� Too From: lterr� Title/Su�ject: r . f�em No: AS-1 IVie�ting Date: April 16, 2�03 7ype of �usines�: Discussian Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Acting City Adminisfirator Review �988 Community Wide Survey The Mounds View Parks and Recreation Commission has been discussing the possibili#y af underfiaking a professionai cornmunity-wide parks survey, and in the 2003 budget, $7,500 was included for such a task. The issue was discussed by the City Council on April 7, 2003 and there was direcfiion ia apen the survey to all face�s of City Ha[I service delivery, not just a Parks surv�y. AI! City Commissions are being asked to review the 1988 survey and to suggesi quesiions which may be relevant to their specific function. .; .. .. . , Attached is Greg Lee's April 7 report to the City Councii and fhe 1988 Community Survey. Please review both and discuss possible questions to be inefudecf in a new community su rvey. �U� �� James Ericson interim City Cierk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Greg Lee's Report to Council — April 7, 2003 2, 1988 D�cision Resources Community Survey � r- �,. , , �: i' •; _, It�m �,��s�abJ��to - _ , ..; � f��rn N�. 6 T� og ��in�ss: YVK WK: Woric Ssssfon; PM: f'ubJic Meering; C�: Cens�nt Agenda; C8; CouncJlBusJness � ,. _ • � ' � �, .� � �'_�-, �,�' • • T a _.� �� ►: - . .;_ .: .. _ ; . :.. ,_ . �_ . -- . _ _ � '+: : a; ` . � - . • . , . . �_ !' f • �-" � •- .l=. � -��, ! �--" � �. �� i • �' #� �:{ ��l:'.�� - � ' f : �. :.- �; � �. i �. ' _ • 1 - • • ��• �: - �f` - � ' � � w. ! � . ,. � .__ ,. � �: ". 7 . � .� � �! �. � �. '� ' : • ... 9 S. 'f- • . 2' . ' ! �� : �. _:!. .. • " ., . �. n •.�. � •a_� �_• ir � • ! � � r l��.. �� ' R � i ' _ A copies o� the survey results h�v� beer� placed in �ach �f the �i�y C�uncil's "In�� ba�k�ts at City Hall. : 111 : ': . `- �.: s . �. � . a• � �-. c .s :. . . �_-= fi� � � ,- ° r �' _ � _ _� � • . _ . . _ „ _ . � . ,� .,� . - = t�. s � �. : �- - - _ . . -- - • * • � �� ' �� , � �� _ - � • � � - �. �. ; . '�, • ;- • : ' ' � - .., �. • '..; � ., i, � � �, `; i - ^, R :� ' ._. ... :.� } . _: - • ��. - -� ... �: * �, � _ : �-R��:, g!` -- •�,' � R. • � _ �� :� 4""__s � i. � e� . • � •- _ - � �_ ,. _ � � . � - - -=! .. I� = - i' ' � . ��, �. .� . - � � — ! _ , . ... :. ' : � _ - �r � • . #� . r � � �; - s �� '+ � � �; � � �'� r, �1 � !1� � �� .�. - �� ' f� " l '� � � - ., � �, ,.. . . � ' r : � ' �. � , M, � �� '. !� ! .�: . • . ..! �� i 'r'R �._� > . ��.f -' _ s�� tha4 th� questi��s id�nf�fy �ither individu�l parks or th� park syst�rn in general. Th� Mayor fel# th�t rr�ost people take "�wner�hip" of the �ark Yhat is cia��st to th�m a�d th�y r�ay war�t �menitie� ar chang�s that lvgically or �rrvir�nmen4a#ly c�nnot �e d��e. ihe Cout�cil tho�aghf that i 0 ques�id�s from each of the Ciiy's commission ccauld b� i�corporated into the p�rk� survey, to cr�ate a"iiv�ble community surv�y° _ vuith the canderstandi�g ihat a surv�y of �his mag�ritude requires a lat of pr�paratian, c�r� and time. Th� �ot�ncgl agread tha# th� Parks �nd Recr�ation Commission cauld proce�d with �h� dev�lopment of ih�ir questions and rationales for ihenn. ��_;,��`_ ;;�'� }�_ - • - �' � '. '' �`� "- • �� i�,� f 'r. �- �" ' �i:1. . .. � _ � _ .: - - � . : � .♦ . _ , • � � s E.. - � �/ '. _ . � ,. - a"-}s _ '. ��. } - � . " . ,. , 11 s s• . .. ` •_. 1t ' r� 1 ,t �,. __ °:i !'c s� '- -� . '� � !_. = .1' . �!" �;''�a �, � .. _ � . _: � �3 �,�- -. � - ��i •� .• �.: s �� , , _ . • : . � � .. ��.., ! � ' �, � � �_ = i :, _ �' � . � �� ' � `� ._ � -_ --- - � _ a.._. _ . ; :. � ' _ � :: � � ' : ^�. � • � • :: ..--, } ! ��:♦ ` �. ♦ i t � � � <: • .. �! i - = � � � � � :: :. ; � . �� . � : ' � i: � � .: • • ' � :.. � . � .. r. � .. � . �. , ° � � ._ � . . � , .. - � - � �i _ - � � • � � ,. �. _�< � � i • _ �" _ _ � _ M � , - t- - - - - - , , s - • • '' 1 '-' .�� c _. � �.- • , • • •: . • ::• • =- . _ _ • � - •.: r = :�. •�_ _� . • � • �- �- cr • � s_ �'. ' !_� . � • •r �:.. a •_:••:. : , City C�unci[s across the metro �r�a h�v� used survey data to obtain a better und�rstanding of 4he vi�ws, valueso and n�eds of th� residents of fiheir city. This data can be utiliz�d when �n�idering expa�sion o# Giiy s�nrice�. lt is equaily, or p��ps more, vafuable when Cities need to mak� tough budg�t decisions on what it�rns to cut and what pr�grams to eiiminafe. R�comrn�nd�i6on: St�f� is Ic�okirag for d'[r�ctioe� frorr� th� City Council p�rt�ining to this matker. Specifically, Sfaff is iooking for dir�ction v�hether th� City Coun�il is ir�teresi�d in �ntr�cting i� p�rfiorr� � Comm�niiy ��rvey. � - .. . - °�; � �: . .�.. - � ��. �,� � � •� �� February, zooa - ): �: �; +;11 i � - Surv�y C�ues$ianS: �. How often during the y�ar do you us� the f�ounds Vievv parks? Please specify. Sumrner �inter Spring Fatl All of the e4bov� �. How do you g�i to th� Park(s)? �lalk Drive �ik� Ail of the Above Now clas� �re you to a Park(s)? (Please �pecify the P�rk(s) �1so)� 3. VVhy do yc�� use the Park(s)? Walking Bikir�g Child Summ�r Activltie�lPlaygro�nd Family �rganization Recr�aiion Sports Otl�ee� 4. ln Generai, what d� y�u Yhink �f the avaiiabil+ty and condition of ih� t�ounds View P�rk ar�d Recreatior� feat�res: Identificaiion/Signag� �lalk�ng and �ik� P�ihs �uildings Ptaygro�nd Eq�iprnent ' '', �1 Picnic Areas - ir�es Fi�lds (Saftball, Soccer, �asebalf) Rinks (Fiockey and €�iea�ure) �pen �pace Nai�re Study How would yau rat� its featur�s and condifiion? t/Vhat other f��tures wouEd you like #o see occur? 5. V!lhich Park do you use the most'? 6. Would you supp�rt a boc�d 'assu� for the develc�pm�r�t of items within th� Park(s)? � . . . .; ! . .: . - . . . _ . - . : ,: . : �: �. Flov� woutd ya�a rat� the fallowi�ga Surf�c� F'1ay Areas (�ootball, �occer, ��sebald, Softbali, Op�n I'!ay Fi�ld�) Lig�t�d y�s or na P�larked N�t�r� °ir�iE� 6�iking/�lai0ti�g irail� �i�� `Tr�i1� Cra�� Co�ntry �kiiing Sl�di�g , • f ; �� ! . . • - . � ��. �. � Y.�� i � ��r ' �. .. .., � _- . ^' 1 ♦ , t !: _ • . ._ . � � • �. . , �- - � - �i�r i :R. i -�� • � ! }.. #". _ 9. VVh�t do yo� �s� fihe Connmunity C�r��er for�? Ex�rcise �quiprri�ni �anqu�t C�nter �ym Meeiings 10. ►lVhat oth�r featuPes wo�ld yo� iike ta se� at i�e Comm�nity Cent�r? r �� .. � � _. -� ' � � . . � �rom�DECISION RESQUftCES LTDs 612 920 1069 03/31/20Q3 12e14 #165 P�Odl/002 T�o �'eg I.� F� �o (76�� 7�4-3�6? �'�na: � P�er ��,��: i�°�J�t �opoa� ��,�t,;��l.Y; ;; ' �o� �� tdm 312� ��an �o�r� AAi�n��li�, t�inne�t� 5�4i6 (�92) �20-2401 �� {81� 9� ��teo 31, �Q03 � e�o 2o includir� i1�is w� .� �� .� = � ; ; :-� :�- � . �. � . ,; _ , , . . � .� , . - • �� - - � � �, � � . . ,. � � :. ► : ��: . �� 3 . � � . �� : .� . � . , � :� '�.c::' � : �_;.: � �1ty ��S � �tll�y � 400 Ii�dorra Sar�xple of �ity ofivlounds �ie� resides�ts � 30 Que�sdo�zs � '�iritte� �lysis of Suxv�+ � Fres�n��tion of I'at�, �uud Fia ' � 400 �donn ��.mpt� � ��h additioa�al qu��n is $135.00. �;� :r� �� C�mpany policy r�ui�s �n�-half'oft� tot�fl cvst �t t.�� imc oi�a� �pproval ofttae qu�sbio� ��I�R Tp %i�OREC; i� r '�r i� dv� �t th� tir� of � d�.iv�rgr of t%e �epark o��gs. From:DECISION f�SOURCES LTDP 61� 920 1069 03/31/2003 12�14 #165 Pa002/002 �°a�� Td 1� : ��l,- . :,.. ;_ �it�-x ,� ��. i ��.� ;y��, �� „ •��- •��: �.:,� .;. ��_,.�r�e_ �, ;:�:;� .� �.�:.�_ e ' � � �, � � � '. �� : ��■ `. :}� i" •� -.t. 1 = r �:. , t "Y. -: � . ��'".. � `� f �. _ l , f. C'� � f t s� �. - 3 r =-.��: :�1 it_.:.. �: - �1��'�'t��.9�1 - t._ _ �.: -ft ��+f --� ;.:YI�Y°" ��! '�:. � �� . � ` � t r �! � Y . _ i � a r .- : i �� " � , i. R �. .�. .. : . ' �. 1 : A' 1 -i" i "' = ; + , � -. � .w F: _ . �� ^ �.�.qji 3.��. 1�:1 .r � F.��',.'�-�...4� a:fl�[i_ !"-.�� "%�,. 1; 1' :1 n �r,R � 1_ f �. 1 =.�= � . �� f ., ll� - � � "i:.) 11.- : l � � •� . � r_1 #. �l =��}. � �.� �� - 't ..'� � -- •'1 ". _:� �.'. �..� _ -{ �I� � '. . a`1 / �. - � ) . : � � x� I ! %'. � 1 " l T'� � . .:-�. .. \ .I l l: . " ., �I f } 1 � � 1 :, i. 11 � t l �: � � r, � � =� �� .>; 1 \ r! , aa 1. �1' � • ' 1 � � : � ^ � " R '. � si " i. ' 1 - `..-' �� " !� • 7'� • ,: �� " � i ' � ri '�. � --� � t � ' t � ". �:, �:x ♦ :,:. ;. - - � � : l w. "� t n. �. 't : ' ! -�7 � ' i++ � . : i . } ` : ,�3' i " _ ...•t1� .� l�l •... .' �' FY •_.�. �- ... . ._ � .,. ,.:', ` . _ _, - ' , ♦' L - � . �'� .. ! ./ a. i- ,.. , � : �.. X � "� � ' Y .M l : '1 �.�. . ♦ N' ...i . d � � Y_ �i � :. ; . : ... ..,._�� _� '-.� . i..�_ 'i,lr�:_'�� ! ` ;?' 1't -'.�l 1"",.;.��. �2� � .e�, li?` 1F_--.'aif '.I�..k: �. � , f �; i i' 1 s� .!" 3 i' �_�. 1, [A Y. i. � > 1-. • �/. � ' w�i�s Ciiy Cous�cil �d/or sta�in �th� �vor� �ssi�n � %�m�l px�e�t�don to �xpl�s� �d dis�� #3�s results of �ic ��y. T�e fi�l p�a�n�ear� or • dis�u�ion se��iv� r� be �d ai a ti� �as�i�xt far �o�.rd megnber� �.ndlor staf� afta° de�iv�ry �f ��tie� rep�at, .� �1 �°it�en rcpvrt vvauld b� �d� a�vaiiabl� witban two �► aft,k�� na] m' I� r`; '°ri A: ��pbxt bf Faad�agB F'x�qu�n�� ofFt�spo�se� Cross-Tabulat�on Tabl� i hope �s ov�iew su�ici�ntly cov�z°s alt ths i�forma�aa� you r�quir�. I,�t � �ou t3�at e�re believ� va� ca� prorride yau �ovith ti�.ely �ad Yeliabl� �rm�aa�, �e look �°oa�d to tite oppor�ity to work �t you �� $�. But, i�ta a�.y c�ase, best of hxe� �aih yvur e�°vrts. � o � � - �� _ i � � - - � . . � � � �� , � I� Fd� aI I�. ' . I _ : . . ' ,, . . � p �t��a�� f�r �: �� IEt� � r. � i i�. �`�h d � I ' , . . i •_ , . - - � is, . , . , .. . . . . �� I �� `�-• ' ' - . ' ° . 4 . � ` . ��. �� Y�� ' . . . ; . � � � . � ! I .� � . � � . � _ . .., . .. . . . . . • . . : �. . . . . . � � . . � � . . , I. � - � 1:. �` ` . ' . . ' . � . ' I � ,, . � ' . - , �. . • . ' ' � .' � � ' : . � . - . _ '. - • . . � . _ . . � _ �; ; :, - ' , , , � - 'v , . � . , � _ _ . _ ..� _ s _ a a_�........P-,.-.9:�- �,�,�-.�ec�� A.16� � f�i71 L��fl_f��°�1' { � � z i 1 � I i �i � DECiSION RESt]URCES' LTD, MOUNDS VIEW CiTY SURVEY �b2F� Dean Cour-� City 5ervices/Policies/Demas EWi�neapalism Minnesota 5�4i4 h{ellay I'm o'F }]ecision Resour�esP Ltd., a natiar�wide poiling �irmo� ^We've�been retained by the Citiy of Mounds View to speak with a random sample of residents about issues -Facing the citye The survey is being �aken because the City is interested in your apinians and suggestions. I wan� to assure you that all individuai responses will be heid strictly canfidential� only summaries of the entire sample will be reported. (DO NDi PAUSE) 1. Appr�xamateIy how long have �au J.av�d in Maunds View? L,ESS THAN TWD YEAF3S n d� 14% 2 - 5 YEARS000.o...0.021% b - 10 YEARSoveooa.00.15% lI - �O YEARS.aoo..a..29% 21 - 30 YEARS.aso...o.i2% DUER THIRTY YEARSo.a..a9% DON'T KiVQW/REFUSEDo..oe0% �. in what city and/or state was your imm�diate priar residence located? MOEINDS VIIEW: 5% STB PAULs 13% MPLS: 19% RE5°f HENNEPINe 9% OUT ��' STATE : 9% REST QF PvE I NN :! 2% RIVOKA CO a 20�. NEW BRIGHii7Ne 'i% REST OF RAMSEYo 8% 3b Could you tell me one �r i;wo reasons why yau moved tD MoundS View? DON'i KNDW: b% JOHo 20'/. NOUSINGa 35% LDCATION: 10% SCH(30L5: b% LIKE� ARERo B% FAMILY fVEAR: 12% LEAVE iWIN CIT%ESs 4'l. 4a As things no►a s�and, how long in LESS THAN TWO YEARSd..10% the futur°� do you expect to Iive �- 5 YEARSoo�..>.�.00l7% in Maunds View? 6�- 1� YEARS.40000.oea.BY. QVER T�N YEARSe..om.o.ib% REST �F L.I FE ( VQL .>. o 0 31'/. D�N'T KNpW/REFUSED000.l7Ye 5e How wauid you ra�e the quali�y o�f EXCELLEI�Tedoo.000000ao28'I. Iife in Mounds View -- �xcellen� GOQDo.......e..aed.aoe64% goad, only �'airp or poor? QNLY �AIR00000.°oa�n.�.7% P�C3R.00.0000pao.avoaoae�% D�N'`i KNOW/REFUSEDo..eo0% ba Over �he next five years8 do y�u iJ�CLINE.......»ooaoa.008% �xpect the quality o� li°Fe in REMAIf� ABDUT THE SAME855% P'iaunds View tr� deeline, remain iMPROVEo.oao..emo..d.a33% a��ut th� sam�, or imprQVe? DpN'T I<i�O�d/REFUSED.o.004% 1 ,;>'i f ., 1 I 1 � � n ,',4 , '. 7 � 0 7. Wha� da you like MDST abnut living in Mounds View? D�N'7 KNOW: 11% LOCATIONa 37% SCHqQLS: 7% QUIETr 9% PEQPL�a 7Y NEIGHBORHQ�De 11% EVE�Y7HiNG: b% SMALLo 8% CL�ANs 2% WELL—�UN: �% 8a What do you like �EASi about living in Mounds View? D�N'T KNOW: �3'/, N�THINGc 24% GROWTHo 5% PIPELINEa 4% ROA�S: 6% NOISE: �% LOCATION: i/. BLIGHTs 5% NWY. l0a 4% CITY GOV: 5% TAXES: 2% CiTY SERVIC�Se i% OiHER: 4'/. 9, Do you think that things in �ounds RIGH'� DIRECTIQN.....aog2% View are mnving in the right d"a� WRONG TRACKo.,.o.o.avao9% rectian or do you �eel they have DO�'T KNOW/REFUSEA..o4o9% gotten off on the wrong traek? I� "WRONG iRACK" IN QUE�TIaN #9, ASKs IOe Why do you �eel �hat way? SPRAWLo 1% GQVERNMENTs 3% PLANNINGo 4% OTNERe I% l�e How m�ch pride do yAU �ake in the GREAT D�A�oa..000�aaee23% City o� Mounds View as a place �o �UITE A L07000..00aoo.4�% lave —� a grea� deal, quite a iot, S�MEevdaooaoo.m.no.o..26% somes or very little? VERY LITTLE.o.o.00.d�o.4% �Q� D� K�Qi��R��J�p. o. o a��e iZa If you had the chan�e, wauld you Y�Soa...000QO.o.e.oe°o32% like to move away �rom your NO..aooe...a.o .�oao..f�4% residence in Mounds Vie�a? DDN'T 1CNQW/R�FtlSED. e a. 04•!, � 15a � d ; � TF "YES" IN QUE�TION ##12, ASKe i3o Why would you iike to move? UPGRRDEa 18% CLiMA7E: 2Y. REiIREe 3% .708: 2% MOVE TO CQU(�`fRY c 4% OTHER o 3% � \ 14o Wher� would you lake to INT� MINN/S7a PALtL0000e�% move? WITHIIV MOUNDS VIEW..o.�b% ANOTHER SUBU�Boevo..m.13'!, �URTHER FROM DOWNiDWN.o4X DUT QF MiNNESQTAo.00.oe7% D�N'T KNDW/R�FUSED,.00.2% I� you were movfng to another city, what �factar would b� most i.mpnrtant ta you in sel�cting your new place of residenee? I�Oh! y T KNQW o 14% LC]CAT I �I� : 18� CL I NEA7E o 5% $ETT�R HClLES� : 15% JOHe YO% SCHDOLS: 11% ARER: ll.% SMALL TOWNo b% C�91`a 4% ; IF R�SPANSE GTVEN Ii�l C�UEa`iI�N #15� ASK: \ 2 � ib. How would you rate Mounds E�C�L��NT,o.a�.o.o0�0.15% � View on that -- excellent, G�ODeeame.oao.epoeee.a4F% gooda oniy �aar, or poor? ONLY FAIR000..000.�a.�1�1 � pOQR.moo....voa.000.oa.7% � �0�'i KNOW/REFUSEAaoo.lO% 17o If i� were needed to maintain FAVOR.maoo.....a..�eti.37% � city service� at their �urren� QPP�SEoaoo..e.o.e.a��a�B% � levels would you favor or oppose DON'T KNaW/REFUSCD.o..15% a� increa5e in city property !. � taxes? � t l8o De ypu c�nsider property taxes in �XCES�iVE�Y HIGHo.000.e6'/ � M�unds View to be excessively RELATIVELY HIGHo.000.019% � high' relativeiy highs about AHQU7 �VERAGEe...,...os5% i average9 or �omparatively low? CQMPARATiVELY L�Wosao..7% � 6/oltl' 1 RItl1.JW/ I��r��L • a e o 1 J�6 I would like to read you a list af change� in c3ty services which �auld b� made to avoid increases in taxes ar special assessment5. j For each one, please tell me if you would tavar that change as an ' aiterna�ive to higher ��xes, or if you wfluld oppose �hat change i ev�n if i� meant higher taxesa , FAVQR OPPE]SE DoK./REF, f 190 in�rease the time it iakes po].ice to respond to a nDn- )' emergency call to save i� funding �nore positions? 3b% 57% 8% �� f . � 1 �Oe Increase the time it tak�s t� plow city �treets after � a snaw storm? 38% 56% 6°l 1 21 o Aecrease the amaunt a'f 'fund� � spent on the maintenance and i ' upkeep of city parks? �3% 58°1, 9% cc. Reduce the amaunt of street � j maintenanee �andertaken eaeh � �/L�i? `�b�i b�J�s 9�e f 23. Reduc� the �requency of • ( in�pectipns and response time � tv camplaints a��ut viola�ions of city residential cades? 38Y. 46% 16% � As you may knaw, prc�perty taxes are divid�d �etween the City vf Mounds View, Ramsey Countyn and your loeaZ public schDO] � cii�urict. � � � � � � � ,`, � � 2�r, For ��ch dollar of property taxes UND�R i�N fERCENie.=�ao7% you pay, abc�ut what percentage do 10% TD �O%ea�a��a�..�.27% � y�u think gnes to city govern° 21% i0 30%..mo�o�ameooi7% ment? �1% TD 40%oao4o».00e..a4% kl% T� SO%oa.voo,aoaoaaS% 51% TO 60`/.a..,.00�e...��% b �, � �0 �%D�a . e . . . o o a o . o . o l �e ov�� s�v�r�rv �E�c��v� o e a oi� L,lU{V � f S��W ��lG{�U.7GL e o n e�0�/0 I would like to re�d you a ii5ic o-F a few services provided by the City �r Countyo For each one, please teil me wh�ther you w�uld r��te t#�� quality of the service as excellentP goodp ❑nly fair� nr �ooro EXC GOOD ONLY POOR DoKo/ �AIR R�Fo �5 o Par k Ma intenance 1 B'/. 4ab% i 3% 3% 0% 26o SiiuW F'loWinc� 23% 5E�% 16°!e 5% O% 2'�o P�lice Proteetidr� 24% bl% 7J. 1%> 7% ze F3YB PrOt@CtIDfl i9'/o 62% '�9% �% 1�% 24a City Stre�i � Main�enance 30a Animai Cor►trol 31 o WaSte anc� Storm Water �ontrol 32o Water for Resi� �8T1$1�1 �5� � � f � io°i, 5ei> �s°r. ei. oi. 4G � 9'/. 54% 1 B% 12% ° % ��s 1 ri �e S4% 1510 14% 9% b2% !3% 1�% 2% I� "Q�ILY FA I R" DR "POOft" I E�! QUEST I DN5 #25-3� e fa�K �'OR �ACH ONEQ 33. Why did you rate ___—____--_— as (c►nly fair/p�or>? AN I MALS a 1 A'l. SAp f�ATER : 1 1% FLCfODS : 6% POTHO�ES a 5°l. SLOW RE5F'ONSE: 9% ANIMALS—F�l]0I3S—S7RE�TSo 14Y. DIRTYo 3% STR�ETS—FLL]Q�?S°WATER: 6% OTHER COMBOo 5% L�t's talk abo�st Mounds View City Governmen� for a�ew minu�Ce�. Wh�n many penp2e think abou� their Iocal government, they think of the elected c�f'�iciaF� who represen� themeeoo �4o How much do you �eel you know (�REAT DEAL.eooaoaoma..o5% abo�at the work of ihe i"r�yor' and �RIR AMOUf�To 0 0 o a o. a� a a�9% ( Ci'cy Couneil °° � grc��t deal 9 V�F�Y LIiTi��. o��. a� a o�63% � a f a i r amoun� r or ver y i i i t l e? D�N 9 i KNC�W/RE�t3SED o a o s o 3% 4 I: � 35o Fram what you knnw, do you �pprov� Sl`RONGLY APPRaVEoo.mo0l5% } or disapprove of th� job the Mayor �OMEWHAi APPROVEaammeaS4°J. and City Council are doing7 (WAIT SQ��WHAT DTSAPPROV�.ao�5% J �OR RESPONSE3 And do you feei STRO��LY �ISAPPROVEo...3% � strongly that way? DON'i KNDW/REFUSED.oe.�4% � ��a Have you or any members o� this YE�000e,a0000.oaa,....33% hpusehoid had coniact with the NO.aa..aao.o.00.a.o.00�8% Mound� View City staff during DQN'� KNOW/REFUSEDao.o.9% the past year? 3io From wha� you have seen Dr heards EXCELLENT.o.o.�0eo.000.B% haw would you r�te the �ob per— GDOD.00...o...�.�.e..e54% formance of the Mounds View City �NLY FAIR.oave.00.00.oe9% sta�f °� excellen�, gaods only POORm...m.o...oeoo�.o003`/. �airs or poor? DDNaT KNOW/REFUSEDsoes22l � 3�, Do ydu ��ei that the amount of T00 LIT7L�oe....e.o...15% palice patrolling in y�u� neigh— RBOUT RIGHToa..a�.,.amBO% borhood is too little� abou� T�� MUCMo.oeso.omeaso.o4% � righta or �oo much? DO�'T KNOW/REFUSED.aa..!% r ,� I� "i00 LI�7LE" IN QUESTIDN #389 ASKa ,�� 90 Wauld you favor or �ppos� �AVQF3e,,.e,ao.,e,o...ao9% �h� hiring ofi more palice OPi'�SEooa..oa�oeaaooaoo5% � a�'�fiCers to expand patrols, DDRi'T' KN�W/RE�tJSEDo . a a.2% even if �t meant an in° ' crease in property taxes? J Let's ta3.k about economic development in Mounds View,000 ' s 4ao I�f the Cf�y were to attract more developmen�, what kind � would yau prefer it �o be? t�ON'T }4N06J: 17°le SHOF'S: 13% R�SIl�ENTIRL: 18% OFFIG�: 13'/e � INDiJSTRiAL; 26% NONEo 3% FtECREATIONA�o �'i, aTHERa 3'/ � � � � 42a Do yau feei that the pace of TOO RAPil�oa000000..000F2% commerc3al and industrial devei— ABOiJi RZGHis000a.0000.65% �pment in the city has been too NOT �AST EN�UGH.a000..20% rapid, about raght, or not fast DON'i KfVOW/REFUSEDn.ao.4% enough? �r�e Are th�re any d'al�pidated ar su�—standard areas o-� th� city in which you would par�icularly fave�r r°e—d�veaopmer��? (i� "Y��a" ASK„) What are they? DDN'i KNOWe 10°!, NONEe 7�% TRAILERS; �% At�TSo 2% CO Ie �% Hl�JY. lOc 1% NOUSE io Z% MI,Co ARE4�Sa �% lVOI�iH AREAo 2% � , � •� � r i � ,;: .� 1 i I � � � 8 � � �F � .� a �r3o �� he -Fol.lowing types af devel— F��SIi}�NTiAi�e o a o e o e o a a a 19% / opmentP which ONE would you R�TAI� SHQPPiN{�maooe..23% i, most favor along the F4ighway 10 OFFiCE Bt1ILDINGS...ao.i7% corridor ��tween County Rc�ad I INDUSTRIALmda.a..d..oalb% and Sp�° i ng Lake Park? �1LL.. �QUALLY ( VOL ), o, o e 18°/a i REAI7 CHO I CES # 1�-#4 ) DQN' T CA�3� f VQL 3 0 o a. o 0 0 2% DON'� KNC}W/R�FU�EDam..o�% �o-4. Wha� is the locatisn af your principal ret�il shopping area? NONEs 2% MOUNDS VIEW SQLEAREa 23% NDRTHTOWIVa 51% OTHER; 21 R05EDRLEa 1�% NEt,J BRIGHTONe 4% I�dEW MARKET: �% 45a Ov�ra11D about how much o-F your VIRiEJALLY ALLoaa.00....b% retaal purchase� da y�u make in MpSio.e,.o,.mema„ 00.017% Mound� View -- virtua�iy allr SOME,e,,,,,0000,o,00eo�o-E9% masi$ somea or Ii�tle to none? LITTLE TQ NONEa.o.noaa3l% UON°T KiVQW/R�FIJSED,e,,o0% I�F "�OME" E3R "L I iTLE 70 NONE a�� ASK a 46o Could you teil me one ar �wo �eason� why you don't shap more in Mounds View? �iQ R�4�Jd�a L�1� �o �TOR�s°a ��e �� SELECTION: ��e PREFER OTNERB S'/ COSTo 2'/. SHOP WHERE W�RK: i% �7o Have you visited hlounc3s View City YEa.eao..a.o,.veoo.,..52% Hall during the past twelve NOeo..vo...a...oa.e000491 RiOft�Fl57 ��N' ��(�fl�/j��USED a a e. a 0% IF "YES" TN QlJESTION #47a ASK: �or each of the #'oltowing characterastacsp �alease rat� the Maunds View City Ha1Z tacility or sta�f as exc�lient' gaod� only faar� or pooroo.e E X C GOOD ONLY POt7R D o K a! FAIR REFa �+B, Convenience o�F �'.1 ty H3� � �lOUiS? q°% ��a (aa�l'�11°1C, �1f118 �Gi 5�iN1G�? 18�e 50o Court�sy a-f the staf�? 20% 5� a E'ff1C1�f1Cy [�� il� s�8�f? tL4% ��e ci��r��r��s D� tn� �u�ad�n�? 23°re 3�%% �f% ��e �� 27% 2% 3 I °IF 4I ze� o� � � �i 0 °� 1IP �I. lY 1% C 1 % �'/m C � � 1 �o �` Ram�ey County �►ii3 soan require ail residen�s �r� sep�r��e recy— � clables from their trashe The City of Mounds View is curr�ntly revieaaing altewna�ives ta comply with the county requiremer�t. ) 53o Da yDU currently separat� �°ecy— Y�Se.000.vaoov.e.00aoo37% cl�bles '�rom the rest of your i�lQ,.ao,,.,,..,.,,.0,,,1,3% � garbage? ��N'i KNOWIRE�IJSED00000�% � IF "YES" IN QUESiIDN #53� ASKo J Which of ti�e follawing materials do you r�cycle? t YE� I�C� � a K a R�F o � 54o Gla�s? b% 31% 4% 0% 55e N�wspapers and cardbDard? 2b% !2% 0% O% t 56. Ntetal and aluminum? 30% 7% 0% O'!. I IF f�ECYCLING ANY MATERIALS, AStC: � } Sio Mow and where do you recycle them? Sio RAULa 2% PAPER DRIVES: 2% 7—il: 7'l, CHURCHt 2% j �f�OC�RY STORESa 9% COMBOt S% PICK—UP: �% OiHERo b% , � F��cycl3ng will start in the Spring> Qne way to mee� the county requirement is f�r the City t4 establish a curbside pick—Up of 5epara�ed recyciabl� mat@rials. Households wnuld be asked to separate recyclables from ihe res� of their trash and haulers would earry them awayo 58o if the City fnstatuted a pick—up VERY LIK�L.Yoovo.e.eoo.S9% system� how likely would you be SOMEWHRT LIKELY..e000.26% t� u�e i t -°— ver y 1 i ke 1 y, some— i�lDT AT AL� � I fGELY o e o. 0 12'le what lakeiy, or nat at al� likely? DON'1' KNOW/REFUSED<.emo4°!> 5�e %�F you could save abo�at #'ifteen YESo,ao.00soode,00.eoo87%« percent on your garbage hauling NOoo....000aosevo.0000>8% bill by participatir�g in the pro° DQh!'T KNQWJR�FU5EDoavoo5% gram, �sn�ld you do so? bOo Da yau currently compost your YES...o<o...00000se.aa47% wa�t� yard materials? NDoaoee.aaoaeo.o..oao.49% �a�v ° r K�owiR�FUS�� o 0 o e e�.i. IF "YES, " ASIC o bl a What �.�mpos� sit� do ys�u use't �ACKYAi�Do z2% MDIJ(VDS VI�W: 15% ARDEN PARKs 8% DTHERa 3% � As you may know, several refuse haulers serve P9�unds Viewa ihis �rrangeme►�t has permitt�d ci'�iz�ns �o �hr�ase �heir owr� haulers �nd �ontraet dir��'ciy with �hemo But� it has also c�-eat�d si�nifican� averlap between the haulers �nd ir�creased noise and i1 m , �' 1 � ,� i \ i � � � � .`� � ,;:''� � ; �r congestiorr ❑n city streets, 62, Qf the �oliowing three proposalse whith do you most favors Am �he Ci�y cantrac+cs with ane hauler to s�rve the entire ci�ye Bo Yhe City contracts with a grcaup af hauiers, each serving one area af Mounds View exclu— sively. C. The present systeme PRDPEISAL A000..soAO..alb% /• PRCJ4'f3SAE.. Beos.a000.e�oc'_OY, � PI�OPO�Al.e C . � � � . o . � . . , a 50% ApN'T CRRE {VOL3o...a.a2% DDi�'T K(VQW/REFUS�Dd.nal�% Traditionally, the City has previded residents with ba�ic ser- vices, suck� as palice and fire prn�eeiion� and street mainten- anceo Some eities also pravade �ociai serviees ta �heir resi� dents� su�h as Chemicai Abuse Programs9 Counselingp Day Care, and Senior Serviceso b3e Would yau favor or oppo�e the City of Mounds View expanding ats curren� serviee provision to include social services? [� J e e a o. o o a a e v e e a o o. a o� 7�6 NOaoo..ovaaoaoaee000no43% DO(V' i KN�W/RE�lJSED ... a o 8% 6�a. I� general, do yau feel that the SERIQUS PRCIBLEM000.aa..6% cond'ation and upkeep of ciiy EWINOR PROBLEMoaa..��aob0'/. streets is a serious problem in ND PROBLEM.°0000��.eoa��o-% Maun�s Viewq a minor prable+np �ON'i KIVDW/REFUSED.eaaa0% ar no pr'obler� at ali? IF "S�RIOUSs" IIV QUESTTON #64, ASKa 65e Why dca you feel that way? PO`�HOLES : 4% S I E..VER LAKE RD c 1'l. �THER : S% � 66. Da you fee2 tha� the City is too TCJO T�UGHo....oa000.oa,2% tough, about right, or not touyh ABOUT RIGHTo..ea.a.o..60% enough in enfnrcing �he Ci�y Cocle NDT iDUGH EiVOUGti..e..o32% regarding residentia] property DdN'i KNOW/REFUSED.o.ao�% maintenance for weed controly outdoor starage, junk cars, animal contr�la and noi�e? I� "T00 iOU�aFi" OR "NOi l°OUGH ENiJUGF4" T IV QUE5T I C3N #66 s ASK o 67o Why d� yeu feel that way7 A�lIMALSP 3% JiJNK CARSa b% YARDSa il% CDMBOa 8% HDUSESo 2% T�17 PI�KYo 2% C]TWER: �% 68. Maw seriaus do you �eel the prc�blem �f' storm water manage— 1 m�nt i� ir� MoundS Vi�w -- very f seriou�, �ot too seriousy or ncat a pt°oblem a� all? 0 � 0 VERY S�RIOUSooeo.eo.o.11% NOT TOQ 5�RIOU�aoovaod�9% N�T A PROBL�Mo.soo..00��% � DON'T KNOW/REFUSED.a.mo°7% � Curren�lyb the City use� a sys�tem of ponds to contro3 �he run—off � from st�rm�a � �S�o Wouid yau �Favor or oppase the construc�ion ot storm wa�er �ewers ir� the city? {WAIT � �'(7R R�SP(J[�5E ? And do yr�u � feei strongly th�t waay? �iRf1NGLY F'�VOR o.. e.. o a 1 S% FAVQRa.o4vo.00.oe4.omo�4% OPPOSEaoea.000.o�e�o.e27% SiRi�NG�Y OPPQSEoona000a9% DON'7' Kf�OW/REFUSEDaoaol9% Although na �armal proposals have b�en macfe, if the city were to � construct �tr�rm sewersq it would require the paSSage of a�ond r�°Ferenciumo � O � � '70. Hsw much more would you be wi%Iing to pay in property taxes �a �u�— port construction of storm sewers? 4SiART WITH RANf�QMLY SEL�C7ED CHC3iCE FROM #i — #7r Let's say wouZd yau be willing t� pay �__�_ per year? SMDVE TO NEXT CH�ICE UP OR DC]WN/F2EPEAT ) iVOTFIitVl3, oo...o a....e..37% ��5ood.00aoao.a.00aea.ff% �SO.>00004soaoea.o.00al5% �i5aoo.o.eoo.00.o.m.oaa5% �la0oaaa,.000.00,o,..oeb% �12S.eAOme.aso,...seoo.2% � j� O. e P a v e e e e o o e e o v e e m e�'IP �ON'T KNOW/C�EFUSEDm.no?3% 7i o Ho�d would you rate park and rec— �XCEL�EI�iTe a o o. o 0 o a. a��Z�1% reational 'faei3i�fes in Mounds 6OODeaoa�000vo..000eoo5�% View -- exce�lent, goodm only DNLY FAIRoo.00.a000m..o8% fair, ar paor? POORao.oee..m..�.>maae�l% Di�N' i` KNOW/RE�USED o e. m. 4'l> 7�a In generaly do you usually spend OUTDfaQR ACiIVi7iESo.0074% y�ur leisure ti.me in �utdoor If�AO�R ACTIVIiIESe..�oo81 ae�ivities, weather permitting, BCiTHoaa...o°o....o.0'..20% or indoor aetivities? NO LEISURE TIME..>vooeoQ% DON'T KN�W/RE�USEDo.a.oi% 73e Are y'ou more apt to participate UN�iRGANIZED..o.o.a�.o.il% an ur�organixed recrea�ion, such ORGANIZEAae..oa.o.a.a��2% as bicyclbhg$ walking, picnicsF BOiH �QUALLYooaoaoae�ol5% or skatxng, or in orgar�ized NEIiHER.oao,00..,a.�.�a0% recreationr such as team sports7 DON'T KNOW/Ft�FUSEQ.oeoo�% ?4e In the past year� I�ave you or any YESao.e..o.e..o.o...oa�7% member �f your household par�ici— NDa°oa..eo.a...000000�b9% pated in a ci ty—sponsored recre-- DON'T KiV(?W/RE�EJS�Do , o. a�% atior►ai program? IF "Y�S" F�! QUESTIDN #i4a AaKo � 7S, Do you feel that th� regis— EXCE�SIVELY HTGHoo.00so0% t�a�fon -�ees are erccessiv�iy �DMPFIRATIVELY HIGWe,...l% h�gh, comparatively high� ABOUT AVERAGEo.e�ao.da��% about aver�ge� campara�ively C�NIPARATIVELY LOW.00..a�o-% lowa art ver°y law? VERY L�Weoe..ee.aaoem.>1'/. dJU� y� �iVO��IZC��r7C� e• o a e 1�6 T�' "NO" IN QLi��TI09�J #$74v ASKa � ¢ � i ; '='! I� "NO" IN C�UESTiQiV #74, ASK: � ib. C�uld you �Ce11 m� one or two reasnns wt�y you haven'�? j l NO REAS�N: �5% NO iIMEa 18% NO INT�R��Te 6/0 N� K i DS :�►% GO ELSEI�HERE m 12/. AG�-°H�ALTF; s 8% UlJAWARE: �% 77. Could yau te11 me about how o�ten ALiMC�ST �AILY0000�.�oaoam3% you and rsther members �f your- S�V�RAL TIMES PER WE�Ke�2% hausehold t�ave used the park and DNCE PER WEEK<o.a..�oo015% recreatianal faciia�ies in Mounds SEVERAL TIMES F'ER ML7NTH16% View du�°ing tMe past year� weather Ot�CE �E{� hiEJEVTNo 0 o e o.. o a o5°1e perm i t� i ng ? ( RER[? CNQ I CES # 1 - S�VERAL T I h1ES PER YEAR a 25'/, �71 NDi AT ALLa.�ooe.a�a...12% DON'T KNOW/RE�'USEDo.ovae�% IF "ONCE PER WEEK" OR MORE IN QU�5iI0h! #i7s ASK: 78a Wha� kinds of activatie� do you engage bn? WAL}C I N� t 6% PI.AY�ROUf�D o 6% �KAT I NG o�% BA�L o 1 O% TENNIS: 2% CONiHD-4�°s 5'/. OTHERo 3% IF "SEVERAi_ �TC1ES PER YEAR" OF7 "NQi AT ALL" IiV �UESTIt7N �$%%r ASKa � 790 Is there 5ome particular reason why your I�auseh�ld doe� � not use the �ark and recreation �ystem mare �requentiy? NO REASON e b8/. NQ � I�lE e i 1% NO T NTEf�ESi :�o-% NO K I DS : 2'l. GC] ELSELJHERE : 7% AGE°HEALTH o 5% NOT AWARE s 2!. � � � '� gQ, Wou1d you f�vor ar oppose a bond FAVOR.vo.o.tioa...<.�aa4�Y. referendum to �+pgrad� and com-- OPPOS�e ... o e o_�. a.�� e��+�'/, ple�e the Mounds View Park UNDEC�DED.006°aao�.,.�ll% 5y�tem? RE�U�EDoa....00.o..00.a3°/o 810 What is y�ur principal �ource af informatinra a�iaut City reGr°e�tional pragrams and opportunities? i�DNE: 8% f�EClPL�: 7% NEWSLE7TER: 48% HUL�ETIf�; 1 i!. FLY�RS : B% PAPERS : 18% OTFiER a i Y. �2a Would you -FavDr er oppo�e the City developing and aperatang a r°ggulaieion nir►e-hole golf course? FAVDRoeo.oe..a6000a.0046°/ Q{7PO�E.. o m.a....., a.e.LFLF�e D01�'i KN�W/RE�USEDoaoa28% �3a Whether you ��v�r the projeet Y��e.aao.oa�.•..tlBe�aaS�% or n�t� would you �nd/or members NOoaoo.oa�o.a.=�v..��% �f thi� household i�e 1 ikely t� DCItV'T KNO�d/.-REFUSED� a a a o2% use the gol-F course? ( � _i I f i� N ; � �' 8�o-a Should the city a�tempt to pre- PRESERVEoaasoem.�.��.�7a% serve wetlands in P1ounds View or ENCOURAGE DEVELQPMENTo12'/ should 'at encourage efevelopment BDTI�d (VC1L)e,o.0000o=..1Q% pn �ha5e 1 ands? DON' i KNCIW/FtEFIlSED o e o e e9% IF "PRESERVE" IN QUESiIDN #84, ASKo 8S. Would you favor or oppose a F'AVORa°oo.a..oe.•..�..51% property tax in�rease to OPPOSEoee.�,.�.da..o..14% permit the city to purchase D09V'T KNDW/REFUSED0000.5`/. the wetlands �fAr preserva- tion? qs yau may knowa Ramsey County wiil be eons�rue'eang a eounty iibrary an Mounds Viewo Tn additior► to � collec�tion o�f ksoak� �hat residents may borrow, the Zibrary will al�a cont�in an information service and provide ather basic read�r° servaces, I wduid like to read you a list of features th� labrary cauld cor��aina For each one, please tell me how iik�ly a� i� that you nr member°s a1F your househoid �aoulct use that s�rvice. Would you �ay it is very likelya somewhat likeiym �r not at all likely? VERY SOME tVOT AT' AdK=� LiK�LY LiKELY LiK�LY R�F� Bb. Video cassettes , �OY' ZOdri? 34% �i. Story Hour and Summer Reading pragrams for children? 1�� 88a Reader Rdvisory 5ervice -for recommending books? 1�% 89, i`leeting Rooms? 6� 90a Space far q�aiet study? lb% 41a Cratt programs �or C�'17. �tj�eri'i $�% 92o Puppet shnws? �7% q3. "�ook Talks" by lacal au�hcrs and and review�r�? lOY9 94a Hamebaund Serv'sces ta deli��r books tn shu�- i rts'? � a% � fl � �3 �e 2 � �o � 1e G � % �2% 15% 32% G� 1 �a 17% 3��9 16 °I► 611. 53% '7'�% 52% b��e E7��e S .7 ,� 7�% C��'� i `/. 0% Ol � �0 o �a C �6 1% � � J i 1 ,� 95 a �r i � _.'► dJha� is �our prancipal source of infarmatior� about �ity government ancf its a��iviti�s? �VpP�d�a 4% P�OFL�e 5% NEWSLETTER: 38% BlJLLE7INe 15% iVa 3I. PAPERo 27% �THERs 4% 96a Ar� you generally satasf'ied or SA°iISFIEDoaa.o.a=��._��% dissatisfied with your Iev�1 of �x�SATISFI�Dooa.o.aeool2'!, info�rmation abaut city g�vern— DCIN'T KNQW/R�FUSEDo e o a e�o-% menic and its activities? 97a Daes your household curren�ly r�ceive the "Nea� Brighton Btealletin"? tIF "YES," qSK:) Da yc�u generally read that new�pa�er? RECEIGlE/READ.e°ao.,.�e74% RE�EIVE/DOf�'T RERA�d=oo9% iJUitl'� RGI.w�SYGa.00ae.oei5fe DOi�! 9 T KNC]W / R�FUSED a o e. e 2'/a 9�, �oes your i°iOtb5EIl0�,� currently RECEFV�/REApa o o e o._� a�61% reeeive "Tl�e Focus"? (I�' "YES9" REC�IVE/DDN'i READ.00alb% ASK:) Ad yau generally read D�N'i RECE%VE000eaao.al�% th+at newspaper? DON'T KNOW/REFU�E�.o�e=�% Q9, O�her than va�ing9 do you �re�l �ha� if you wanted too you could h�,ve a say about the way the Ci�y nf Mounds View runs things? 100. Do you recall receiving the "Moundsview City f�ewsletter"? IF "YES" IN QUESTICIN #I00, ASKo 1a14 Da yo�s or any members o�f your household regularly read it? YESoo.a000ee.eovooaoeo72°!. NOos..oeo.00...00aeooa3.9°!. DONsi KNCIWIREFUSEDo.aol0% C ��Sa000,.eoo.am..00..ma8�% � NOomo.aa000e.oe..a0000ll% DON'T KN�W/REFUSEA.aaoo3% YESo.o.oen..o.m..°000.9fl% NOoaq.e.oao...oaooaom..b% DE3N' T KiJOW/R�FUSED . o a o.O% � iF "YES" IN QUESTIDN #I01, AS#fa ' i0�e Do you tend to keep it KEEP IT AROUND,aom..00�43% � around for Iater referenee TOSS ITao...00.a.a•��5% or toss it after you have �DTH/DEPEiVD9 aN iSSUE.12r. r�ad through i t? I30N' 7 KNE]W/REFl1SED e o 0 o a 1% � � 1 �'� lO3o Are there any changes o�- impr�v�ments in the format ar the coverage �uhieh yoe� wa�ld like to see? NDI4� s 6�% COMhiUN I TY EV�NTS o 3% COl.1NC T L SUI'�i�IAR i�S o 3Ya lO�s. Lioes your household curren�ly YESe.�aao.,om,.•�•d... �3�, r�eeive cable �E'LE'Vi510Ti? NC�e e o a o a e d o.� a� a o, m a m e57% �oN =��o�/RE��S�D a o a o e�% C II- ��Y6.m��+ 1� L�v��diLVIV YPl.o{$9 f°IrJ�{m 1� � ..> � r � � � 105. C i�y Counc i 1 I�iee� i r►g� are VERY FR�QUEI�TLY o. a o.. o a�% �eievised on ca�,le teie— OCCASIC]NALLYo.o.��ao°o10% visiono Hnw frequently da NEVER...aooe.00ee°a.003i% you watch �hese broadcasts DON'T KNl7W/REFUSED.o..o4% -- very fr°equentlym �cca— sionaZlyy or never? 1� "VERY FRERUEf�TLY" l7R "OCCASI�NALLY" iN QUES�TiON #�105 ASKe lObo Are there any ehanges or improvemen�s in the broadcasts �hat you would Iik� to �ee? NDNE o 7'/, C F TY � N�'0 a 1% B�°f T'ER SOUND s c% Nowm just a few mc�re ques�ions ��r demographi� p�arposes.oao 107o Do you own or rent your present O�JNoaooaoeaoao.000.oao79% r�siden�e'? REIVi000..oaea.ma.00,o.21% REFfJSED.00aa000...oa.vo�% 108a Which af th� iFollowing bes� SINGLE FAMILY DWELLoe,76! descri6es your residence? APAR'FMENT,..a.aovo.voeli% (f�EAD CNOICES) Tt]Wf�HpL1SE/CC�fVDOMiNIUMe m2% MOHILE HDM�a.oeoo.mao..4% a! riCR °o � 1 f-f�R o e o s a n o a o. e s o e m a s o S� ��es��a.em.m..edm�. �11�� p Lp�ry'�` /�jC 1, p� /� DUIV y 1 f�ItlUW/ ftiGFIdSC� o 0 0.. 4/� Could you pl�ase �ell me how many pe�ple in each of th� fallowing age groups live in your household. Let's ��art olde�� tc� young— esta and be �ure to count yaurselfa 104. Are there anY persons aver the YES.00.e.a..o...aoo.eol2% age of b5 living in this N�..aovavo,a.aoaae=a.aBB% resbdenee? U�N'T KNDW/R�FUSEDaA..oO% ila. Are there any school—aged chald— YESoaoa.aoao.�>..o.oa.37% ren livang in this household? ND.a.o.00....m.a000..a63% lilo Ar� there any pre—scl�oolers ir� this residence? lk�a What is yaur ag�, please7 (REA� GATEGQRI�S) �3 D�N'T KNOW/REFUSEDovavo0% Y�Soeae.d.....aeooe..o2�% NOeosveaoa000vaeoeeso.7BI0 D�f�'T KNDi�/I�EFUSED. o a a.Ol 1��4m,...oaeaada000aoe�% 25-34oea.o.o...o�aao,o�7! 35-4�aaa.,.a.ea..mamoaoc8% 4�S-5�oeeao...aoaee.oa.alb% �5-64.a.moa�..o.vovo..12% b5ANA DV�F2a..>do...e.e7l R�FUSEDoe°o.00eoveo.00.l% � _. 1 � , ,' .,' �, _ :`� s r � � � � .� � I�_. i13o What is the occupation of the head of �his hduseha��? / l PROFE�S I QNAL—TECHN I�AL o 23'/ OWf�ER—MANAG�R a l b'/. �LERICRL—SALES: 14% BLUE CO�.LARm 31! RETIR��a 11% SCATiERED o�s% RE�USED c 3% fl�o What is yo�r present marital �I[�lGLEoo.me.oa�o�=m�,.15% S�Catus, }alease? Are yau pre— MARRIEDeeOOa.oeo.��.%�% sently single, enarriedq da.vorced DIVflRCEDd...o��a•°°°°9% or �idowed? WIDOW�Do�e.a�..�a�.HOO 3% RE�U�ED000..o...000aooa0% I� "MRRR I EA" % f� QEJEST I ON # 1 15 p ASK o liSo Do ba�h s�ous�s work ou�side Y�Se..aAao�na0e��..^°��y the hame? NQo.000°aao��.��0�•0028% D�fV'l° KNOW/REFUSEDoo.o.�% 116a Can you tell me approximately BE�aW �14,OaO..moaoo•�•�% wha� a� the level of in�ome �for �i4��01—��QoQOOo<a.a�.�5% all memb�rs of your household �20,001—�30qO00o,oa�on �efore any taxes? I� the tntal $30y1+O�°�4OqVOOa�oeoaoi�% annual incameo �40,OOi�#�O,OOOoe.moao�0% 4REA� CHOiC�S ##i—#7) ��Oa001—�609000o.amo�..s% pV�R $bQs�o4.e400aoeeo46% DON'T KNOI�Jma0000m��a.��'/> REFUSEDo.moaoo.aap000..9% �. 1�7. Sex (BY �BSERVATF[�Na I�O NOT RSK) MALE....oaoeoaos...=ma51% FE�iALE..o°oo..meaooa..�t9% ��i�ES o i : ��$% G'e �1� 30 28% �0 27% � �4 � �. �< ,1; '.. ,1 , , , ,.., : � .. : : �; � � �;, -, i: .., 11 11 ' 1. CaII io Oa-der 2, Roll Call 3. Approve Mu�utes REGULAR MEETiNG AGENDA a. April 2, 2003 4. Citizens Requests a�1d Comments on Items Not an �lle Agenda ciriz��s: sE�oR� �P�,�,Kw��, �L��,s� co�E �o �H� Poorunn, �►N� GIVE YOIIR FULL NAfh�E AND ADDF��S FO� TF°t� MINtJ7E5 5. Considera�ion of Conditional Use Permit Request Regarding Property Locaied at 7988 Edgewood Drive, Planni�ig Case CU03-Q02 6. Consideration of Development Review Requests Regarding Properties Located at 2436 and 2442 Highway 10, Plazu��.g Cases DE03-001 and DE03-002 7. Consideration of l�esolution 724-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of Two Ordinances Related to Pawnshops, Zoiung and Licensing in Mounds View. Special Planning Case No. SP-114-03 A�PI�ICAP87�: YOUR ATiE4VDAP�C� ,�i 7HM5 MEEiIN(.; IS REQUEST�D. PL�.4S� NO`TIFY THE COMMUNtTY DEVELOPiVIENi DEPARTME�7 AT 763�-717-40201� YOU ,4R� UI�A�LE TQ ATTEh1D. 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: May 21, 2003 9. Adjourrunent to Agenda Session ��rE�A �E�S�oN 1. Review Minutes: April 16, 2003 2. Staff Reports 3. Chauperson and Plan��ing Carnznissioners' Reports ;;. ,; : j Iter�u No: 5 �ee��rng D�ie: hRav 7, 2003 Type af �a�sin�ss: Commission �usiness �� I�� : I� �� '�� . . � ..� -. � � �,� Too Mounds View Planning Commission �rorn: James Ericson, Actir�g City Administrator I�ern Titi�/S�bjec�: Consideration o# a Conditiona,l Use Permit Requesf fior an Over�Size Garage at 7988 �dgewood Drive; Planning Case No. CU03-002 ... :. Property owners Steve and Sar�dy Eyler are requesting approval of a conditionaf use permit to consfr�act a detacheci 1,344 squareafoot garage on their property laca�ed at 7988 Edgewood Drive. �he Eylers i�dicate that the exisiing single-stall garage is in poor condition and needs to be replaced. The iofi is 36,750 �quare feet, which is more than four fifths o� an acre. The existing garage �nrill be demolished to make room for the proposed garage, rn�hich would be built in the same loca#ion in ihe rear yard, extending cfoserto the r�orth side lot fine. . . . �� : _ . �� , �,: _ Section 1'i 06.4, Subdivision 6, (ists the speci�ic conditional use permif requirements for garages larger fhan 952 square feet. These r�quiremen#s, such as sefb�cks and maxim�m square�footage would be met with this proposal, with one exception, which shalf be explained on the next page. The Code seis an upper [imit of accessory s�orage space on a property at �,800 square feet, this requirement i� also met. The applicant is proposing to construci the new garage behind the house in fihe same focation as the original garage, excepi that the garage would be much closer to the north proper�y line than the original garage. The Comprehensive Plan encourages fihe development and mainfienance of residentia! areas so as to improve �he quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and resid�ntial property in general. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 7988 Edgewooc! Drive, as low-density residential. The 36,750 squ�re-foo� lot is large however typical �or this area. Mosf of the horrtes in this were buiit with detached single-stalf garages, which by taday's standards is not sufficient for the typica) m�afti-car family. Many ofr ihe property owners in this area have already expanded or replaced the originai garages. Adverse Effects According to the Ciiy Code, ih� Planning Commission musf consider the possible adverse effec#s of the proposed conditiona[ use. The findings of the Planning Cornmission shall be based upon, b�t not limited fio, the following factors: � Relationship wifh the Comprehensive Plan. � ihe Geographica! Area Involved � Whefher such use wi!! tend fo or acivally depreciage the area in which if is proposed. � The Characfer of fhe .Surrounding Area � The demonstrated need for such a use. Eyler PC Repor� i1�ay 7, �003 Page 2 As stated on the previous �age, the proposed request fulfy complies with th� Compr�hensive Plan. The neighbarhood has many largle lots of this same size so the oversized garage would not appear ioo large for the iot. The g�rage would not depreciate fihe are and in fact wou3d b�°ing added value fo the property and woufd have a positive irr�pact fo the tax base. While many homes in the area stiil have the original, srr�all garages, a growing number of proper#ies in the area are making similar improvements. As for ciemonstrated need for such a use, the Eyiers' lefter expresses in great detail their need. Code Ir�consister�c�c Subdivision 6 of Section 1106.04 lists ihe conditions under which a conditional use permit can be issued. These are as foUows: a. ihe accessory bui[ding must conform with Section 1103.06 and subdivision 1106.03(I} of iflis iitle. b. ihe combined square footage of all accessory buildings on one (1) iot cannot exceed or�e thousand four hundred {1,400) �quare feet. c. ihe buifdrng shall be designed and mainiained to provide a uniform appearance with fhe dwelling unifi. d. The width af the building cannot exceed fhirty-fve feei {35°). e. The buifding shall be a permanenf structure. f. Should the �ase for which the permif was granfed be changed, the permit shafl be subject �o reconsiderafion, revocation or other action regulated by Section i 125.01 of this Title. ltem D s�ipufates that the garage not exceed 35 feet in widfh. C7ur assumptian is that th� width fimitation was pufi in place to prevent an overiy-wide garage fronting �he street, ln fact, until just recen�ly, the Code contained a provision which limited the number o� stal[s ai thrse. With ihe uvidth limitation, the Commission felt �hat there was not reason to further regulate fhe number of stalls. (Ord 664, adopted in 2000.) The Commission has interpreted fihafi a garage more than 35 feet D�EP is however acceptable. The attached siie pian shovvs ihe garages facing #he street. If the Eylers would agree to rotate the garages 90 degrees so that the garage doors faced south, the Gode provision would then be satisfied. I have asked ihe City,4ttorney if t#�e CUP could be granted in spiie of fihe ir�cor�sistency, and his response was "No", fihe conditior�s articulated in the Code are condi�ions that need to be satisfed ir� order to granfi the C�1P. The only way to vary irom the conditio�� would be t� apply for and be granted � variance, provided ihere was sufficient hardsl�ip to warrant such an approval. Eyfer PC Report Nlay 7, 2003 Page 3 ,: . �: , �as�d on the above informafiior� and the site plan presented for considerafion, sfaff woufd recommend dertial of ihe requested condifional use permit unless the Eyiers limit the width to 35 feet or rearient the garages so thai entry is from the south. If the siie pfan were revised in s�ch a way fio be in compliance wifh City �ode, then staff would support the granting o# a CUP for fhe oversized garage at 7988 Edgewood Drive. lf the CUP is granted, staff would recomme�td that as a cor�diiion of approvai, the looped driveway be removed to be in compliance with Code limitafions of on� curb cut per properiy. �� James Eric�on Interim City Clerk/Adrninistrator Aftachments: 1. Applicatian 2. Applicants' Letter 3. Sife Plan 4. Location Map 5. Zoning Map 6. Photographic Documentation .: ��.�, _..�' , ;":: P`� � < - - --- �� r�.,�+-,..�,...��---- .�.:�,�:� 2�` : z��.� , �� w' �f z r" � �- � .��- - �X � � ;i` �' �J � ��t�S� � N - - . 4 � � _.` � � � 8 �` �� P �`C�'Efi�l,) �E � U �� t i ��: �.-°, ,� o' � � x � � � C� �J � � �� r- � � 6`a �,�° � �— I �.� --�-�'� tfl' Q �� q� �N P � � � � � � � � Im � '� � � � � � I � i � � : . �� - _ �. - - � �_ 1 �.�� ____"`.�� : ; C� iJ��, _ i • � T ir — ---- �, : - � � ; ` .�"�.� , ` ; `m"�. �_ ` ' � � ? i � � � ��} � -.-- — -.�_.k ,s.� � t`,i—� t � _._,. � i � ��`?3� � � .,..._._ � $1�s$J � --� �' i �3��i �j .__i �.' r __� _ _ .. - _.. F � . �.: -� _� _ . -- - � $�� i23 I�, �12� � �9�1 � � , �.�-=-�--- .- �,-._ j .� _�.� ._ . , ._.._ C� :._ ec� i � +� � � ,�. , � ,, 81 �10 � � 1 � 1 t N ; � I � � �f��Vt,d'� fi�d� '�� f q�y � � , , �, ! _ � � ; Y: � � ' � `�� .��r.�] � ; � � � ; ►"i :�� ,J�� 1' ,C �`�f ' � ' --� ' � � . .. _�_ ► � „ :. _ . _ .___ , ' � -_...�.. __.-.-. ----� --- � i � < ... __- _ hd � �"` - - 8��1� I t— :�: ��1�� ; i �t}7t� �� 7� �- .': � � ._.. .-��. _.- - -- - . _ _ � . ��, , - : , . � - � � _ _ _i. . . �� .` �, . v . . � �j � f -1 ; ' . . � _ � , i '4't : N ' C�! � ; � ; � } ' N'} i wi ; � � � � ��,�, ;, t+ y. +� ; C`.A i [V ' i^�1 - fw€ : {�¢ � �,{ � i �i _ � _ 1_. , . _., , ' � � ..—..� . _ �.. �,.. H�. � :� � ; M � h- % �-. �s' +�-; r� .: u� ; � '�� . � i r) i e�; �� rY.' �'ti; le�: �.; '� [,3' : C4i ; � : CW : � ', � t'`S : � : '� : '�' � � 00 : �� : 4D � i°�t .' � � P;� �' t3' rrY B"? . C J �C� C`,9 a C'� {•,¢ �; d c�} ; t' � � --- ,... _, � � �a �. � ' 8�4�i � �451 �0�`� 7��4? _. _:__ . . _,._ _._-�-- ' �94� ' 7��4 _, _.__ _...,_ . .:..... .._ �_ _-- ----- -- - � �3t�� , _�. � i9�3 � 8�?�� 1 79�1 7�� _. .._ _. ,.-- ------._�-_. _.;:, -_....---- .__ _... .. ----; ---- � 7939 z , ` �{��+� �q�� ?31 7��,7 ��3� � �'��5 `•- - 7933,7��2 -- := -- � � ��$�: . _ _ _.. - ?�8� 7331 I _ _ _ . __�_ _, � ,.:,N_.-:_, , ,� r��'t� 7�� %��r �� ' 7�� _.__i. �, _ _. �� _ _.,. ,��4�4 � i�� _: � ! ..�._ _._- i� ,� � � , 7��4 v � t�s . ti} ` � � tCt , °� # � _; � . � ��i C�£ , � f ,� i N ; .-..- . ,..--.��.—�--- -a _. ' �$�8 =--- '_ 78�t� .._ , �83� �� _ - --- _ _ _: ��_ � . ___ _.. _78�D � .. _- 'i �{7fl ' _. „ -..- �--- �3�� 7�°�� ; 79Gr� �.-- -. .__--�. _ ___ .__. �� ; �� `��'� ' �'�30 ��,_ � _._� �_-r� , ...__..._ � ;� � . � �. �: c�t; �� c� ��r�' �gi�, i 7�75 �8� i��i�� E �89�7� ��4 J� 3� � ��33� 7�95; �� 3� � ; ��b� 7i�� '9�� ; �'�� —JU _ _ - --- - .._.. ,.._ � 79� 3 : 7�21 + _ . .::_. �--- ---�--i, 7��d � T91 � �s�� ; �� -- - - , , s._. ,,� �� 3; ��]C7 t� 7�� s��r�� ------ �r � � ---- � �� _ . � . � ��? '+�F I P� i ( � � � �^�r. �° '$ ' $ `3` C� i*J ` (`�i N _J O�J. - ��'�J' � 'i 4�� ... ?8��!7&� � -�- -- , i�45 784 � 784 ' � -- � 7�3�:!�� « 7��?7�� : - -- � 7�17'! �' _..._ --. .__, � , ; 7��' ��... r � ____ -� � :'� � � ' � , �. � �� °y�`°�`�°�'��- -- .� ; � ,'��- E t.,�. � � �,-,, � r� s Y'i rr}, . tr1'; E''� �. G�§. t''} ', C� � .�,�s� �� ;� �`�,. '�r�.�";"aa,,� �`:; r �,� � : ►,f, ; � ', � �-� : -c� �:� i �' �c} � :r7 : � � � '�� °� -� ; � � �: � ��_� i...� . � ; n1 . r+S ! t�? ! .r') � r� ; r�} � j�*i � c�J ; iV ; t�i �6? �6i - 5�� -_ �0 v �56� . _ t,.._.. � i I--___ � �� ' � ��,�i '� 5B1 �� fi1 � 5��{ ��`�� 5�5�& �� QC� :56�J1 �5�2 �5� ��i �]�7�7% I ��M1�n- �.�� ; . ,. �- _ � s. , -:� � •. . • • •- � . � .� � ._� ..... :s� - �y �'- � �� '* �i i ' � . �F <: � ��1 �= "" � � � �� . 1�11�1� ■�r�� . � � �r r�� :��1�'��: r � � � � '�'�• :� �1��IIII�: ■ 11 �IM�� r.tr� �.�. A _ �� M �`�� ■ �� ■�� '11111111 �� '�� '�'�� ■�/,�'� �� r■� �� ,� � � �r � � � �� : � _._ � ■�i� �� . .. '� � �t�� ` ", w,-- • : : i �� _ � � � � �� . � � � � r�� ■� ■ � �� i�� i�� ■�� ■r�� ■ ■r� �� ■■ a�� i�� 1�• s.� .. .. � . ■. .. ��t�,�� ..� r.� .. �� ,.� ��• ... .�. .. �� ■ �r�"'. :�■ � � :: •. '� : :: : ��/��#�� ."�.� �� ■� ��' +� �� 1i1��:��' r�I �� =� r is'. i■r ��'��'j�,� �� -� -�- �111�� :� : � = � :� �� . ::: ��N��rr,�� „r� �� :::� ��'�� : :: � � Steven T. E�ier Prop�rty Involved: Planning Case Na �988 Edc��vvood Driue CU03-002 798� Edgevvood Drive �� Pr�perties UVithin �50' 1 ��, �� • . :� � �; -: �: � �: ; ' 79�� Edg�rn�ood Drive, it�okir�g so�afihwe�fi (�ubjec� prop�r�y.} • '� " '�! • � � • • ' . . • i, • � � ' '. � � , � . ^: �,A:' . i � �. 'l. r • �"' - S � � 0 C�04� Of� � L �j °� V "e,, i�� p S Q�resj ° Fartne<S�'�Q CBMMIlNli1� DEV�LOPMENT D�PARiM�NT •> , ; . >-- . ;� 2401 Co�nty Road 1a, Maunds View, MN 55112 (763) 71%-4020 . Fax (651} 765-1660 Please Type or Print Informatinn - Comp[ete Both Sides of This Form �pplic�r�t Ir��o�rrr�atoon - . Name of Appiicant �'� 4�V �n t � Y I k� t- � TeEephone `� � r�`� � d�� Address ��°t�S� t= r�� W�� " Eax C1�.��.��,w . !�n. ��jt�� _ E-mai1: Irtt�re�t in Pro�et'ty {Gheck apprapriake box) J�, Owner of Property ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager O - Other (explain)_____m.�� ❑ Contract for Deed Owner � Agreement to Purchase •" � .r , i . , - � � � . _ , �- � - _ - _� � . . :__ .�. r - _. � ;_, .. : _ � ,. . � i ',r . • r ,: ._ . , �- ! _ ' - - �. .. -F..�._°'I; „'I_:..I '�TI�" _4.i. ... �', ,:��z. , � � _ . : • e;' : r' 'i .�Y .: i,° � r ' ��✓ ^'� �'� s..�_ Y?,.. - . �., . � �: ; •, ,' i i i, .�: .. �. . , �_�. �� ;�.1 ) - -� - - a f " . # � � Address or General Loeation Legal Description Property Identifieation # (PIN #) # oP Acres C�rrent Zaning `.f '� ` f. ' _� ,� ! - �' ' ". � � � ❑ ❑ � ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ p ❑ ❑ ��'1`��b � � ��r�� I'�lOvs�e�� iS��.er•b _ � `�'�i 6�c s� ,� Comprehensive Pfan Amendment Rezaning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Development {PUD) PUD Amen�r�ner�t;� , - Conciitiona�/In�erim Use Permit Variance Texi Amendment, Zoning Code Tex� Amenc4ment, Other Gity Code �17evelo,,�x Review/Site �an �, •;�,, Wet�anci Aiteration Permit ' Wetland BufFer Permit Other $250 $5Q0 $50Q $250 . $750 - $350 e � , ' • •-� R-1, R-Z $150;,ai1 others $325 . R-i, R-z $150; a{i'others $325 $15� $1Z5 � cL� � �12�,/+acre� min $1��'�r;na�$750 Rai, R-2 �15�; all other's $2a0 R-1, R�� $25; all others $100 . €: ;t I�ounds View Planjiing AppEic�.., �� — � ",��;` � '��:a+- �._�_, � �, � �.. C7 Torrens pesc�ip�iOn o� �t'�pt��al (attach additiona! supparting docur�entation iF r�ecessary} _ _ G��° �,c�� '�r 2 C` - Page 2 Ptease tVota: Applicants are respans'sble far ail eosts incurred assocfated with the fling, review and praeessing oP this application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon reeeipt of statement from the City of Mounds V'sew. Fees may include but are not iimited to costs for eonsuilants retained by the City, consultant planning services, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposit may alsa be eequired to cover eosts of public noYlces, materlals and staff time spent in the review, research or preparation of materiafs associated with th'is applicadon. The appficant shal{ be responsible far all reasanable incurred easts in exeess of the initiai deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shal( be refunded to the applieant wi�in 30 days after consideration of the app�ieation is completed. Payment of park dedieation Pees is required with subdivisian applieations. i ACKNOWLEDGE THA� i have read all of the inFormation listed in the Planning Applitation and fially understand that i am respor�sible Por all costs ineurr�d by the Ciry related to ihe �Orocessing of this appEication. App[icant �� " t °i � � � bate . _ - a . . . � . „ � ; - _ , , � � - � �_ - , �, ; '� � �. - �� _ ., , _ � . ,. . , ; � , . . �� _ !; ; :. �' �� ° i- �'� '�': ` . � . �.� _ :i =i � � _:.. � . � � " �� '_! ' '� �� _� �i �' �� .% ' �� r z, ► Name of Applicant (typed/pri Signafure of Appficant.� Name of Property Owner (ty� Signature of Property Owner Address of Owner Phane Number of E-ma i! R,� l �- v � �:��**�x��:�***�*��***�*�x��**��x�***�**��****�******�*:��*��*****�*x��*:�**��**�* �OR O�FICE I15E ON�Y - - i�ate of. Submittal �� ° ��° �. � Date of Acceptance: �°°� �� 60-day Limii 120-day limit: pfanning Case f�o(s} C�.d3 ° o� Assigned to: _ Fees paid: Accaunt # Check # Receipt # APplication: � � � � � � � �� Park Dedication: _ -- �eposits: other: Tatal: � o�oz � � � u `' * ' � 0 � � �� `� ��.` a�i��. �� - �� v ,�'c.�e.�v,t`Q, �� C c � L `--' j�. (` 1 t� ��, �� , .... r e - 1 --"� � �°� ' I�,r ■��.r �� i -.. . , \ � �..v �. . � \: 1: 1 1 ��w� � `�� \ � _ 9 ',. Y � � R Y. � �: ■Ym.��.� . :� .. . ,, � , � w � � �. ' :� • . � , , ?: _ � � a ! � w., .� �. : .. �� . . � � .. . :� .„ ,...... ►. �" � '�. : � . . C. . �, ., �_ ! 1 � -�_, - 1. 'r� - ! '�. . ��` .;. �r. � . . � � i -� .. .. .� �� •. Y .. s n �.�iL�+..t � , 1 . � - � ..a, �_' f. , _ I .. . i�_ t, . .� 1 c�. r � � �`._ , :� i � _� 0 � ��a � � � . a_ • I ,� 0 � �. � � ��'4��i;��rxe��N� a �� - � �1 a�. �-1��- �� sn �, o� ov c° � � � �.� �E1 °"' i "i � � Qi � . /� _ �. �1 4, r \�1�10. \61C��i�\� • L � � .. _ �- . _.� . � , tI►�+7 .. ►.. F.. .. � � � �� a, ,; a ! � � ► a. �: � � , � 9 tiem Np: 6 �eeting Dai�: i1�av 7. 2003 Type of �usiness: Business ; ♦ ` ;", ��'__'. ;1,; '', ,,,,:� : To: IVlounds View Planning Commissian �roma James Ericson, City Administrator Ite�n Title/��bj�ct: Consideration af a Development Review Request for Properties Located afi 2436 and 2442 County Highway 10, Pianning Cases DE03-001 and DE03-002 �� The appficant, LandCor Development of Maple Grove, has reques�ed a development review on two separate parcefs wifhin tihe Anthony Properties / Theater Planned Unit Development #o construct a two-story office building at the corner of Long Lake Road and County Highway 10, and a multi-tenant �ood / retail building next to the theater at the corner of Ec�gewood Drive and Coun#y Highway 10. The purpose of a development review is to aflaw the Planning Commission to evaluate proposed development in terms of ifis consistencywith City Codes and other requirements and to ascertain and mifiigate any po�ential impac#s to the adjoining properties and the community as a whole. The Planning Commission makes a reca�nmendation to the City Council, which then acts upon the request. For the purposes of this repar� and discussion, I will refer io the Eot af the corner of Long Lake Road and County Highway �0 as "Outparce[ A" and #he lot at the corner af Edgewood ' � Drive and Caun#y Highway 10 as "Outparcel B". It should also be noted tl�at these two parcels are further con#rolled by the Theater Planned Unit Development, which is attached for the Commission's reference. :r .: ' -' �� : � :. . i�� This parcel is an irregularly shaped lot zaned PUD, Planned Unit Development. The anly permitted use forfihis 1ot, according to the PUD, is a sit-down restaurant. As the Commission is aware, the applicant is seeking a PUD amendmeni to permit an office building on ihe lot as well. The Council wili address this request at their meefing on May 12, 2003. This review will assume and be contingen� upon the office use being approved by the Cifiy Council. DimensionaE Requirements ��ailding Setback� Front (Co. Hwy. 10): Fronfi (Long Lafce Rd.): Rear (south}: Parking Lof �etb�ck� Front (Co. 3�wy. 10.}: Front (Long Lake Rd.): Rear (south): Required 30 feefi 30 feet zo �e�t 30 feei � 20 feet � 30 fee� � Proposed: 30 feet 120 feet 140 #eet 3Q fee� 30 feei � 75 feet - * 1� is unclear what �he infended parking lot setbacks are. Com lip ance Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes LandCor PC Reporf May 7, 2003 Page 2 Parkin The PUD establishes the parking requiremenf for an ofFice use at one space per 25Q square feefi. The proposed office would consist of a maximum 15,000 square feet of gross space. With that much area, a toiaE of �0 parking spaces wauld be r�quired. ADA requirements indicate that of the 60 spaces, three need to be handicap accessible. The plans show a�otal of 54 spaces, two of which are e�arked handicapped. To comply with the PUD, either 6 aciditional stalls would nead to be shown or 1,500 square feet would need io be eliminafed from the building. If the se#back for parking afong Long Lake Road were 20 feet rather than 3� feet, three to four more sta(Is could be added fio the site plan. Aceess & Circulation There is one access driveway shown from Long Lake Road; no access is shown onto County Road 10. The absence of an access or�to Caunty Highway 10 is consistent with the goals established in �he carridor redeveEopment and revitalization plan adopted by Yhe City Council. The Long Lake Road access is offset fio the north of Moundsview Drive by about 100 fee#. No traffic conflic�s would be anficipated because of this. The circulation withir� the development is not optimum however there is s�afficient space in the drive aisles and there is adequafe space provided to back oufi of a11 parking spaces. Lic�htinq. The applicant has submitted a photometric analysis of the site, however it is not known if the analysis complies with City Code as the foot-candle readings are provided only for the ' parking lot area. (The City Code indicates that foof-candle measurements shal[ be showr� up to the centerfine of any abutting streei right of ways.} Additionai[y, the photometric analysis daes not indicate the lighting fixtures fio be used, the pole height or the individual fumens specificatians. Any building mounted lighting would also need to be shown and figured info the photometric analysis. The attached resoEution includes this provision. DrainaAe The plans indicafe that the site would be servicecf by a series of catch basins linked together by a storm sewer which empties into the existing NURP pond at fhe rear of the property. (The existing pond was consfrucfied with the ariginal development to accommodate the fufure build-ou# of the site. Permits would need to be obtained from Rice Creek Watershed District before the City will issue any buifding permits for the project. Tf1e applicant and any utility subcontrac#ors shall meet with the Public Works departmenf for final utility pfan approval. Garbaqe Enciosure As shown on the site plan, the garbage enclosure wauld be located on the south side ofi the praperty. No details were provided regarding the enclosure's construction, however the PU D indicates that �he enclosure shall be af ihe same construction as fihe b�ailding with solid, opaque, latching gates. Chain link is not an acceptable gate materiai. _. LandCor PC Report May 7, 2003 Page 3 Landscapinq A Landscaping Plan I�as been submitted wi�h the plan set, however the plan lists generalized pianting types {e.g., Oversto�y Trees, Evergreen Trees); ii does not identify �, which of the listed planfiings would be uiilized or in whafi numbers. The City Fores�er wiil review the planting schedule and make recommendations from the lists provided or make alternative recommendations. The applicant shaf! revis� the pfan based upon the Cifiy Forester's comments and io show all species and in whai quanfiities. Wherever possible, the exis�ing tree cover shall be preserved. Si na e iVo sign plan has been submitfi�d for the site however staff has cammunicated the PUD req�irements to L.andCor representatives. While not specifically addressed, no pylon sign will be allawed, as the �nfent ofi the PU� is to establish a consistent design theme throughouf the devefapmenfi, using similar construcfion, colar and materials. The Theater sign has a masanry, monumeni styfed base and the same would be required on this site. Buildina Construction As noted earlier, �he proposed office building would be #wo stories wifih a 7,50o square�fioot footprint. ihe maierials used would consist of a colored split face block base, brick, and a upper levef EF1S #reatment. (EFfS is °Exterior Finish Ir�sulation System".) A colored renditior� has beer� provided for#his building which is afifiached forthe commission's review. The proposeci coiors are consistent with the Theater. A paiio area is shown ofF the back of the building. General Site Plar� Comments The firs� four Site Plan General Notes listed on Page C2-1 do not apply fo this developmenf and should be revised to reflecf the subject parcel. The site plans sho�ld indicate snow storage areas and on Page P.i00, the building elevations should include building heights. ,f . , � . . � Located adjacent Yo the Theafer at the corner of Edgewood Drive and County Highway 10, fihis parcel is an irr�gularly shaped fot zoned PUD, Pianned Unit Development. The permitted uses for this lot include restaurant and/or retaif uses. Dimensional Requiremenis i . �; :� .:: � Front (Co, Nwy. 1 Q): Front (Edgewood Dr.}: Side (south): Rear (west): Re uq ired 30 feet 30 feet � 20 feet * 20 feet � Proposed: 75 feet 145 feet 105 fieet 95 feet C0171��1a1lCe Yes Yes Yes Yes LandCor PC Reporf May 7, 2003 Page 4 I�arkir�g Lc�� S��backs Fronf (Co. Hwy. 10.): Front (Edgewood Dr.): Rear (south): 30 feet * 30 feet Yes 20 feet * 20 #eet Yes 3Q feet * �0 feef Yes �` it is unclear what the intended parking lot se�backs are. Based upon reasonable assumptions, siaff believes ail sefbacks to be satisfied. Parkinq The PUD establishes fihe parking requirement far the restaur�nt / retail uses as one space per 100 square feet. The proposed multi-tenant building would consis# of a maximum 7,785 square feef of gross floor area. With fihat much area, a tofal of 78 parking spaces would be required. ADA requirements indicate that of the 78 spaces, four need to be handicap accessibie. The plans show a total of 93 spaces, ihree of which are marked as handicapped. The amount ofr parking provided complies with the PUD however one additionaf handicap accessible stail shoufd be shown on the plar�s. Access & Circu(ation There is one access driveway shown from Edgewaod Drive; no access is shown onto County Road 10. As with Outparcel A, the absence of ar� access onto Coun#y Highway 10 is consistent with the goals estabfished in ihe corridor redevelopment and revitalization ;�, pfan adopted by the Cifiy Council. The site has good circulation and drive aisle widths are `:? sufficient. . . The applicant has submitfied a phofiometric anaiysis of the site, however it is not 4cnown if the anafysis complies with City Code as the foot-candle readings are provided only for the parking !ot area. (The City Code indicates fihat foof-candle measurements shall be shown up to fihe centerline of any abutting street right of ways.) Additionally, the photamefric analysis does no# indicate fihe iighting fixtures fo be used, the pole height or the individuaf fumens specifications. Any building mounfed lighting would also need to be shown and figured into the ana[ysis. The attached resofutian inciudes ihis provision. Drainaqe The plans indicaie thaf the site would be serviced by a series of catch basins linked fiogether �y storm s�wer which fierminate into the existing s#orm sewers under Edgewood Drive. Permi#s wouid need to be obtained from Rice Creek Watershecl District before the City will issue any building permits for the project. The applicant and any ufiility subcontrac�ors shall rineef wiih the Public Works department for final utility plan approval prior fio construction. LandCor PC Report May 7, 20p3 Page 4 Lan_dscaping A Landscaping Plan has been submitted wiih the plan set, however the pfan lists general�zed planting types {e.g., "Overstory irees, Evergreen Trees), it does not identify which of the listed plantings would be ufilized or in what numbers. The City Forester wiH review the planting schedule and make r�commendations from the lists provided or make alternative recommendaiions. The appiicanfi shall revise the plan based upon the City Forester's comments and to show all species and in what quantities. Furthermore, there should be an atfempt to match the landscaping provided on the theafer site and along Edgewood Drive to whatever extent possible. The City Forester shall approve different plantings only if not considered inconsistent with the existing. Last, the Landsc�pe Plan should idenfifiy the existing landscaping materials on �dgewood Drive. Garbaqe Enclosure The site plan ir�dicates that fihe garbage enclosure wauld be located at the rear of the building. No details were provided regarding the enclosure's construction, however the PUD indicates fihat the enclosure shali be of the same construction as the building with solid, opaque, latching gates. Chain link is not an acceptabfe gafe materiai. Signaqe No sign plan has been submitfied for the site however s�aff has communicated the PUD `� requirements to LandCor representaiives. While not specifically addressed, no pylon sign wilf be allowed, as the intent of the PUD is to establish a consisteni design iheme throughout the devefopment, using simifar construction, color and materials. The Theater sign has a masonry, monument styled base and #he same would be required on this site. At a minimum, the plans should indicate where on the site fihe monument sign is pro�aosed to be located Building Construction The proposed refai[ / resiaurant building would be a single sfory buifding witE� a 7,785 square-faot footprint. The design is very appealing and the materia(s would match the proposed office building. Most of the building woufd be brick; with brick coiumns and an EFIS roof detail. Fabric awnings are shown adding more character to the building. The entryways would have a tall arched design very similar to fihe Abbey Carpef building currently under canstruction. The building is shown partitior�ed forthree users with drive-up windows at either end of the building. There is an autdoor pafio / eating area adjacent to Tenant 3's space, however it appears as though Tenant 2 also l�as access #a the patio area. Since the plans do r�ot indicate a building height, I was unable fo determine compliance with the PUD. The plans should be revise according(y. Ceneral Site Plan Comments As with Outparcel A, the first four Site Pian General Nofes listed on Paga C2-2 do nat relafie to �his developmen� and need to be revised io reflecfi the subject development. The site pfans shaufd indicate snow storage areas. LandCor PG Report May 7, 2003 Page 5 �'T While �he plans need many revisions as pointed out herein, the proposed development is or� �he whole consistent wifh the City Codes and the controlling PUD document. ,. . . Unless directed to do ofiherwise, staff wili draft a resolution recommending approval of the LandCor development projecf. The applicants shall make ail of the requested revisions for Planning Commission approval (or if not possible in ihe �ime frame available, the resolution will stipufate to the revisions.) fn addition, #he applicant will need io submit a colored rendition of the r°etaillrestaurant building and shall provide to staff three separate fufl-size copies of the landscape plan fior the City Forester. The resolufiion would be availabfe for co�siderafiion af ti�e Commission's next meeting on May 21, 20Q3. �Q,v�.a,� �� James Ericson Interim City ClerEc/Administrator Attachments: 1. Applica#ion 2. Zoning Map 3. PUD Documenf 4. Office Bui[ding Facade i � � � a d � � n_ � � 2 t� F-' � 1i°' o � a W � � w , � � ! A-� H � � � (� o W � � �4 � � � C � a O � > � � C � 't7 � C C � � ro �U N O � � ,� O � r. � N Q1 N :� � � Q N � � � � � � N � � � � r � � N �, O � � N � 0 0 CV M � E 6 � 0 0 '� (� �. cC6 i ^ � Q R7 � � ` � (lf {ti � � 6.. � co a� i � o C � � � � U G N � Q ca N c� �n � � � C � 'w�� U � N � � w (4 N Q� � � � � � •� � � U Uj p� � � w,�. yw'„ � o y o ro � ,`�1 �o � O �� U SO O Q p�� U��•-- � 'v � y � -Q o � t'ylY C�+�-si m �, ro m�.. �; a .�; � ai � .� y � � a p � � o � � c� ,C � N o ` � l�D � � Q.) eC � -C � � .� � � � �� h �' rn try O� C p� W � �. O O � -� � L � � � � � � iO m �C �° � � y m �5 � � vj � � � � � ro � y,�, C � � ,•�i., ,N y y � ,'�a, O y„ � �Y � � � � � ~ � � ro y ,G � �G` Q � N � Q � � �,�� y+� v O�� QI j a � q`fi �"� � �� o U y U '� '� � ^� � 'a° l� a.. � O L77 N �-C O y C � � � ro �y � � � � � � p� C a� � a f'�- Qta o � w� � w b y � a �., � � m o .� `.,.," > a� � c � � O� � � 'O �� ~ o y�� ro� v� a � U � � N � � O 9] Uj � (� c�a :� ro ,�N � � � � � h y � �(�U�.O N � ��v'�.. � � � U� N Ul N tn tn � fn � � � � � � U U L 6 L.. L L.� L U U C1 U U U�� f0 Id fC t4 (0 tLf OOOMIn� C�NO �MO(V I��[") (` r Y r (�{ � � N � � � � .� � � � �Q (n � N � � N M Q � � � � N � (U � � (� � U U U L � .�. � � ti�''°--. w w�1°°-. (4 t� � o F`°��oL1��— � O �r= U N � N .� r. � w O � ul N O � v � N r IU . � O Z G _ � � � � 3 �� c� �. N � � C � U o O V dl ?' � o� �w � � � � �� .�y��iYi a► o i :� C]�a�w a> � � �� o0 e� � o0 O� N CT ' N � � in � �--i d' Q �ry � -�- o '°" O � o � � z�� 00 � � � �/ o r~' � � �+ � � � P� dti � � W � } o�+ V] '�` Q � � � � � Q W d � � a � z � a 0 r� � W A E°� � Q p � Q o �� W�w o� O�c�. H � �" O �� W � Pw � o Q aH W � zQ o� a a< , C ��'"/ t�' a� Q, cn � � � � � �.c��c ai CO y ,C -�» � � `.0 4� � � � o� � � -� � � o��,��ro N � Q� � � � � � � � � � � � 0�,��'U�C N h N O � q� �4 j � �- �� p4o� � � � y � ro �- ay ,� � ,� � � , Q*� � � U�.`,��-� � ,-� y � ,{� .�7 � � � ro � 0�.�� 0� � � � � � aUi N � +�.+ �7 0 � b � b o � � � � ro w_ � � C � io 0 o�w'�° $ � � � � � c�,>�� RS .0 � o � y,�N �bv� �0 a� � �� D .� b � � � .O ��X �N.. ,4 h� �I -C 5 �ll � ` r � N � � � � � � � � � i1 � w- p U! Q) � Q � � U � � N tII l..� iZ � � ` G!. � V� Q N aJ N �°'r 00 > o c�f � w. a � �r° `�c�i Q � N .� � � � � w. O V tn O O � ('"°q ' � o �- c� � w !f') � � � � ��`��r-('7 m�ncn��i� � O O p � � N � � � U � a d° N r � O � � L ` � �.n.0 �'�°1 �. � � � N E O. �--- ; �- � tn �.y. U U U � C (0 tl3 cII � � Q. g [t. . V � w +n ur .c c Q) r �- r � (� .a � � C6 � � � � L L � � N � y w QHO� 0'_ 0 0 � M � �' C'7 (O � � N U U U U U U � � � � � � oMO'i cYi N�� CO N� a0 0� Cp � � m ¢ � � ,O � � � C .� N ;,}� 'II �p ��m� � � � �Q� � � O � � . � � � (�4 4�Ot�°� N i CIf � .� Q' � � � � .� c � C� U� � Q� ro V Q � � � O U � p o ro � � � y � � •� E f6 � w � w'" � ro a U 45 � � 4 � � � h O U m � i- OO ttr > � b�... � ,� � � � w C � O � v' o rob Q� � �b � � o �y �. Qroro y �' y � :? m � � -_ ,-, � � � �a�i`L L� ° % Q ro .� N �/1 7 7 � � v � � .� .� .� C C �C C C C G '� � �� E �� E E �. .... �. .� .r �. ..-. a� a� m a� a� a� cv ar a� � � � � iU '� 'a ��e-�a-..w-00 OdOOQOC� � MNd'CV�'d'cV N Q � C ` Q � �p � � �' O � �� z U (i1 ,�. �� _ � � O fl3 � [L Y �� v, �� 0 UJ ($ � �� fi � � � � RS � Q ` -� � 4 �� v.. � "^' 'o � ,� w �1o�,b Q O � o � y O � � L� U c�j � � � � � >fi � �ro � �b.�� v O � � � Q� v� h y O � � -� � d N O �i ` � � a�°ti� o � �1 � Q � � � ��o ��o �..� o c�n � C C •C � E E .� � ,r as a�i � '� •e-. a- C? � O O N N tlJ � �I � a � A.� C � 'a 3G � O�Q. � � W , , � c (a � � h N 0 � � � + U � ,°�" � q� b f� � � � ro c:�,� � � c O U` � � O � N Q "� �n � � � � m � °� a� � "-� �� > �C � C � y � � �� q � y � j ay,� � �� U b .�� > � C � .� Q� � � � � � � 4 � � q;� ,� y � m `° o c a� u� �. °�� a�i�,�o � � ('�j,� N y ��s � � ,� � � s-Q �,�,�. � � � � � � � � a- o- �.w`O i� � � � � ro c � 4 � N � y U n�, o �U O :� � � � � � m � � Q 4 � � O � ro v'�.. ,� � ro O .� � � � o � �� `� � � �� x � W � �Q �� Q1 C! O � � � O c'b's � N C O (.7 � � l� ,� � � 3 7 � � � � .� .� .� � � N N "°�°' � `� �`4'N� � � � �t � � � a � U N �� a� m�--O� �� N � ,� � � � � d� O � �n z °+ o O �°'� '"-' � O � U za� [r.� o 0 Q`, � �y, t7 O ~"' � U Z ~ � � � Q � W � � O � � � � A H � � Q L�+ R, � � � � � � Q h � A b y-' ��o `� u, ��o a x � G� W � �' ¢ O N a. r:ti``1 � � �"" Pa F o � `� � � � � -_, o A f � � W � Z Q o � � � � C C�,O 0. "J > � U .0 � �<�-' 4 l6 0. � � N .� � � C p Q, � O � � •� � c y c � �°A'� d 6 � � � � C ($ � L. td � � � � � �- � fU � ,� UI C O Q' f� 7 > a - . �.,, � Q- r � � � Q�1LQ. �. � � '� w >+ U � af O ""' p C ��UN . f� C o w A ? � � V ro o � �II � � � .� � � � � U � � c e�4 � Q� U � � C N� U C'� U � r� Q. � '¢ � fa � O V �� c � � � S2 .«N.� ;?' � U � ,i � C r > X � � !� ° W � � es: � � Q U Z � � (Y7 � � � � � � •� (� tn ?. > � .�c��c Vl {� � � G � d Q � � ��L V3 N � Q.QIe+t°'� t8 V •G [4 C g � C � �� -r � U U � � � (U C '°'' C � C ��°� O'C p � r � -� t0 U � � � � � � � � � f0 ❑ � �ZLt� n"C C � C c '� N � O O O � � � � 7 O � O �9 � � � � � � � � [-�°��N� � ��e– O q� � Ol -U -� C — � �G (� X Q � � � � � O 0. `� tA �N � .a�-+ p G d � � �� eai '[i y�, .� � 'r- C •� L � � � O � O � O p' � N � � -° � .0 O � o � N N � > � � 'pt ,C� `z3 O •� °C7 3 � 0 �+ _Q Z N � � o � ��i� V! (n � �- � FU Q,1 3 � � � � O O � F� Z N L� n. � � N U � w � f6 C �� Q �•C � � ❑. �. � � i a a- L.: � -� O o � � � (0 O C `0�- � (d U � � O •N � 'r O � � o Ul � Uf �� tn �`� � lV ��R � N U3 � t� G O� .�7.. .� � Q. � O C 'D �- � O � CS �� w y� A Q� f0 U � � 0 � � � Q. >, �- � � � � ci .�c � � �n .c, � c� � � � � � > :� � � �y � N U � U � � .� U �� C� G� � g N Z3 j ; F � � � ~ � C � � O c°�� ° � �� o�� C � �C C�� tA� �� L o fn ([f N V7 ' �(� t� N�� y.. +r N C�� w � � C -C �' o � � tn � � y., 0 � � ro C ; � �l ,.� � � N � U °'• u10-:�0��"�� By � ro � u, � c - �c � > � ro� f�ll m N� o G� N Q ` tll a � '� fTS . 'Q � � � �p_, (Q (�6 > � � 'w U � '� �' U' � � q U'�O `N U N Q, (U � O; E CC � X C Ell I6 �7 �� f, O N > a� �' a� a� ` .� � °- v�i�cCQ��u,�n°��o W�� 03 o C� N cU Q� H v� :� � N � C � � � :� � � � � � a� p C N X C� ro�� 00 ��s �� f6 L. v7 a ul � f0 � G O C � � UI :iS � N .� Q � o > � v � � � � rn -a � ..' `�° 'C7 uf 7 t� � � ..J � � oB U (��S �� E C� 0 � 'L o �� ? > .� i �-V'�O � � � C N m.� � `-' � ?� C 'p - � � Q [II N Q° fa t0 � d. V � � C .� � i4 �1p.U� QL � � Vl (�0 �T" � VI Vl y r^ � C � '"° � � � U � �y C�� C Q. U) c f�U � � c�j � C° c� C o� i� � a� � � o a� t- +n E� �j "^' �- G -�-' Q � � c-- Q� G Q � D � � � N >>��T��Q- N q C v1 �,,,,, O � � � � � � � �.�•-� � � Q1 vi � �' � � � � U N � � � i-�.� d_'.II.,�... � -C`1 � C � � � � � u.. � � � N Q� � �Q ��.(II L O N ` � °' U � � O � �y -= N � C V1 � �°" O U � � �Nl.I_� w o � C N ,� � cy,L'o�U'��- � � (� � ,Vl •� � � � � � � � � � C � o � ..0 ` w � � ,p o �. N � Ul � � � � L � U (� � "d � •° p. vi p= Q� ul -° 'L'3 N '` '.� uNj � �y ` � � Ul tCi � N O � � � � ��.� � f6 � `T � � � �O L Q r� � UI � U ,: � � � 3 � O.� o Q� U O �� O � O N r � o° N �. � ul � '� � � U � � � � � �,� �r.�_ � � �. � v) O � N � L � o N N'� G� ul c6 O" � ,E � O� .� uT � .0 � ,� � � k-- � O �� w,. U L. b oJ U � � �N C � � � .� N 4- O �, ,C O .a. � U N �~ C "'� � � O+-'� o � Q C� o.«.. (6 � °'c-�U e� cU �� U � .� � � � � � G U Q- >'0 Q� > w- O � � � V � O -� � o '~ Q�' e � w Q� O � � � � � }� � �• O Q? C�� C L L2 � a v ��a ro � �� r°� � O�>� L o N C� � 4' �e � C o� CQ L w � � �>��c°a�� L p-�y 7 U� Q,t9 �-, "� O� III O�-a � �, C� U'J a,� � N� t2- U�� N �CU�Ol�q;��'� ,� .ro � � � � � o Q � 12 � � O � O � o � � � � � O � V � o � � (4 � O 4 C t�.. "O Q� N ,� � y- r i0 � 6- N o U1 �'a CZ C U��,+�, a��. mc� o � � Q vcc�c�t�L o c a� '- � � � � � � O � �L � � � d �' f�.d=°pOL � (fl�Q O �' � �r� o�o y,� C a� :� O r o p� cn u� �. jl +L°' L- U V7 � ,� � N � � `r% 0 0� O p C Q� � o`O O � � U � 4 � V � � > '> � � O g O � n o UcqQ��°.�U ca � c 0 U ` N c Q � � U C � � � U � U d O r � � � +�°' � G � � O u° �, c U � Uj ` Q. N N t3 � c c� U � � (0 � � .e � O "Q a� co�f>� r o 'Q Q ltl O ;F, U � t � i/� �. N � m� "'" � �+ IC� � � C C >' O � C � U n � � .� C � �3 U �� O� N � � � � .--� � � � � o O � �1 � ,n � U O a � z � � O U��' i� o � � � � � � � a � � ��7� W � q O � � � � � � Q O Pi a a � E°-' w �1a OO � Q Ey � o � ,-1 � �e O a�� p., (� � � � M r-t W o � O N La+ E--� W � � � � � W � � � � A � � W � zQ O� � � O � r O '� � � >' ¢ '� � � � � +� � � "Jo-t�DC�C'GL..E� o� ��•c � .� o � � i r.�j � ,� � � ° � c p ` � °" N � O W US � .- � O .� '� "'' (� � R. tn � - � �� N� C U�� C N QI C O r-� '� Q,M � a� rn.� c� a� -rr � a� u� �.r a' � � ia Q� c m� v�i u� c�o � o� v' Q. � � � �, ,� C o � � � � � �, � � a � � :a c` o�o o Q� v°�i ��'> ai >�b � �° Q °i�Q-U� � v°�,V �0-�0 �� 3 ��L�cO�.�ca�vio �D��w �-°C30"�� .��i�•��,�a�s� c�.� E`a � a�� a�i c`�o EU ��w c a�i �n � o� �-a� a� �• s a� �..� �y � U `- � a� � '° N a� � w ai �- � ° c "° � C° as �� ca �° o a�•- ai N � �, � � .� o C i � o .i � � 'g � .0 � � � � N (Il N "' � i--° � � � ` V o � O � o � � E � � .__. �j .�n � O L a � a(� °a N L... ltl j`°� Q° Uf � � 3`o q>� y,° E U7J 7�'�s a� � c o' � ��, ��....� ��..a-�� c4 C �,�a�`J��°' �a�cUa��vio ,� N� c.�.� ` ai � E,v_3� c `�� ° �y � c�v � � N u� n ��•� E � .J o U � y C � (qj °a .12 � � ,e,�_, l� aJ� O `� ..`",. � � 0 � p « (ll tn � � [D ,� U w A 6. O N N� �� O �i *�'.IIp � � w N � p a "-' � G � � +� "d � � p C cQ N a.- � V w C Q. � Q' Qj c�]°. [6 3 � � o � w � Q � � � � � f0 � Q7 a tU � � O � �L �i �(° �7 � a� L�O•A� Q w- `C7 .� ar .r �— C=.� .�-' .� 7 Z Q-'Y7 t_ �'i � O �� c�� j� .� � � � f�6 � �e (� � � .0 � � C V (a '� � Q N� a°° O c6 � v! � i��:_, Q p � O fll tl° � � � :'= U O "J 'p � � O N '� C N '~ � >o�cc�>aca � L � C� f4 � � � A -a N � U � � 'II ` ;•_: ` OS,> � • � � > O� U �'U O Q O U � V � � � ` ZJ O � � C .� � O C Q1 � �� - o 0 0'��.� o C ; U � � � � � 7 O Q�3 f�/) � d� N o•C �� o p�� O-� `� O N � U it q� � U � N f" � Q' �e- p � w O �' � � � �-� � 7i� ��'�L � O N j� CUj � p) '� U w- � � � Vl O � L .� � Q � d± �o-� a-r � w (6 fn O O� C L O o � � O C � � �(p o .r ' G � �. � � � °�r Q 2 0`�� ° o � o` �� , ,� .w -a � a> w. cn �� O L� Q, Q� C..m. O � � � U � �� o � L I!3 � C•'- C) N � � � � � � �OS ��. O Q. ' C �- . �= � � � d' C � 7 � -� � N .0 L � O � t�L��.°av�o`va� � C N t6 � � L � �- ° Q u01 '� tl? � . � � w Q U C'�00�� ri � .'� a� �� m � � o� � ��'� -�o°�� ' z � � n U � (4 � � p��-��c aj �� .�� GU � 'C N � � U � d V � � � tU � � p .0 � � Q. O w N y-=., �� m 'as � � �° �Z cceCa cO�c�rov� � a� �� ' � � � cz a� � o � o'��'� N � � �.G-�� .:� � U} ._ �- � � � � � 6. . � fl. � � z �- 1C � (ll v w t°°° �— Q O.. "O O Q r O.. O vi -,� � v1 N "� � •= � � N Q� � � 'a C� ��'� O� � O c O � � > N � � C � c� � � O p •� p � � V °p O. t� Q.� :�, „_, o ro c� � t�y,�tUCQQ�� ..� U QL a = -e1 0 °� ca �� c� �� — � c ��o•C°'c°� • L�. �� -`�-'�¢?e�`�,°;��c� � `� 3�� °�� E 3 ,� ' .tn��a�a��os�au°�i � � ��'� `�>,�'a�i `� V L. vi c4 � � � � �Ea�ca�n-Uv-N ` ' ,a, � � p � O � � �� j � V � � '� � � ,g � � C tU "� C "L7 p (6 ti- � � ,� � N o ;e N N � 3�c��cCna�°-n � a��:��roa��.o�� s 3 a �.� � y :o_. Q .0 �► � t.� O tLU � wa- O N`a O�� N O c� U � � � t � � �- C � y o � � � o�- o Uf O � � � � � Ni3i L O > C � Q' i "'' � � � •— � O � � U 'D � � .� � � � -p N -Q � .aj C �, � o �,�ao �no>�, vw��a� m c o � 0 o e e C'a. � E�°°� � a� -� �= Q° � •3+ U � (D -� � � 'C (0 O .:: V � �= Ul � � �- N � 'C3 N � Z � N tQ '� :«.� � y � � � �S Q � � CV � � � j ',0�- N W �qroj � f�A � � X �= N� V Q�� Q L tSf ,� � �- 'Ul 0. > 4= Q C N N°O �� N b-. "' � � • � °- � `� Q. t� � � � � � a3 V1 A•L A�% (��0 Q i � V i � O ar � ..r � �.+ QS � N !fl ` � Ul � ,h t6 � j � � � �O .0 N 'a t�lf � N Q, U � � U b a C L� C.� lf1 i o 4�-' (6 a ` cv L � O � N p � ;� � � V p� ; � � .� C � � t-. � N � L � S � � � tS Ivj � � •> U � � � V � N > � L '"' O C > � ❑. -0 � � (ND (Ti O � O � � � tl1 � O 'D N Q- � � � O � � (�6 N p � � � Q° � ,C � N � ¢ U O o '� Q � � L •� � (U � c ` �/7 C (� U `� � O � tn ` "r L4� A .i � � � C � � � � tA � C d � � L fi � »r >, � Q (tl QY N � X o � � �- v�- � C� ro o� N N� c W Z��y �� p Q � � y t�7 � OD tA _fl � C � � a�i � c�r-° c� a�i� C rn �� o � � � � '°- � C � �• � U � � � U � L C �.� O � ~ -�p > � �' � 03 � �' N l�I! � � — o � � (�0 w � U � O � N t�q � � � o � ` o � .� �iQ� v.F..� �°a u� ��.._�U o 0 � '� N � N N � '� C � -� a� � � � a � � A > co � � � N � � l6 C � -Q C 7� � � U .� O � d O C � �� o � .c �p � � N � ` ;� c� � � L 7 � � � O � � ro N � � � � �C co � N � .fl > �� L a) N �- ,� � O � � 'C G a Q Q9 �I . y Q9 C � � � N � O � � i '> �A � O �� Q C � � N � •Q � � � � � � L '� a � � � � ta � �` � � N � � E � C '� N � d n � � � O� N O� ' N � '-n in � � d�o,j z �oo .-.�'a �n �, C� °z�� O Q�� C7 � "" � U �� HW �~ � � � � � WQ � � � o � � Q � � � � > � Pa � H � � 0 � Q H � O A � � d` O �� , �o � � � o � O N A-� a i J F� � �, e�' �, o A; W f� � ,.. O Q ;�H W � zQ �� a f� ,� `9' N �f •C � p 't7 � C � w. � °� -� '� N � N -� � �4 �� O d j j�- � Q! r.«.% V -�p U C -a U -a � ,� C U..._ N � N� v CO � t4 � � (S3 ~ � N � y 'O i 7�'N � � U � aa�°-'uiE°'.c�vc C � � tn (Q .� 'w N �:., � � UI � � N p � Qi.�CC�'�poy,G,n � oa._ � ro .e c� - cB � � � y, �. �' � � °�*°s c � � � � � O � � N � E o � � .;n �- o .� � o p'� � � � f�J .0 tt� ' � ,f„ N C � �„=..m��"a o.r� � � N w- � O � � � N `C7 t� '� � � ` N � � .� vl � � X � -i C � N N � O�� O �>+ � 'C .� N�?+ p+�.' C U t9 L Q- =� o `a a�� «- o ��wa��-��,�. � N VI .� �� C6 = c� Q, N��C � i p Ul �Ul o� C � � � N � � � � � (�/1 t0 � � � � � 3 � � � � p � O �r� U � � � VI � O E Q x �,C � 'e- L � w C � Q � � � �= f6 � o c � ��L�,c c c� � � Q �° � w� � a � � ��'.vo- l0 N t6 p� N��y � 8b .� U C � v � � ,� � � U � ��'v�°�'� v �� c o M� � aJ �)( � w O O cQ �Q �«..�•e� � +. Oi� U o N � C v N N � •�o�°�� N w N O �'Z � O � N � G i� �, ,c��j� � Z o p O - p � Q ❑- � � � � � "� `y 'L O �- � � � � � p� � o � p '� U � O G .�r � � � LB n. � U O � � �° � > � - � �` � 03 � � O Qtn Q,� 9-�J N O L � � ¢ .0 v� U � O � -O 'C� � � � � � � � °' N o o � f�/l U � C � °p � � � -II p � f!3 �i Q 7 O. N U��fC � � U ^ � � C � C �. •= � O � � � VE C � � � X E � � -j� O C � � o � O�d'�� O � � � C � � � .� > O � � o� � �� C �� Q � � V tlCS '� C {�j � t�S � � G C � tQ `� � � � � � � � �� I6 v� i- "Q � �- � tif � G Q1 w � � � � u� ` � c� � � � N � O m � ro > � � a� ,>�,+ w- '� '� �� U� N U � � � � � O � d. � Q C � �i 7 > � �,°°w i � � � U L1 N 0 N 41 � � � %.+ � � � � O � Q1 Q ��° � Q' � Q t� � ' _ .�° a � � 'L � � U '� i � fll P F"° 'Q tn � � ro O �� o � � � "a N � �n O '� w r/1 fU � � � O c L c� � C N v- � N ~ Q. C fl1 `Q L 1n .� L� tt Q) O � N � Q N � � � =' l'6 Q L a? � al �� L � � .a � .� U cti U O �3 t—�j � .� .� RS E �... �nN�cn�'�o3� c � � cn� e o � .�,�- � � '� � � ,c� (a N U ,� •� l0 � � N d � }� G � � N ~ N �y7 � N � C � C t0 C� � L C N• � � y '.D �' �i � UI � L � � "' :� � � vl Q� � � � � � '� � � � U � --. 7 l�f � � � � X � � � n.y � � ��.s�- �Y � � (� �6 f]. i � `C3 �- tA O � � � U a�� U� O U c�� C � ul . C � � � � p � Il1 '� C � � � .,L. G w- > � � a3 � � o �� v� �UL� � � � � U � ` °� H � � L � O � �`�r v � �`°o O a�i E yy t � � O C � � � � r i-' N Q U tb r L. Dl "D ro o 0 0 ` b C d � � � �� y� 'iw :� N d � � � U1 N � �Z�� + � O .G Ol � QI VI � N QI C+�,��,�� p ��n� � � � � c �% v� .-.� a? � � U� � c � 0. C .e � .0 � Q°-Q � 'L7 .��a�o'v��i�'�°�� > s '� '� ,� � � � ro A � F •� .Q p Q- > tll EO N �'�a�EC � �`� �� El_ ' n � "O �U � � O > o O � N � � �t� � Q...� ,� � � � � C � 'a � �" � L U V � � � � '3 � -� O C�L� �� •-� � 'N � � a C U rt+ � N � r o � � � � � (� 4- '� t . � o � � � � � �� C U1 � w � t� V� �-Q• � Ao.� C �- � C � p � ` � � � � � � ro S2 (� (n � > � � � � �N O��' U1 O� C�.= r v1 � G L CZ �(�6 `C try E .m � • Q 43 ��° tn � � � ftT � � � G Q C2. � �7 � -a .� � ;� N T "c� o c � - c � cs Fn"pv'��>cc r $ <-. C4 � Ul � � a � O N C Fll C� � a C1 L � � � � O � � � � �- C3 �+ Z1 ev Q. ,«. .�. O -� a� d O �. � L � N � w � � C � � � O � . . � � _ C .� •� � � T � � O � ` O Q N N U � C .- 3 � N � i � � N O '� � � O � Q O � � = � � C� �" C �c i�3> �Itl � G C .� .N � �' c `o °� N � � o d � � � O E ` Q'� O N � � � � y � N O — � n� ° N � C Ci � � {� N C C C �> Q1 G O A .� � � � � .� � 0. �. � O cB {/3 Q vvi a� � � r � � a� � � U .� p C :� � o � N � tn � O �. G � .0 O C U Q�,3 �1 � � U � � � � .� A � .0 'B u) � B •N � ° � "''Q �"G�' NLL CS lll � � Q Q — � i �� Q" p.� N U' � C,� � � c �+�oo (� � � � U � L � U(� � C Q v Q�� ` C O � �- U � N � � � (J) �° � � � � � � C � � � � o Vl � � 'iL � L1 � -�r Ui (6 � N ��„ e � � > � � � � o� O O-sr � �.�� w (6 �" � � tn � � � o. 6- �� w C tB " E � � � N o C �� Z V � C, � � � � (� o +en w� p � � � N � '"' � N � � Q- � O� uj C�� t� U C4 � � ."w � � � � > G O '� C '� � (/� W '°"�_' � U �° � � � � ,�w C�! �S N O t�❑[l.l �Z �M C� � � � � � �� O� N � � N � � � � r-r t`i' O � j � o 0 ~ ~ � � H � °zd� W V} o Qi � �..� C7 O '°�` � U � � � � a �S � � W � W o � � �i � � � � � � P, � F-+ � � O � � Q H � Q O � � 4 � � p�,,�� W O (> � N �w E°-� � r�"' o � a W � n� W �Q a� � A O � � P-� � N � o � � C � � � � O � os�a� ��co> U o C� ��i�,"D Ti � �'�-p � � �,—� C � � ,� O O � .iJ U C o � � �' � � � � �'�- �� O �w C O C��V.- t„ .`.�� O �: c�u � � � � a� � � � � � Q, °- ` -� � ��oc� �?' o ro � � "- .� ` � 'Z5 � -� .,r � Qj � N • �. Q� � 7 � V � � � N � ;ro�.�ma �� s � � � � � � � �i V � �., O QI L U�� o� o V � � Q3 N � U (� R � � �� r �L��'� �� S ,` � (II ' � O � O � � .� � •�, -� fD -p N C2, N Qy �� ifl � .7 C � C � � L � ro � � U � o r � � .N ��-Q(n a`> c � � � p� N� U o O�� }-- N � � � � U tLJI � � � E � � � � O 03 (p C '°� � � .0 r�i1 "O C C � C .c�n>,�ao�� n �-' �i v1 (ti U U v- �+ � � � a � � cti � �C � C � � � � ` O � � L� Q g- � C N � � O .Y � ro � C � � � � � N R � � � � C � � .�-+ (� � o � o � a��i��~ � � � N �� O � � � � � (4 � C � � � E6 O — � L Q .e�-� �� O � Q � � +� 7 w � � ��—Q-U � X � o � �� a> � C� � o � o'�'��o ��,cr� O � !n (6 m � Q! � N � C ��vl� U V o cya � N a� � C w — O � L � U7 � O u1 C� � U Ln �. �' „�.°_�, :p O O � U N O O A � � � V N _ � C �+ .G fQ � C� � o �n �; � � N � �.c � � .� � �_� � � fll N °� � � � � C vl 23° � C � tll L � m � s � � � � N � d � .i "0 � O � � C� �? i ��p.-•�•�.-+ L � � � Ab,�,,��7� CJ � � � � � �� L � � � � C (/7 .� .d L �--' w v o � � �� ro p L L � •� "d � � (� Q 07�� Uro'� � c°}i�'� �-N•�� O U :� � .0 C tQ L � � � Q9 p V} O Q� �X ro ` N � � � � O ��-�-c°��a�-o ui t � � � e�6 -n `d > 3 � 0 (6 `" � u� .c >� �oSG � O � � � � y N � c0 O �i � � � � � � � � Vi '� ..�_• N � O � � G p� � �a=� O �C C C � x — � N � � � _ � N 'SG � tB C � � � � � � � »� c `�QO��c c`a � ��_ c .cai`c`�o>`° *-' ow c c c� E � V Q C z3 ta C; �d •� 3 � L -V :�+ Oe Q � 1� N � � m �� 3 � � L .� �� G � � O O � � � � t0 � � � p � N N a��'ro � c "_ -a o> �o—c �.� M Q a�i c°� a�i N 'II � � o �' '� � � o �' � N w � i3 O � � @ .0 � � '� O ` L f4 � (fl �� O �i � � � � � B � � (4 � (ti O� � C � ,�G � ` � � � Qe N Zi +-' a� � > � �a � Q� ay O � � � � O � � tll � � ..N.� ' a � O d f�d � � ro� � � � o cLo � o ,,. � � C � .W C � C� 'C7 � � Q1 ��-' � �� o-� L a' c �.� �a a�i= N � (� (li U � N � � � � � o �A � � V7 O � Ci � L � � � � �° X � 6 U3 O ,M W 'y L tR A � � � QI Lc��O.0 a� � � C w� ' � � N �� Q � � � '�Q-otsc� � � � U Ri � P m � � � � N � .� 'L7 ,-% w � ,ia �' ' C � �Y � N � � � � � a ii .�- j � p � O C(U C3° fti f�6 CA C O fLY � Ql � y� ;� ,N C C � � � � p � � N 'L _ � N � � {0 � o i O � � � � j o � ,�'. � � a �' �'JU V C � C N 7 C � (Lf � Ql N � (Q � •`, C a% C O � � � � � N � ' � � c°,Q ��.�° a� N � � L o � � = � � U N � � � � t9 .� � L � .G (� � 7H'rL �.Vl .N p L W � O�� `r,N � Q O� � p.0 �N p� � Q1 �J � U � •C N ' (p Q, C p u1 t tq a � .� V ,(U p � � � � i � �C N o 7 �'�Q (� t�6 � ° � N � N C N .0 � ..- V O � 'a C � O � N � C C. r ,,.. o �,N � � ro�.- �,rn �Ecaa�o,�E� � Q � � a� L o �U� cim.c� �. �;��COC��i � -p C � ?•. VI Q � +° C ..-� Q.1 � � � � RT � d � C r Q� N"a i �� Ql �`� � N F- �� V7 N � p 'v � � t0 y�, .� Q. .N � � � O � � N � C fA C • t6 � tg. O �+d � Q � _ � 3 N � � � o m cn ..r � �. � � a� � ca'� �`� � ��.��ro� ��' � �+� �U N ui e � � O tl) C1 � � .S� � `� ^'"' N � � w = U� [C � t�D � 3 � 'C � �ry � �� Q p o u! � O� flS »� ��—L�a e0 � t� fl. i� lCi �� a� O �� C � � .Q � � � � � � �� o U � � N � R9 cB � c0 •u1 -- J � N �� -�y � � N T3 N J U O � `�C�c�s .� � � .. t�� OL� .� 3 �, •-. � a� .� �- �, O ?•�� '� � � �� c�a' � � �.�� O U t'° O = a+ G = �+ � � � � � � L � � t0 � ..-� N i �.� O � � Li N� ` � O b.. � � � � � � � � ¢ � � � � o (�3 .� � o � �� i � �Q�� o� on, � ��"�' � C3 > 01 "� � � � � � � .-� -a � � � j > 0 �F- oU `c�� v� Q C � 'C � � �> � c � � � � Q � � U � � � s N ,-. � � G � C6 O a a� . o�`° > 0 >� � a� .., o.. � � t� O � � � � t5 � a tA � � � � � � � C � ([{ � N U •C � Ell i��=� � � E � � � c � � .� � � a � — t8 � W � ~ o � � � U 9 � � � � v Q i tl) � O� � n � � � ti � �n 0 z W � U � � � a a. � � � Q � � F � a, OO � G�1 � � Q w � � � W 0 � � N � N ,� � � Z n O� � � � � 0 0 � � �'� o~ U �� > � � W Q � � � � p � A, a Q 0 � do �� O � � O W N � ;'. `� ;-;..� �u� Z �°' � F-� o R�w W G1a � a � A� Q , J W 'a� z �0 �. �e � � i � QI � e8 il.l � � � �. C�! .� a C a� —�? �,•°� �• �� o� � o � � � � � � O 3��„°� � ��n �. ? o �c > >�c�� i � E ._ o �-.ac `ac °� � � o c`� •.� ��..� od � a�i �� .� � � tl1 .a- L �"" : L ~ C�6 � N .� � � � ` Q� o- o ,n -� � c �CO�U�a� �o��ca:;r� o•�CQ-�� ._ U � C '� p,:� 'n � '� tn � O � p � � 'v �i O � U � � � � � � � N (�ry > U �, � � � � � � � C� o� ��'� c� � �cu G `� C � c � ��n�oo�f°� �-��C�°ai � � Y� � � N '� � O � O Ly 'd � ? d „� C .m � �l G O 7� I/f -O .� O N � o � C � � (J r i � w 7 Z7 III Y � � � � .� � ,� C � ° O Qr U in N -iy � � t9 C � � o � 6� N � � � O � �� C...- -� N � � � C -a c � � C �% 'L1 � a.� �$ � � � � � �7 � � � N � � � e4 � > � � N � .� � () Q � � � � � Cl.. Q o ��D �fl� C� N N tU N .a ��°�� U v O � N � L � � ` �li � U � O � (Q � U � � � � m � s � Q � L �r �� L � Q.�.''~� U .� o � O ��L �- C 'C3 '� o tG o � C � � (i' � '� � � N N��' �� U�+' .� � o � � � � � p � oJ�� e�a � � � � N � C = � � � � N � N U d �tn O � c� a� C � o U O � x � G�. U � � N � � � � � �" �w � � V L C f6 Q� J � N � y�.,w t0� � �' o �� —+nE�vQ ��°.o�m i � +-' � � (n ro � � > -.� � � dl i � C .`+ � � U N �� V C � .e d., t� .� � � '� G �� -� � � v ooa� � +-- w .,- � �� t� � � � � a� � � � N � 'a � •� .n L ✓) � O u, c � � � � G O Q-� � � C °°' �- a�=jT � c� o c °e��s � � � ,� a� � Q N � ; U � -' � K � � If1 � � w N �' O C N `/-" U `Ci � � t�n p � � N � � � > � °'mLi°� ��°La N � �Y'� � � .0 C "� �Q�� •_ � 'O � � Q � O .0 v- O I6 � j- O C � 6., .� c O �y � V� � N � 'O O ul N � N � � � ..- .� � N � � �� 'O � �+�-��Q � � O � N � � ��a= C � � N p � � � p Q� � o � � .�w ui � � � O U � � � d i-' � � � p U "0 r � .� i.. � o O N � Q a t4 a3 G ; O N �� N �-s�-� p � W Q� j � ��•L v � i � � � `b° � O O � 3 � � U% � ° �� Q (6 � � @. c � � � o � v (1- C °' � C N � G° � tt� � 7 � � � 4 U {- O .� C O � � � � y ,� U c� � � � � � �.��, y,� m � .n � V► _ ui � C t/i r Q) �. ia= a�u��,o� U � � 0 � � 'o '� "" a- ur Q .� +n O V1 N f4 s. U N � N > +� U 9 � o` � O � � +-A� f� � Q � �U °�� acn � ��cIIo a� ��o��o �p°��n' �� N � `' 3 � � °a � p p U � O Zi � � � � U � � � l� � U i� u1 °d N 1�l1 i � W � � "' �I � � � � ,C � N U �°� ` � Q o � �, ct5 U N �,a�� aa� � � u, a�� I6 C C N U �- �' -Y � >; o � � N N � = � � � � L'6 U o � (� C U +-' � �-- L I� ffl Q � ,� "a N U � C >+�+� C �� p � O +� C � � � 0 � N CU ,.� � �� I��6.G� � L �. � `� � IO L C N � ,wL+ v! O�w � � � � � �ill 7 �% p � _C �U C � U �, (6 �5 U � � �� O o C Y � O C QI U o C 0 � � � N � m 6 N O � � � � � � � �.Q G .� �� o w 3 � N C � � L � � � � � � .-.� Q, � Q o � O �- � U O O j��-r NQ C� � V o � �' Q1 ,� y�-- C � 3 �w �� (0 p N � � � C � > � � _ � a � � � O L N O '� L �^ � t� � tb .ad � � 0 a� •c � � a�--� rn�-�� o '^ +- E � � � 3 .0 � � � L � � °�� -a �U C � � c `°° � o � _c i� �n cu � � a�i -a N '^' Q � 43 � � � ��ve� n. � G � o •� �'-C � N � U � �° A � a�i � � a� a1 a> L- � ass c Qo v o� °Q� ��Q v u► a -° � � -� c p � �U � O Q G S].�� N � �7+� rr � � ro � a� � � ��°� c�2 � � ( 0 � � t � � � �"°��O N� � p w o p� O c >,o� � o a� 'c��a �"° � � �a c...: ��° �-p N O C N °�c,�� p �w 43 fn �' Q. f9 '� (A � � � � � m o � � �L � � O > � � � � � Q � � � N � � N (D C �� O � •° U � �•�U�� (B O N 16 C Q'� �. I � � �1 ro g. � c L^ C � "C3 O f0 y � O '+L-' � � � .0 = U s�" � � � C� � � tU � U � � O � •� Q7 U U� cB ��4 � U � � ��J S �.rnN (%� a+ U) C� � �II 'u7 L C C � � � ,� � >+ � O [tl � � `°- � � � i U��-' O G O+-'i� � " � � N J � o > N � � ~ C � �!! � .� � � � � � �� c��11I� fl� Q. � °—' �.°ioo � c.a a� �� C'� �y�'' :A>S] � L O � y � � � � `, � y � q� C > � Q�� o= p� U3 tn :N O t0 Q" �I � '°°'° p � L >+ � � � d `� (0 � � O I— � � o � � a c.i • -v V o�� Z U� N Q a� O �'� c U u�i 03 U Q�w � C� N �� .� v 3� r�� O� N d� i ^° n '°' � � p n � � � � � U °zo� O � � � � o U Z � � Q � � a`�' � W � � O � � � � Q H � � � W �i a � E°°� � P� 0 � A H � Q O ��o � � 0 �� r� � o � o N PK � � � R° F-' 8 �i W W � A. � � Q at �-+ W � zQ O � � a N O C C � O O'0�°' y, � U � � � � � � G2 � � ` o�Lo a� �,w, N�-�� N � L y, +.. (i4 U ��o c� �E�,�` �Uf � � "� N .N � � � � N � p�•N � �V C C aS O � .��'� �� `n C o ��e � Q. C p � ��a��U a�c��+>, ��m� �a� � �U c� .0 p � N �� QL� N � � � .`+. � ; • � � � > ��(A � � � � � � � � N � O (� � t"�U N ,o � I�4 � �.� � tn Q � �n � ca � ° u � � � � .a (� a' � �N � ��.s� .� � � �� '� � H bC eoi o C � �d d yvi w ��o°'� �o° Q,�``�� •� � � � C ,'�� M O! � � � � �� O � o �.6.�•�"� r�V �°��bv _- O u U F+ t� y' � � q �• Oo °u � {i� � O � o lv0 iG Z�>v, �,�,° �'��;,�^ LiJ O� ,�v'drrno� � _ c oz•�, ;zc� u] o �n��rtid � � v�� o r� �� e „ o d ` � � o� Q� .5 W U �, ,, � ;, T ��,� �� w� ��. s o�r,�. � � �, �� o�b al C '°" � R °, m,c�P"°� � LLi � d a��i y� d a � � � y a � � � � w�. � i 7��°' � r u o� m :6 J � �°� op" a�i y� � Q ��€��+ u�i C7 y°m t/1 C � o Q� O � Y C1 O � ro � O �� '� .�? c � � � '� ° °� '� E = Z u�i � � p � � Q O N �, � `� N G N ❑ c�II o �'N � � � N (U � L � p O O � f- � ,h ,.� A � � � O �~ � � � �N� j�� r U m�� ro c v �° a � =�oa�ia�p��' 0 00:��`� o m c�rwLC`�� o a o�a�' �-��w��L° �o�•��.�� a�i ¢�� s v�i � ��w�.+ � o Q. �1 � � � � ` � � a. u3 t f0 p� U� a ��N�� L�� ca �� m o ;" o,�� a3 "�� G C ro � � � � O "� � � � � � w = A Q � �� ul '� � W � w � ta 43 Q. � Q - � Q m � � � �� N z Cl.� O `� �U Q �o � � d � C � Q) s � � p'oaa� e E-�.� � vv-�... � � e a� o � � � � N � O� O � � J G � � C E '� U {n (0 n, � °o '� �� .o d � N � � � � o , U Q � c��c� O � � � � "r � (fl 8 O � � � G � � � � � � G LL � � � � �3 N(�—.�> � ��C >+1ry��N °Q `F' r- C �[L1•� � y cn w, �g O � � Q1 � IO V L � �� C c �°' e � � � N � � �m C � � o �n c � � p � E � � � O � 't7 °`� (� C "- � c� a�i�� ;� w � c� �ll c� a� � Lpm•°Z O � � C U � ,� O a� w. '°d �- o.� � o � v o U Qj tn � � �'` (0 � � lti � �(� � �O � C � A r � � N � � � CQ �t] °�� 'U N �� > C Cn 'II IA C6 a O C '- 2(n3 ca� � U C � � � .N O O 0. � � A � � � � o y � e °' cu � � o ro � a°°i � D � W �, � U � c � � w � o � U "�-' O QS � � � � � p" 3 � � ` � N c5 � o N �1 � � � = O N Z � O � I.� O J = � �- •� -a N � � � .r � �L N � � L 7 N � �n o �w G C 7 �� C � � A � �, � N �� a � .c .� � � � C U � � 'D 'Q � � Q "Q - p � (�U �, � Oy � w C u► � � "p � � °' � � � i N � �� ay C � �` �> ,� � O � � Q 0 •� � ca c � � � > � O � '" -c � � � io � � u�-°Q� � o � >, u� .n .� c� ,� -o �:�� C � � r N � N � o � � � �=' � � � � Q � � � 4m C V � N °C7 -.+ 9 � � � � � � tsy�"�iO � � '� :.� �n E o.�? c.� � ��c�xo»�� L � =d •� � � 7 fC Q +=�Y3 �w.W �y � 41 � +° O C dl C � � .� C � � � ,� �� o � � � � N �i5 � 7 e°d ° c � •— �° � c•a Q �. � � a -n � O � N .� O � � � ,--. .-. � O � � � � � O i1J Q � � C � � ��N cNC� c� � m r � � a � � > O � N p 9 � L" i N (� � � � C � � O � 3 � U � � ,i4 -- ' N -� +- +-J L ��c� Q`� � O d r ,��, � �a�i'�a eEC-aai � a� •... u� °n o � � w o � � mU __.. � a� .� � � � � � � � � � � �U ❑ � � o � � Q a N� �� N � � � � w N � R"� "'+ �-C�� G � � E � � !9 � o N � a� ? � � �� i u�i r`�i� o � � � � i c a� E ql � � � �� G� N O� � N � .--r �n .-a � � ` � o � ° zo �--i � J in � � °zo� W t„ o � � � �` o ~ � U � � � � � � � � p'1 W Q � � � � Q � � H � � � O„l F+r � � H � w O a W W A E-°a � p o � � O ��°' p., (,� o W � W O (� O N P¢-o ;� i H � J°" o �a W � a � `�. � A , � � ,a W� z� o� d a a � � � � L o ,� I� � � C � � U1 fa �:, w-• O � � �� EU � "' U ` � � � � v S1 o � O C � C C6 O � 7 N C � o � ,O �f �' � � � '8 O � O � � O �C r � U � �U n N +-�'� C3 � U � C � � Q1 � f6 L � � � L � N � � C C � C .O pj � b � � � O .� � � � � � ocIJU � � � � L � � � ,g O '� Q1 � O (y? J � � O� c � U lV � � N � iti � c w � � � � � C ll., � o � _� � � � � o � � o � a � � a � t6 O � Q � � a U � � U .Q � � � O Z � �v o � �- �� O U Q, ° w a� � U ro a � � S °' C LLI � � � � �� r p � T � a � `� C O � � � � o -Q � U � � P L O � � � � � 7 �- � a � � '� o�'� �� _°.r c o � O v CO � � � � U o � � � w��'- � O � U � "� � � � � � � p i7 w � � � d � � O+ (0 � � U U � c � � � � Li3 Q 0 � ro � .� .� � .�C � U � � G � � � N � � U (!) � .--. .-. r� H O � w Z Z � 0 LL.� Q � � W � � LL 0 �° Z � � r � � �� ,z"' ° o0 n � � °za� ��„O U � H �� Fa W � -��i Q � w � W � �n � � � o �"' � � Q � 0 R�, Pa � H W � O � Q H � Q G1 �. W ��o � � �R+ W � W o � O N � , ��r�i� ap �� .�' �r 7 Y, u � 7,�,.ti�f � Lc��-r ! �i�'S: '��D. ,*r, � �—y'a rf.,,? �`+1 �`�'k � � .. �(..- � -... �,� �� c— �� J,y -• V ��,. : LIBF�RY '� � �� , � �kT t� f,'�.7 '�r't� /C}t)�- � � ` � C y`�, r �- �, i'h, � �'� i�' � � . w �, y ?��F�.� �� = � �' �+� ; .��$ � ss �""� �i '� 1_Q y. 1� ,� 7f'`rr � Y,;,,. �. �,� + .�, , � �j ' % CJ `�Ir � � ?�'-f --E,�,� •+F•-'�"�--- C� 8 �� O ` �! f�? � � a � �°4fo£ � � f �� = �� ~ � �` hA ""f "� `� �" i� � r � �� u� ,c, ��. �:� �� . E x�� , E� 1 � - .� � r-, r r� r- � ' � � �'"-�--�,;,�. �-��•� .a��.� �k"! `w` � .� � tij t�i �-.� iii L l � d �l� �" `¢ .� c,l �.,� tV'.� �..� <i? �i 4t r1 .� � r`d , . J �:;�.. � �I � ;�,, �§� � , � f r��4.� i�;�B fi1�j J F�j-81 ;' w e,l? .7 f� ;� �;r Fi �.•� j{� rs 1 a�._;� `'��r �G:?e� J h: �• ?h��} '7E:11 7�'IC �� ? I� �':� 1 ._yF �� `.J-../ � �1��. 1 ��l 7`�3!�� s 7�� _ � 7'Giljdl `7r'9�a't �C3�� ;7��,1 r 5�C J,r?-3,� :+ J.�)'�. .. 15.t i �'�'.'''v lJ:r � �. 75CiS fF�C1� frL�l �°�� I� l�f��L � connnnu�i�rY A �:� �; � �� ryr �'�• � �,� �A� tu W '�� ls;j � �" > � ��. *�' a`*y �� jL(7 � .,. � _ - � "�,'� a � � F'V. --* 'ar . . ' � � ,� � � `'4s� . � �� "��' � .v�.� I �' � �' OUT B ' �{Jd�: � � PARCELS A� ��x` � � � �. '� ��.�� ;i � ; �_.�.� �•�, �� ,. �� _�-�---�, -r�EaTER,��, � - r , t��. ��:� �� i, �1� f'.. cE��r�R _ /' � �� ; / ' �'� � ; �� x •� � � `�'�. ��• �r� /'� _ i �,� �f` r , y !/ � ��" � r f 1 �. — � � � .•, - {'��;:rf'� WAL.GREE�S % PARKING LOT �,f. � , �.� '��=.� � � v �� r�� f E ' S „eJ � 4�` l. _�v ' y� a . �r�F� � p =: ' a�. . �.�..;v�:"�csa.'+�ts-�'3:e.:�a�:9�:c�- _. �.�.-��^v .s-�,�aa.�.=-.,.,.,�s„'„� �.� ��,. 'd�r; � .. ' . l � m' � r°.�+=x:�� - �" � F�, ;'Tc;i � =� r.7 -d �'• �_.3 �� `��c�t �' r��, �„�. 1'y U ) 4 � td? : r -. g °d�' � -t :.� � � � �F5 �. u "y' Y ,.� ta t x 1 �.� �-.y : � ".! t`'J �.i'�_��.,"; J "� �{�;' �.�, � `�• � 1,�. �f2#,�.I,•� � � �i�G �� + '.�.': .+ti7 1� ''•,' J"1'�?a^� ,—rl � � � �.�. °�� ,.�� 1�6; ��v ��-rF_,3 S� _`�F, i —�� J<F �; s�r.-...7 ��.,�.�.z�.� _ x :. :-.�rc. F.';Ftl_I �'7'�YS J'��FI 1 , r`FG -�a' ,� J' " � f F"-�'�� `?'�'3 :i.7(��y J��'Fl�- p `�]:;�� <•'��' �� , �j T � - � �� 'i ,, .9.'� f� r--- u F G� r� +Cr P-- °� � s.�; 42; ri�:1'a ��.;� 'S� ra i,e+ .-1,� 4.� -� � «� `�' a�^��4 � _;'-J��`I r �.._-_ z� O w � � � J � � � � � � u..i Q � ,�, •::�: 1 ra:�:'' �:: :�: : : y: .; • i.t '; , ..; i �� z 0 w� � ��_� � �s Q � �' �' � � � � O , „ � � ua � Q � .: ". i ;,;,,:.nj:° ,M�r„ �_-I �� -: :I � :. �: .; ..rl. � �.< x �:�; 0 �r � O � 14em No: 7 i�eetin� Date: Mav 7, 2003 Type of �u�iness: Action �� . � - � _ __ : . , � ��.. � � . :` � ._., - �°o: Mounds Visw Pfanning Commission From: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator [�ern Titfe/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 724-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of Two Ordinances Related fio Pawnshaps, Zoning and Licensing in Mounds View; Specia! Pfanning Case No. SP-114-�3 � The City is in the process of amending ifs Zoning and Business Codes to al(ow for the regulation of Pawnshops in Mounds View. The Cify Council adopted an lnierim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which direcfis the Planning Commission to reviewthe zoning implications and to recommend applicable provisians. The Planning Commission has discussed this issue afi their March 5th, March 19th and April 2nd meetings. � . - Afi the Commission's meeting on April 15, 2003, fihe latesf versions of bath the zoning ' ordinance and the licensing ordinance, respectively enfitied Ordinances 711 and 712, were reviewed. The only changes #o proposed Ordinance 712 {Licensing) from the version lasfi revievued are as follows: Manaqer. A definition for "Manager" was added ir► response to comments �-aised at the last Planning Commission meeting. fn addition, a requiremenfi was added thafi the designated Manager wauid need to be on si�e on average a minimum of 80 hours per month. Muftiple "Managers" are permissible so long as ihe appropriate police investigation has been comple�ed. 2. Holdinq Period. As discussed by the Commission on P,pri! 16, the ordinance has been changed to reflect a 90-day pawn hold and a 30-day purchase hofd. 3. Disposition of Articles. The dolfar threshofd for requiring name and address of purchaser was increased from $50 to $100. 4. Refusal to Disclose. The provisio�� that required the Pawnbroker to disclose the name and address (and phone number!} ofithe purchaser to the original pfedgerwas removed. Alf parties agreed that such a provision would be inappropriate. 5. Ora! Information. The language requiring the Pawnbroker fio orally inform the person pawning or selling ai� i�em that they are being videotaped has been deleted. The signage requirement remains. No changes were made to draft Ordinance 7� 1 regarding fihe zoning provisions. Pawn Ordinances Report May 7, 2003 Page 2 '� � ; �� * � Former Mayor �onfierre addressed the Commission at the last meeting and raised a variety of subjects. His points and o�ar responses are as follows: a. Acce iabie Identification. 1 asked fihe Police Departmenfi if they felt it would be appropriate or advantageous to fimit fhe acceptable !D provisions to include ONLY Minnesota drivers licenses or state issued Ids. The Police Department did not fee! such a restriction was necessary b. Guaranfeed Enfoi-cement. The manner by which en�orcement will occur wiil be through random checks and ihrough proactive Poiice wor6c. Regardless, the Police Depar�men� will provide fihe enforcement and will bring any viofafions fo the aftention of the City Counci! for possibie iicense suspension or revocatian. c. How wiil Nfana er be defined. The cfefiinition of a Nlanager has been added to ihe ordinance and a requirement added that on average the Manager shall work a minimum of 80 hours p�r we,�k. ,.;-�-t �� 7�1 �!�? d. Fees should reflect that af the h�qhest of the adiacent communities. lf the Commission woufd (ike to reca��mend an alternative �ee structure than what has already been discussed and agreed upon, a majorify recommendation woufd suffice, keeping in mind that the Council establishes fihe fees and any recommendatior�s are simply that— recommendations. ''`; ; ;:� e. How wilf a Pawnshap impact the PD. Until a Pawnshop locates in the Ci�y, no one is quite sure what the impacf wiii be to the po[ice departmen#. The Chief and his investigaiors have researched other communities and are familiar with the impacts to oiher departments and as such, they feel comfortable in the fee structure being �roposed. If the impac# is such that the Pawnshop is requiring a dispropor�ionafie amount of police acfiivity, the fees would be adjusted accordingly. f. Maximum Interesfi rate. Minnesota Statutes establish the maximum interest ra�e thaf can be charged. g. Enforcement. The comment was raised that the ordinance daes not explicitly communicafie what offenses would warrant what penalties. Rather than attempting to identify the multitude of potential violations and then attempt fio associate an appropriate consequence, the Police Department suggested leaving the language as is to allow for discrefiion and #lexibilifiy. h. Prohibited__Acfs. It was suggest�d that the prohibited acts identified in Section 5�6.14 shouid be referencec! in Section 516.13, the section dealing wifih suspension and revocation. The prahibited acts ARE referenced, however in a broad sense with the following language: "The Cifiy Council may suspend or revoKe a fic�nse issued under fhis chapfier upan a finding of vioiation of ... any o� the provisions of this chapter" which of course inciudes Section 516.14. While the prohibited acts COULD be referenced if desired for additional �mphasis, it would be redundant. -:, Pawn Ordinances Report May 7, 2003 Page 3 � - .: .. . . Staff recommends ihe Commission discuss both draft ordinances and the proposed changes and if found acceptable, to consider approvir�g Resolution 724-03, a resol�tian recommending to the City Councif acfoptior� of draft Ordinances %11 and 7�2 pertaining to the zoning and licensing of Pawnshops in the City of �lounds View. ��u� ��l�i�n. James Ericsor� Interim Ciiy Clerk/Adminisfirator Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance 711 2. Draft Ordinance 712 3. Resolutian 724-03 N:IDatalGroupslComdev\Special ProjectslSP-114-03 (Pawn Shops)1PC Report-April 16, 2003.doc ___i i ._�.��..`1 ;;',3 �� ! : �' >. ` ' . .!i �' ' .�? ' � ... . — ;# � . �a.. . � � ; � ,' � ' �, . � . � . : � . , . _ � � �� . �� . ; : � '� . � ` � 1 ! .' � - �� .F�, : . ; .., .'. ��.::' ..... � -\ A �� ':.. � � � ... � +. R i .. , . . ,. R . ... .. r Y ; .. % � � THE C1TY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAlNS: SECTION 1: Section 1102.02 of the Maunds View Zoning Code pertaining fio definitions is hereby amended by adding new definifions as underlined to read as foliows: .;. :. • t.' -.'� _,y' • •.. •-.: .. ::.: ..' .: .. . a- .- ,• ..•-� � � r. �. i:: �., .� +. - - - - - . . �. � • :•: M .-.. . �...... . : . ... � ..' : �. . ....... .. ...:.. �: � � .�� '�. � � �� .. � � � �� . � .� ♦'�. �: : � .� . -�. � � ' . �.. '�: ' � � �� . :� � . '�- � � i- � �: -:.� � :�: .� . . S � +� �. �. ' .... : , :�a. � •: ' � �' • i ^ �' ",� ,.. �� •, . ^ • ��_ � �; (� ' ( :� �' : (b) The follor�rinc� are exempt €rorn ihe d�fni�iora of_"'pa�vnbroker°': anv bank requ[at�d bv the sta�e of Minnesota, '�he comptroller of the currenc� of the Unitec9 �tates, the F�deral Deposit Ir�surance Corporation, the board of qovernors o� the Fecierat Reserve S�stem, or anv o�her fed�rai or sfate a�athority ar�d their a�°iliates; anv �ank or savinq� ancl lo�n vd�ose depo�i#s oa° accounts are eiiqibBe for insurance bv fihe F�cl�r�t Depo�ii �r�s�arance �orparation or any successor to i� ancL ail �ffi9iates of those banks anc! savinqs and loan �s�o�iatEOr��° �r� stafie or f�derall chartered credit unior�° an industrial loan anct thrift cornpar�v or reaulated lender subject #o [icensinq and re�ulatior� by the de artrrri�nt c�� cornmerce. �,� :_, ,, *. .. .. ., - . . . , _ .. _ . . f' � � �! • • i' '�. � �: ��_ �r�: ..• a. All existing subsequent subdivisions within Section 1102.02 are hereby renumbered as appropriafe. SECi[OIV 2: Section 1 i�5.02 of the Nla�nds Vier�v Zoning Code per�aining to Permitted Uses within the B4 Zoning District is hereby amended by alphabetically inserting the following underlir�ed uses: �. -.; -.: .; -.. . . � -� .. . .;, ,.l ,. !.._ SECTION 3. This Ordinance becomes effective thir�y (30) days after iis pubiication in the official City newspaper. Read by fhe City Counci! of fhe Cify of Mounds View on this 12th day of May, 2003. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _ day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: � .)ames Ericsan, ' Acfing CEerk / Administrator (SEAL} ,...� � . � �.� Cifiy Attorney ; �� , , �. ., , _. , ,, : , . i�,� . . . , . ;� . � : `►. = �[a��[��"!�f'� �" ''�°:.� �.- . � �; ;. � : . � ;-. �, �; , � �-� ; ... � i.. � � .i`. � , � =_. , _ �; �' ��_- ��.. , � ,� �- � ; .� !�� . - _ ' � � i ,, ��, 1� � � . s' " . � !; V. „ , : �;1! ", �',� •` � �'�l, i 1,�� , ' .,. � �_ � � . : � �. iHE C1TY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SEC°CION 1: The Mound� View Municipa! Code Index is amended by alphabefiicaliy ir�serting the foilowir►g ur�de�l�ned texi: -. ,; . ... . ! SECTIOIV 2: The Mounds View Municipal Code Tab[e of Contents is amended by inserting the fo[lowing �nderlin�d text: Pawnsho�� ........................o...e.............o..............e.....ao........o.o....e.,......a....516 i SECT(ON 3: The Table of Contents for Title 500, Business License Regulations, is amended by inserting the following �nderl�n�cl text: . „�: ._ .: SECTION 4: A new Chapter 516 entitled "Pawnshops" is hereby added to Title 500, Business License Regula#ions: 'i Ordinance 712 Page 2 z . ' � ?ii1��+�:Li7�'] � � � . ., � � . �: �- � ., r .; . y �: i: �. �, * ° i i � 1 : � •. s r, '•, �' ��•� - .: . il . � •: + :1 � 1: : s � �,�� i� • -i. � �, . r r ' - ' - � _. ° �. . . . �. � : ; _ _ .,. ..,; _ _.: . � i i - �' . �: _ ! ' � � :F.. ► � � : � �- N � � �` . •:� ., �, . '•` . � :• �: . i ' � i: :.. s-� � ��•'. • • � • • '�: . {: . :�: / • 1 r. 5�6.01 PiJR��3SE. The Cit Councii of th� City of il�ounds Viev� finds tha� pawnbroker rectulafiion is appropriat� bec�use such aciiv�iie� provide an opporfiunity for ihe corr�rrcission of cr�rnes and their conce�[ment because such busir�esses have the �bilitv �o receive �nd transfer stolen praperfy easilv and quickEv. Th� Cit� Courncil afso find� th�t consur�er protection requlation af �u�h �ct�vii��s is warr�nied because cusiomers of s�ach businesses fire ue�#I s�ek their services ciurin times of desperate �inancfal cic�cumst�nces, To h�lp th� Citv of Mounds Vier�r to better reqa�fat� current arad f�iure pawn b�siness� dec�°e�se and stabiii�� costs associa#ed with th� rec�ulataon o�'�he ��wn industrl�, and increa�e icBentification of criminal activi#ies ir� �he pawn incl�asirv �hrouqh �he tirr�ely �ofle�fil�r� ar�d �harir�� of p�wn tra��action in#orrro�iio��._ `This chapteralso �rnplern�r�t� ar�d establ�shes th� req�aired u�e o� �he A�tam�teci Pa�� S�sfem (�►P�1. � �." � , s:; :. -. ,l,.- . - . ... .. +.:; � ,, f * � , � ■ s::�. !� - ' s �`' i -• .: ;• • � �'- � �+ � � J �� -� .r. i . • ' _ :� . , �, �, ' -:.+; f ' � ` [� a: ' * �' • . . �`.'-: , i? .+. ! :� `.' � � _'., . �. �. :S , �', : 1 #. . r: '1 3 i • � �.� . -. •- : �., • . .. i..` • �, - � - � ' :; �., .._ �l�- ' � .� r.. : _ : .. _ �.. . - .: � - , :�- . ., `, . ; �, . !. .. . - � . , . • . . # • . : ,. - � :� , ; � . . . : ':� � . - • -r'. - � �: •. • � i •, - �' � -r, � `• • • `:r- s s ` �� -i€ • r;s �' • �:t• , � �:. � - .� . • : ' ,, _. , • ' ' �' � s _ . � ' -- •, _ _ . . , �.: • ♦ �' �' + • • • .� rt' a •'' ` �: � • �: � r • . • � • �. s � •' `• s !' �' • �' �! r' . a'; r r � -i s:, •. � -i! • -�, .� i�. � �� ' � �� '� R : -�. � ' •�: - i ;i r - f' � rt' 1 !� � � � '�� • ' - • �� i • • • :; i ' �; . �: - .a •: r ' r . � � � - � ,. . ., � �: . .... i! � • .: ,� ., � , _ . .. � , ,. ' R:� 1 ' .? ,�� : . . '. �':� R �. . . .: .', �' •�. , �.. . ._ .. .. ... .. .. . : . , ,. . . �. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . � �: a ►' R: ' � 7 • �, .r ` c• � � '' l. 1 .►: i .... J. .: � � ^� � �� ' �. � � • �./ � � �-.�.: � � � �� • • � s �. -' •. �� S . � ' � � �. � i � .: �. � : � � � � + � J. i: � '.� .: � �. � �. :�. .,� .�. � � .�: �� :�: . ' �. � � . . � �' ' • � • . 1 � I. �.. � .'. . � ..'. .. .: .. . : �- :� � • �: .� � �. � �� : '� �: �� : '� � • s .., • ". � +" + � '� � * � �� -. • � �� . • �� . . � :� � •: .. . � �. -. � y: � �� ' . '�. � w �'��.��. r �: :-. . � '�. � .�� .." . '�. . � � . �' � �'�. � . � � � � �'� � � �' � * ' �. -. � � �. ', S�� a � �.+ � � � � • . ' ll �' ; . � i. �:: . � . F - • � �� -J � ^ � .: -�_, • . . ..� 1� -... • .., �. . I � � a. ". s ..,. �'�. s .- �- �. .�: • �- �r � , ;: .... .. �:. � i �.�. �• � �� . !�� . .. I ' . : .. . . ..: � ,: �� . • :� .... !: �� •�. '� � Ordinance 712 Page 7 � , � �� - ��. � .. a, - �. • � ��• :. - r �' - - '� 'i a. .._ - • , t` ' - !! ►� �. . ' - �1�` �' �� . ' f: � r s: �; �. ,�` ' . •. , .. . #-. i. � R r �,. �' '. � • ' . , . -: :/' - •. : � #'. - �' ` ;" l��. , � �' • � � � • , �..: s' ! i � � _ :• • � . �-I * .��. . •i :� " �. ' -" ..� ' �.:, � �` .�, . 'f'� . •, .` � � � � �: . •-: �. I � •. ' -it •'. :. � • ��' .� � . •� • • � ^� ' � ! ��. i' ,� .. . ' ' ` � �1411��iT1��+`A r'ii_ ' i's 'Y '�' i; > :i, '+ � � ��: � ' i � . ,� � �: ' : �. • _�' • K ' � - ' f! � /. ' 1: � �€ � • ! '�.� . � J' ,�. ;� �� ' .. � � ' �: • � ��' ..? ` �' �, 1 : . � �. '� �- � � ^ ♦ . • �; . i- . ,., � , � � + �, . .r . r; , r - . . •� � • .. . � - r - • - � - � r'� � .,' • • " i: i; � r� - '� • ' '�. .�" �� ' ' �: " . . ��1= � R.= . �, ;+1 � �.� :� • �. :=�. i' �;. �� . �: ` ^- �' . #.. . - �: .': :. . �: ' �- ':� R : �. ?: , • ' . � 1: ' � ' �. l � ' ..: �. ' !. '� • ; � • ..��:� • b. Dai� e4nd iime: The ciate ar�d �kime the iter� of ro er# vva� rece�v�d b 4h� licer�see, and ii�e unsc�ue alph� ancilor numeric firansaction iden�ifi�r that distinc�uishes ii from all c�fher firansa�tions i� ihe licensee`s record�. °fransaction ideniifier� must be ��siqned �onsecufirrel�y; r- . . • . ... �- . . .- ._ ... . , .: .•-.- . , . .: . -. -. . . ,, , r .. . . .- . , . . . ..- ,: . .:- ; . .- .• . .- .. . . .. . . . . . . . .:- , �. r, �. . . . . .: ..- -. . � ,, �, �. :.. , �,; ,. . , , '° ' r ., r`, •: s` � :.. •:.;: ' . ,. w • . � � , Ordinance 712 Page 9 � . ,�. . � . �._ �1 ' _' � , r •' �'. � �- - }� - �s � � �` � .. , r � ! �� , . _ �. � _ �� ,� �.s - �, _ _*. � �_ :i. - � � � • � • �' R' i� • �J �I' •. • •; � i �1�j ?�< i • � • + ' *, ^ • , • �, � , • • �, . ' �. ' �' r � �; � �;, "-�s.: •'• ., �. •� . -� � �: �,,� � r- r. - a� ° � • �:: - ., , � .. y. �,.. .-•, . �, y - � ' ',�. • ; r . . _ _ � -s• _. . . , _ � � � „ � ;� . . . r � � • . -a' ' + ? . • - � - • �' ' � -- °• � � � � - . � _, .. � � . � �, - � , ` . �. . � � � � �:, =- r � - �. i1i � • ,. - I� . ' - i - �. : " ^' ` ' � :, � ' � � s ' ` a . ; - .: '. .. � �' _ .. � _ , . �, ," . . . , , ; �. - • .. • �; _. r r � r,' s �': •'. r � � , . _ . . , _ .. , .: : • , .. , , • ! .. _, � , i : . � .- i ' . , . .i � � •' c- s _ �': !' !. � �. �, r R: � � � - � � . _ . . . .... � ' �. _ - '�� =' �-i. .> ;„ ,� -.�: •• - �: . - �• .♦ - ; ., . � : • � ` - ' �-•`. �• ; .*. : � �:,.,. • • • 1 1 • • �' ' � . . • ! • - - a r • ' .. • : � � -:�' • - • ^ � .. � . • . `a • �. ' "- ' ` � � �- '• '�; -�� ! a- �;.� �;� 1 11 -•• . �- . • s -r • �. •� •' • - ' f •' � ' -• •; - .-... . .. • • .,. • ' . ^ � �.. . �`�. .. ' • •. � - ` . !! ' � �:� � .: ._ . . �. � � � � .. .. � r • �` ' 1` • s •� � . . }, • � � � r. .�. . �.:� • • • �:� � • : i ,��' �:� • � � f �'. • • ! • i�. f : .. . - " .�� ! , .._ ., . � � ' y: • � •r � . !!.. , f ' .. ��: '. � 7- . •: "!�. • • • • �. " '� ' !: ;� ' �Ri . ' ' .�- ' �� . .� -:� ' • . . -. .: ::. - • .!: � , , ., * .. , _. .. _ ..: ...: :� i .R�- . ' . ' . .. � .. R'� �.� ' . ' ' �: y.... ' .. - _ ....._. �� . :� • ... ��' i' ' -' ' -" -ii • ' .; 1' "' ._ � ... , • � : �.: � • : ",.. � '- .� .' �. ��',. � �. .! f' f; � �� • i�. i� - �l�. • , ( . • �� . . R: i � • • . �' • �' , ': •. ��,. :! , " • ' + .._: . " . ^, ' " � :.t .;- �.� �': : i . t: , ,.. . ` ', , ., '' .E> ,.� � !. ' � � ^ _ i .. * � . i . �. ��,. -. - �.: ' ' ' '.: � � ! • ; �. rs� ��; r- "��i• ��. • • Ordinance 7I2 Page 12 �� ! .i�• � � �� i � - �'�: �;� s � rr�� -�; �� :�`' � _,.. . ; , �., � , ,.. _w.," " . •:i,.. '. �. .:. • s: a � • r . r �' • . � r. " • . ' 1 1 � 1' . �. �: .: ^ � * � - � � � y� � 1` , � • �� r .: • - + ' _ • r - : � � y �. - - .� - - . • . 1 ., . , .. � . � - � s , � .� , �: , � �� .. - . • -� ; .. ��` : 1 °'�� .. � s ` ,,� _� i, " i. n . < � . � - . " , , '�� c � � � : �, , �! � � �� ♦ : ' _ . . ':: ' �' �: s �:� • !:. -.. ' • �. �.. '� ! r :� ' " �'�� ' ! •- _ . ,,. . „ . . . _ . ....,. ,._.... ' 'a. � ' ,. ..: , � '� , ..., . S '....: .� . `.� *, � � .�, � i �.. ... . . �. , . " . '.'_ 7 . .'_.: • �' ; . � , .. � , � , " �. : . ' : ' . . _ '�'�� '- ! i�� ;' ' , �_ :�: . �, �, . � ` " �: _ � ' .i :�: � ' '� • ' �- f. • '�� • '. •. :, .� '�.. F. � :c' ' t� � � � � �� • . ' : a ' . �� . - r �� y, • . • • : �! � • r ' : • ;� ° �: � • r; - s ` J � � • . r. a � � • • •`- • �% •,� - - '!: ' " • • '. • • � . :�, �.. , i�- � ' •-� � ' • - �. � s ^ - • • f. .�. '. •: �. � �. . • ' ., ::•: • � C-� ; .- `• � •� • � �� ,� ! • a� ;�' � • �' •` r' • r' • i, i': • -.• . �' . - • .' • ♦ �- � � „ • : , .f�- - -•-� �;1 . � • . . • • � i . • • a . a a: • � • i� � i • `�': :i� �-�� R . • : . : `.. � _ • • i'. . ,` � - -R ' � �. : ' . �. • s: /.. ' ! � ^ ; i. • '', " � . ��, ��. . :� � ,.. � . 'y. . . ++. � • � . • • �. ' �: 1, i � � ; . � � � .s �, f: . �� i a .� .f I �� . ,. � Ordinance 712 Page 13 , " : • �':a :;: �°: i . ♦ Y' l'' a' • �;; � ( { • � t c ' ^� "�. ! �1: .; ii ' � . . . Y i f� i^ 1� ;F � �` �• r�'�' i�'_ - r � � �' ;� • ' �: • • • , : ,� , _. _;.. . ,. �::. �� " � • ' !� # � �. .!: � "' .• ^ � ,. � • : , . � ._. � .. ft ; . ... . � . . ,. . . ,. ..., . :-. � �. •f • . • ' '� ' �: s ' R'. ! 'i •�- � :� l� • • ' .!- ;, - % � , a � _ � �• r� ' r ' • • !�� • '. . .�r�� i�• ,.�... �i�i.�''.:',- •�.; s- ...'. ,.;,-��'..'.. �. �*�. • �� ! s. .s'�"'�. •,�` •��` >, " '�, y _ - . �" i . �., . . � . . ,__' � �•.'�. .. . . . . .... �. _: ... , ,. : - -. ' .-- • :. • �f - � -: f �. • .: � . ' . r'�: ' , � . .. �: �" • • .: �.: , . � : _.. .. ' .. . � ... � .. . , .� :: i . �. . ��: . .� , . . . � . �i .' . .:, � ' ' ��. ' � :. �.: . • : .. � �. • .� � �.! - �! " � •�� ' � " a ! � � � : . � : �i � ', � � � • V _ . ' • !.'�� .. . �.. �. � �� . � .,�. . . . , �.. -,., • f.- i . . -` • . ,,� � ' . �} ! . . . �... �-. .�:. � . �'�. • �" -1 • • �' '' � ' � .� � • • ' �. . .+ ' � .. �:�- ' * . -.. . ' !:. _ .� � ' � ,� � _` . • �. ' �. .�' ,:, �, � � � • • ' �� :� �. . � � . � � ' . . . . �: . . � � : . . .. � e � . . �, � j • j� '�' S16 15 ADOPiION �Y FtEFERENCE: fl�irt�esota S��tt�tes Cha fer 325J �� hereb ado ied b referertc�. Vllh�rever th�s cha �er is rnore r�strict�ve fihan said statu�es, thi� cha�ter w�ll con�rol. 1�lherever said st�tufes are snare restric�i�re than this chapter, s�id stat�ate� shall con4rol. � � ■ , - � � . r �; * r � � , �. .� - •- �- . -r_• : .. . s ., r- - ; .• • .; •- . � •- • : , +. ^ _ . , � •" - • • . - .. . _ • - • . �. • _ ; - '•. ". • �; ' '° a: i; 'i Ordinance 712 Page 14 SECTIOi� 5. This Ordinance becomes effective th�rty (30) days after its publica�ion in the official City newspaper. Read by the City Council of the City of Maunds View on fihis 12fih day of May, 2003. Read and passed by the City Caunci! of fihe Cify of Mour�ds View this 27th day of iVlay, 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: James Ericson, 1n�erim Clerk / Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: City At#orney {SERL) � i ,_� �� .� , ,: . �,_n. �,_. ' �� . � ,� . _ : i�'��... ".. •�� ` � ��- f `. � _ .f f � . 3,., i. � � � ��:�. �� . _ �. �� , � �: ,. � � ` , r ." "�_ ' . �� s� : �� : �i 1 ,� ��. �� i �-,_' .; .� � ,.�� ;� ',�,� �, ,-�_+ � �'. � ��_�. ��, u � 6; � �: � � �. �-�� : '" "�� ..�'; ! < . :: : E _ �; .;. � ..�.;�ti.:; �_� � _; ,., �'... ...� ,�' "� . ; �-' WFiEREA�, on January 27, 2003, the Mounds View City Council adopted interim Ordinance 709, an emergency infierim ordinance reguiafing the presence and siting of � Pawnshops and relafed establishmenfis within the City Ofi Mounds View; and, V�HER�AS, Ordinance 709 directed the Mounds View Planning Commission to conduct a study of fihis matter and make recommendations as to the adop#ion of amended official controls or regulations to fulfill the City's fegal obligation to adequately protect the public health, safeiy and welfare of the community; and, VVHER�AS, in response to said direction, the Planning Commission studied this mafter at their meetings on March 5, March � 9, April 2 and Rpril 16, 2003; and, �lHEREAS, throughout the process the Pfanning Commission has encouraged interested parties to provide comment on the topic; and, �IFlER�AS, the Planning Commission reviewed ordinances from neighboring communities, ordinances from communities in which Pawnshops have afready located and review various sections from the Minnesota Stafe sfia�utes, all of which helped form the basis for its draft ordinances relating to licensing and zoning requirements fior Pawnshops in �he City of Mounds View. N�V�, YaER�FOR�, �E !i E��LV�D thatthe Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval af amendments to Tit1e 1100 and Tifle 500 of the Mounds View Municipal Code respectively represented by draft Ordina�ces 711 and 712, a�cached hereto as Exhibit 1 and 2, respectively. Resolution 724-03 May 7, 2003 Page 2 �E iT �lNALL'1` R�501�VE� that fhe iVlounds View Planning Commission direcfs sfiaff to forward fhis resolution and �he two draft ardinances to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopied fhis 7fih day of May, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ��_ James Ericsan Interim City Administrator (SEAL) N;1DatalGroupslComdevlSpecia! ProjectslSP-114-03 (Pawn Shops)1724-03, Pawn ordinances.doc ' l �� . -�: ; `; : 1� ; .� : , :�; �: ` 1: � ' �, . ,�: ,.�; . l'� �'�` -.;�:�, �, .: . �. ,.�. �; 2401 1. Cali �o O�-der The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7 OO p.m., 2. l.2oli CaII ' ' Members Present: Cammissioners Steuenson, Heglari� Members Absent: Jol�nson. Also Present: Commuruty DevelopmentDirectar 10, , �ong; � Index �� 1F�i�B�ies Planning Ga�e �o. �P 114=03 Pawnshop Ordinance , :� P1aa�ning Ca�� I�Yi03-�Bi}1 : Locati�n: 2442 County �-Iighw-ay 10 Col�isit�e�° PossiF�le Ameaic�m��ts io 4be Zon�ng Code ltela�ing To�'Expa�asaons of Exis�tu�g 19�ulta-Fa�nily Dvvellx�e� P�operties �e�ular IVleeti�� A��•a116, 2003 �i� irie`�� C�icy �Iall � �Iie��, I�i'� ��112 , Scotch 1➢a�e 2 9 10 3. . Approve �inutes '` a � � �� March 19, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Miller. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for March 19, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — b Nays — 0 Motion carried. 1@/Iounds View Plann�� Com�nK�s�oa� l�ege�la�° 1V��etxn� � None. Ci�ize�s I�eq�a�sts and Co�gne�ts on Yteix�s I�Iot oaa ila� r�gencia Apri116, 2003 Page 2 5. Considera�ion of Resolutio� 724-03, a Resolut�oaa �teca��en€liztg A��r��al of Tvvo Ordinances 12e��ted to Pawns$�ops9 Z�nin� ancl I�iee��i��g i� l�/Io�a�ds �Ii�� Community Developrnent Director Ericson indicated that tk�is;it�m would�be�a contuivation o�f the discussion concerning pawnshops and indicated he had reViewed the 4rdir�ar�ce� wit� the Police Departinent and the fees of $5,000 for an annual license, �750.00 far the investigation fee`' and $1.50 per transaction fee along with a$10,000 perFormance bancl n�eet with their approval. He then indicated that the fees, if it is determined that they are not sufficient ta cover the City's costs, would be increased as needed. Director Ericson indicated that gambling was discussed at the last meeting and, a�t�r researching ordinances from other cities he has determined that gaanbling is an area tl�at is alY•eady well regulated and it is not necessary to add that language to the ordinance. He;tl�en indicated that he had added language from the city of Plymouth �concerning the requii�ements for pawning item� and the requirement to have �ignage listing";those requi%��emenfi� Director E� cson indicated that t: pawning the items the contact in did not feel that was appropriate with t��at irzfornlation but nox�:the reconvnends that the dollar artio informati��n of tlic purchaser,:is r that amaunt ta be Cor any iterns i Director Ericsozi indica�ed,there there are two ordinances .Qrdin of the licensin� requiremerits.' ' etor Ericson indic� o�ized for the late � Was a requi.rez�ient that the;pawnshop disclose to the person nat'i"on for t�Ze person that,iiad purchased that item and Staff a� �change was ��n�ade to allow for the police to be provided rson pawnin� the �tems. He tl�en exp�ained that Staff be set at $St):t}0 and all items over that amount the contact ired to be obtained but noted that Mr. Przetycki would like - $1.Q0.00. beyond what was just discussed and indicated axnends the zoning code and Ordinance 712 creates all �mber of handou�s were provided prior to the meeting and but said there was soxne research done by Mr. Przetycki that was provided to the Canr%mission as weil as information from former Mayor Sonterre. ' Dire�tor Ericson inc�.cated he had spoken to the City Attorney concerning this matter to verify tl�at �he Commission is proceeding as it is supposed to do. He then noted �hat the Commission is c�arged with tlie task of providing a recommendation as to the location of pawnshops and how p�wnsl�ops shauld be regulated, as the City is not allowed to prohibit pawnshops within the City. The City can, however, indicate where pawnshops can be located so as to protect the heath, safety and welfare af the comxnunity. `4 , IV�o��ds �Iie�v �laaanin� �o�rnissfo� Ap�i116, 2003 RegulB�° I�eefing Pa�� 3 Commissioner Miller indicated that draft Ordinance 712 provides a definition of consignment on page 3 and on page 4 discusses reportable transactions listing consignments but on page 13 it is prohibited. Director Ericson indicated the reportable consignment infannation should be removed ��=the City does not wish to atlow consignrtients. Director Ei-icson indicated that bulk transac#ions must be with an e�tiablished business Z?vith a permanent place of business. Director Ericson indicated the Poiice Department had asked that there be' a 90 day holti pn pawned ifems to allow time for reporting and verifying of tlae �otentzal for stolen merchand�se, ` He then said that xnost other cities require a 60-day hold and a sh�i-�er hold on purchased items. He aiso indicated that the Police Department had requested that hand�,-u.iis; rifles, and shotguns not be allowed. Chair Stevensan indicated that Blaine and New Brigb�on require 120 days and Fridley requires 90 days so he does not feel that 90 days is excessi�e Director Ericson indicated that precious meta�s are regu�ated by the state of Minnesota and that hold is less than the 60 or 90-day requirement. He thei�`'said that the City took the position �hat it was not going to regulate preciaus �netals above and beyond State requirements but the 14 day ' siate required hold may be insufficient s�� adding ;a 90 day ha�d z=equirement wouid mean that the City's Code supersedes the state require,ii�ent. Chair Steve�son asked for an ex��anation of the difference" between the buy hold and the pawn hold. Mr. Przetycki explau�ed that the difference in the buy and the pawn is that the pawn is coming back each monih to renew the coniract a�d he actually purchases the buy items. He then indicated that h� �n�out� lilce to bc able to, sell the purchased items as soon as possible to recover his costs and..elirniilate the incidents where holding the item too long makes it not saleable. Com��ssioner Hegland u�dicated he did not feel it was necessary to require a 90-day hold on the purchased items as the inforxtiation oxi the ztem and who purehased it is available, if necessary. �e:then said that it seems Fair to hun that if the owner purchases an item he should be able io sell ��provided the requirerri�nts of the City Code are met and the owner is collecting sales iiiformation from the person. Mr. Prretyc,ki indicated he was fine with the 9a-day hold on the pawned items but would prefer a 3Q-day hold faic �iurchased items. Con�nissioner Hegland asked if the police department liad commented on the buy hold. He then said that, if records are availabie, he does not understand the concern other than it is easier to obtain the merchandise if it is still at the pawnshop. , Idro�nds V�ew Planning �orra�ission April � 6, 2003 �tegular I�/Ieeta�g Page 4 Director Ericsan indicated that the police department would lilze every opportunity ta ensure that if something is stolen they have the opportunity to retrieve it. Commissioner Zwirn asked if the police department has a communication reference burglaries and thefts and to check against the pawned items. Director Ericson indicated the police department has the activities but the investigators will need to be trained to � There was consent for a 30-day buy hold and 90-day pa rackie Entsminger af 7954 Long Lake Road addressed the C opposed to having a pawnshop in Moundsview Square. She several business managers and owners in Moundsview Squa � set up'; to cross inonitor the and indicated she is ;at she has spaken with wei-e not aware that a pawnshop was being considered and do not want one. � Ms. Entsminger indicated she has lived in Mounds V�ew fQr 17 ;years and it as � q�zet community and she does nat think that a pawnshop belongs in a reside�ltial area. She theii said that the business people said they have enough theft a�ready at Mourids�vie�r 5quare and what a pawnshop would bring is rnore theft and rnore vandalisin and she cannot imagine that he City would consider it. Ms. Entsxninger indicated she spolce to IVIr. Przetycki regardin� the matter and he disagreed with her way of thinking and dismissed 1t''as "old school". She then said that the City is discussing brining a business into Mounds View that �-ill de�rade 11ie reputation of the City. She further comn�ented that when she`�el�s �eople she lives in Mounds View they have a perceptioxt of a lower class Ciry and she feels a�awnshop would further enhance that perception rather than enhance the City. � , Ms. Entsminger indicated. the City laas been ��orlcing hard to redevelop the City and adding thzs pawnshop w��`iri;ake;all t1�e work i:oi- i-�ot: Chair Stevenson clarifiec� t��at ihe Lommission was given the chalienge to regulate where the pawrishop could be located and cai�not deterniine that a pawnshop would not be allowed within the City. Tkiomas Sh�-uxnp, a represeniative of Pastor Enterprises addressed the Comniission and indicated �e was not aware of any vandalism and the only theft he is aware of is the theft of a television d�:u-ing an el,ectz�oi�cs blowout sale. He tlien cornznented that any retail environment will have i.r��ie� w�th tlief�" Ms. Entsminger indicated the hair salon had its windor�s broken twice and Pettezs has issues wiih theft all the tirne. . <; i �, IVIo�ar�els View Plannin� Cox�rr�ssio� A�ral 16, 2003 ite�u�a�° I�/Ieeting �age 5 Mr. Shrump indicated he had heard no baciclash from the merchants in the shopping canter and to his ut�derstanding, the pawnshop is not a huge issue and they feel it would draw traffic to the center. He then said that many of the newer pawnshops are very clean and weil stocked. Mr. Shrump indicated he had come to the Commission to ask that the Commzssiozl nat,force the pawnshop to a different location as he has already developed a relationship with IV1� Przetycki and his pai-tners and feels their business would be an asset to Motii�dsview, �quare, Mr. Shilzmp indicated he does not see the sale of firearms as an'issue because ihere used ka.be a , ;: ,,. sporting goods store in that same location and they sold firea�s. Commissioner Miller asked if Mr. Shrump felt #hat rifles and sh�i�un� would be olcay. Mr. Shz-ump indicated the sporting goods store had them for y�ars anci theze were no issues. He then said #hat handguns would not be allowed so he has na prol�lem al�owing the rifles and shotguns. The Cammission asked whafl�er rifles and and how many attended that meeting, Mr. Shrump indicated that all were invi said that the information vvas discussed it ns were disci:issed at 's meeting to attend. He then Bob Bushy, General Manager of Petters; addressed the Conu�:�ssion and cammented that any time you put a high value produci i�ito a store it becomes a target at night. He then clarified that they had several televisians takez� U'y smasl�i�g a�vand�w a;t night. Mr. Bushy comnicnted that he is concerrzed a high value jewelry store would be a target and said he wants ta inviie �Zew businesses �nbut;is concerned about increasing an already e�isting problem. Mr. Przetycki �dicat�d hc owns a jew�lry store that he has operated for 14 years in St Anthony Village with no breal<-ins, no crime, arid no bad checks passed to him. He then said that he has no int+�ntion of opening up a`business that woulci not be secure and does not want to bring crime to �nunds View. He fi�iiher cor�imented that his business will be 8Q% jewelry and 20% other s and he will idell Smith rf of his clients security for his business. preseiiting Anthony Properties addressed the Coxnmission and indicated that �s �=large pawnshop that is a clean, upstanding business that is an asset to the �viding jobs. Ha then said he has met with Mr. Przetycki and has no reason to run anything other than a clean, honest and reputable business. Richard Sonterre, 5060 Red Oak Drive, commented that he appz-eciates what was called the "challenge to construct guidelines for pawnshops." He then said he was not at the meeting to try to prevent them from coming to town but he is concerned and thinks that as a part of the Ii�o��ads �Ire� Planning Com��ssim� A��al 16, 2003 12egular 1VIeeting Pa�e b challenge the Commission needs to recognize that certain businesses operate in a fa�hion with a particular type of clientele that do not belong on a Main Street. He further commented that the City has dealt with this in the past with tattoo pa.rlors or adult entertainmeni or other types of businesses that bring about public criticism and this falls into that category. Mr. Sonterre commented that with regard to whether pawnshops of today are tra��peci in the bad images of the past he drives an old ratty Caravan and sticking a M�rcedes sticker an i.t daes not make it a Mercedes. He then said he likens the pawnshop to tha� �ecause zt seems tl�at they wi11 be putting a Mercedes sign on the shop but it �rrill still be a pawi�shop and that c4.��cerus hi�n. Mr. Sonterre indicated the staff report rnentions no changes r��arding �oning provisior�s and he wanted to bring up that there were othex alternatives that wou:�d riot;prevent them fron� corr�ing ` but give the City the ability to impact how and where th�y ar� located:, He then said the city of Robbinsdale created a specific zoning designation for those types. o�businesses commonly refened to as a red light district. This would require xz�ore changes hut the Czty would be able to create a geographic area that v�rould be only iz� a commercial industrial area and away fiom schools, churches and parks. Mr. Sonterre cau�ioned against allowing a as it is easier to forge a passport than a dri Mr. Sonterre asked whether or not the the reason for that is that not ali staies like holograms and he knows of peo�il state driver's license because of the:Iack of tcchrucal enhan�ements. 04 identify a c�e�nition of the minimum number of hours �; a manager on fhe premises as it is cusiomary for businesses r could prohibit non � an ideiatification p the �ast'that have �t Mr. Son.terr� asked that SeS that the pawnsllop is requir� to float a manager'amongst Mr. Sonterre ex�ressed cop fees and billable transactxaz itself to; adjacent citzes but, buszness climate is the sam� citi�s'and use that rnodel, in Section 516.02 ;sota identification and said that includes enhancements ullv manufactured an out of �ern with the cQSi of investigation in 516.05 as weil as the licensing fees in 5 l 7.07. He then said that the City usually does not compare ri this case; he feels it would be prudent to do so because the -. He further asked Staff to look into the fees being charged by other Sonterre indicated he had issues with the identification in 516.1 l, Subd l d. N�r. �5onterre indi�at�d he felt it was good to have daily police reports as required by 516.11, Subd. 4 to reduce the number of stolen items moving through the pawnshop but said that the City is al�eady.short on police and this is going to exacerbate the situation even more. Mr. Sonterre aslced whether the City has the authority to set a maximum interest rate as he wouid Iike to hope that the City could to make the establishment above baard. �, IVlounds i�iev+� �l�r��i�� Cor�m�ssion Apr�i 16, 2003 12e�aaiar 1\ileet�g Page 7 Mr. Sonterre commented ihat Section 516.13, Subd. l, does not indicate a formula but says that the City Council may suspend or revoke upon finding of a violaiion. He then commented that the tobacco ordinance has a clearly defined process for violations and he sees no clearly defined process for violations of this ordinance and that concerns him. N[r. Sonterre commented that Section 516.14 addresses prohibited acts but tk�ere,i:s no ciefinition of the consequences for those prohibited acts and that concerns him. Mr. Sonterre indicated he served several years bacic an the latest version of the Caunty Highway 10 Steering Committee and the Steering Committee madc rcco�nmendatians'#o Council tbat were ratified by Council as to the irnprovement plan for County Higliway 10, 'The first ��as'safety and. the second was to make the area a true coa-ridor and more atti-active: The City spent tc�1s o� thousands of dollars for engineering and plans and the upgrade �vill uast $3,000,0000 to $5,000,000 and he asks why would the City and its residents pay'tl�.at mueh money to upgrade the corridor and allow a pawnshop in the center of the Czty. :' . . . Mr. Sonterre indicated he wants to give the busine�s tl�e opp�rtumty ta ru� � p; wants the City to have the means to say run it in a dif#�erent area, Mr. Sonterr� commented that the City has givei��Pastor��Ent�rpl-iscs opportuniti wor�C with the City and those opporhznities'were ignoxed hy tl�ein. ' but in the past to ;:. ; Mr. Sonterre aslced Council to digesi the znformatiori and consi�er requiring a different location. Commissioner Miller asked wher.e,lVlr. Sontei.r.e would loG�te the pawnshop. Mr. Sonterre indicated he:liked the separation that new Highway 10 provides as it divides the City. He then said that the area is co��mercial industrial and a paw�shap wauld have no impact on housing, churches, schools �r parlcs lc>cated in ihat area. He further commented thafi a pawnshop is a ciestination shop and does i�ot need to be located within a shopping center environment. Commissaiorier Scotch asked wl�at space was being looked at in Moundsview Square. ycki indicated store. Mr. Prr�iycki. at�d Jewelty. 4,000 square foot space between the frame shop and Penny for the name of the business. the name would either be Security Pawn and Jewelry or Security Loan Director Ericson indicated that Staff would review the suggestzons of Mr. Sontei-re and provide feedback to the Cammission if necessary. ; �lounds View Plann�g Corriarr�ssion April 16, 2003 I�egular l�eeiing �age � Commissioner Miller indicafed she felt flie revocation and licensure coinments were good in that there is no set process for determining when licenses would be revoked. Director Ericson indicated that the way it is drafted the Council could take action after one violation. He then said he does not think that would happen unless there was a �alid reason. Coxnnaissioner Hegland indicaied that it would be up to the discre�ion of Council and, while gutdelines would be helpful, �t would not make much of a dzfference. Commissioner Hegland asked whether Canadian and out oi.state licenses;would be allowed, Dzrector Ericson indicated he would check with the police d�pa��nf'for comment. Commissioner Scotch asked how many hours Mr. Przetycki wouid be at:ihe shop. Mr. Przetycki indicated he would be at the shop from 6 to `10 hours per da he has a fu11 staff at his St. Anthony stare and at his coffee shop. Commissioner Miller asked how the Comm�s�ion felt abc�ui shc7tguns and Cammissioner Scotch indicated she was Chair Stevenson indicated he was �illing to;have firearins: to ��ve firearms: ' indicated Mr. Przetycki indicated that out oftlie 17 cities he researche� not one restricted firearms and ieft regulation up to the Federal �`ire Aiiins Regulatxons Comtz�issioner� Hegland commented �that this Ci�y is��talking about ailowing a pawnshop in a shopping center ar-ea closc ta residential,areas and other cities may not have a similar location. Coxnmissioner Hcgland indicated 1�e would like to have one mare shot at the fees. He then said he has asked for i��'oi�matioz� and it appears that no ane is sure what it will cost the City and what the fee shiiuli3 be. i zndicated system. : IVIr. Yrzety:cki i fee pays for the electronic systern. ked whether the $1.50 pea- transaction fee covers the cost of the that $1.00 goes toward the �utomated system and $.50 goes to the City. Coxnmi�siorier Hegland indicated he is not convinced that $.50 per transaction covers the cost of the extra work for the police department. , , l I1/Iou�ds Viev� PIar►ning Conamission Aprii 16, 2003 Regular 1`/�eet�g Pa�e 9 Director Ericson agreed that it is important to establish a fee that at a minimum covers the costs but, if the initial fees set is not appropriate to cover costs, then it will be changed. Coxnmissiotier Hegland indicated he would like the information up front ta discuss the Director Ericson indicated he wouid discuss the rnatter with the police depart�nent onie last time and provide information to the Cocnmission. Connniissioner Scotch commented that a pawnshop with high-�nd jewelry would�-equue =_ , additional security. Mr. Przetycl�i indicated that most businesses have cameras and said he does not want to mcrea�e the police workload and that is why the City joined the autonlatic pawri system. The systein is designed to save tixne and assist with locating stolen goods. He then said he wants to run a legitimate business and doing any differently would not be, beneficial to his business. He further cotnmented that he is using a lot of his own money to siart this busi�less anci it wouid not make good financial sense to run a business that would jeop�dize his reputation c�r harrri his znvestment. Mr. Sonterre indicated there is an inter� limits, is tv�ro officers down and this pa department but the City cannot charge. handle the increased woz•k load. MOTION/SECOND: � the To n Nays—Q � is a police fQree that, because of levy te si�nificant woric for the police the fu11 costs of adding officers to � `724-03 to May 7, 2003. Motion carried. Zev�ew �ro�Q�eci PiTID A�enclinent l�egarc�ing the Property �,�catecl at 2442 :ount� I-��h��y,10 , ::. Zrty"Development I7irector Ericson reviewed the proposed PUD amendment regarding erty at 2442 County Higllway 10. He then indicated that when the PUD was established was ve�y specific tllat it would like a restaurant use for that lot. However, after �g the site for that;`type of use and being unsuccessful, the owner wouid li�Ce the use to allow for an`pffice bu.ilding. Ericson han�led out drar�vings of the proposed two-story office building. He then ..t�at he had reviewed the criteria for recommending approval of this type of request in Director Er'reson indicated that in reviewing the criteria Staff was not able to ascertain any potential adverse affects the difference between the restaurant and office building may have and noted that the office building may be even less of an impact ta the adjoining residential complex. l��Io�a�ds View Plan�ing Cornrra�s�ion Regui�Y IVYeeting r�pril 169 zoo3 Page 10 Director Ericson indicated that Resolution 725-03 would recammend approval of the amendment to the PUD and noted that there wauld be a publzc hearin�; before Council on Apri128, 2003. Chair Stever�son commented that Outlot B would remain with a restaurant des�gnation. and the , office build'zng rnay help bring in a restaurant for that site. Audie Tarpley of LandCor, Inc., reviewed the proposal with th� Commission ..' Wendell Smith indicated they had sold one lot to Jalce's to attempt to res.alve some parlcing issues. He then said they are worlcing with Carmike Theat��s�to lease the additionai site foz parkin� to accommodate their overflovv parking issues. MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 7 Recommending Approval of an Amendrnent to the PUD for. thE County Highway 10. V� Ayes — 6 N Consider Possible Aflnenci�aenis Existing I�Iulti-Family I)r�veiln�g.., � �son indicated that tlus item cornes out of the request for a -plex. He'then sazd tiiat the praperty could expand if the may be Xooi�� on sife to do that. He further camnr�ented ssion review this matter for a change to require �ed some pa-opased language to add to the zoning code. Community Development Directt variance to increase a four-plex te paxking requirements are met' and that Council had aslced that t�a.e C� conditional use pern�its. He t13en i The Coinmission agreed that tlie t 8. Aririouncerne�nt::.JlB��ti� �y Go�� -03�, �a Resolution P�-ap�xty Loc.ated at 2442 Mation c,�rried. C�� elai Exp��sions of d be made. of Planniaab Cana�a�ission Resoiutzons Aclopted April «unity Developme�t Di�ector Ericson indicated that two of the Resolutions adopted at the 2, 2003 meeting were renumbered from 720-03 fio 722-03 and from 721-03 to 723-03. ing Comrnissiar� A/Ieetin�: I�'iay 7, 2003 >. ; 1Vloa�nds Vieo� Plannfn� Co�r��ssion Ap��i 16, 2003 Regular I�eei-�g Page 11 l0e Ac�jo��mer�t to A�e�cia �e�sio�x There being no further business before the Planning Cammission, Chair Steve�zson adjourned the meeting at 8:54 p.m. _. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda S Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director A-PDF Scan Optimizer D ��v�vw.A-PDF�.co�m�to rem�o�vI�h�e� watermark YL � - - �;�: � June 4, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REC�ULAR IVIEETIl\IG AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roil CaII 3. Approve Minutes (No �ninutes to approve} 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda ; �, . ; . ; �• � ,�� .. a � !. " .. i ". . . .) 3 f �"-::: �' 5. Zoning Code Amendment to Require a CUP for any Expansian of Existing Multiple-Family Dwellings. 6. Consideration of the Acquisition of ihe Properly Located Between 3016 and 3000 County Road H2. _ _ , , _ ,., , � , , �Y, , , � . • , � �_ . � .- - �, -;.. _.., . , ,� � , � �- �: r � �� 7. Next Plai�ni�lg Coxrunission Meeting: Jizne 18, 2003 8. Adjoumnient to Agenda Session 1. Review Minutes: 2. Staff Reports . !" . _ __ '�'� May 7, 2003 May 2I, 2003 3. Chairperson and Plas�ning Commissioners' Reports .':. �,.:. G:S' .:,t �.;.; i;:i . '': ::7 ,',, _ , 1. 2. 3. 4. �� X�� June 4, 2003 -- i:00 P.NI. R�GULAR IVIEETIlVCi AGENDA Call to Order Roil Ca11 Approve Minutes (No mi��utes to approve) Citizens Requests �nd Cornments on Items Not on the Agenda _ ..�� :, � � ; . �.. i• .�� : � ,� � � _ . � .� ��-�-�� i�- �� 5. Zoning Code Amendment to Require a CUP fo� any Expansion of E�isting Multiple-Family Dwellings. 6. Consideration of the Acquis'rtion of the Properiy Located Betweeia 3016 and 3000 County Raad H2. x•- , � . , _ : .�, ;,__ . -: �1 ': r .: . , �_ . _ �": .� . � , � � � �� #i ' '.' " ' , � . . ,, . _ ; , - : � _ '� " � � - � �� = ._ �- , l� 7. Next Plai�riuig Commission Meeting: June 18, 2003 8. Adjourrunent to Agenda Session AGEIV�A SESSIOIV 1. Review Minutes: May 7, 2003 May 21, 2�03 2. Staff Reports 3. Chairperson and Pla.unin.g Con�missioners' Reparts ,; -. ;:_ ,. s:i � _, `si `..'i I��rvt No: 5 iVie��ia�g Date: June 4, 2003 iy�e of �usiness: Aciior� / . / . .: ` / :.;, ° � , ., : � 1►, io� Mo�nds View Planning Commission F'rorne James Ericson, Acting City Administrator I#ec� TBtlelSyb�ecto Consideration of Resolution 730-03, a Resolution Recommending an Amendm�nf io the Zoning Code to Require a CIJP for Expansions o� Existing Multi-Family Develapments !I"'rr....'+I''. At your April 16 rrl�eting I presented the Commission wifih a brief r�port concernir�g multipfe family properties and fihe �fact fhat the City Councii was interested in having the Planning Commissi�n review fhe Zoning Code and mak� a recammendafion thafi woufd either restrict or confrol fhe process by which an exisfiing multi-family residential developmenfi could expand. � � �.��: The mefihod by which confroi can be exercised is by requiring aff existing devefopments io go `' through a conditional use process to expand density {the number ot individual cfweliing units.) The following fanguage was proposed and the Commission supported such an amendment: �/lulti-FamilV developments havinq been consiructed priorto Januarv 1, 2003 shal! firsi obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) prior to expandinq fhe number of dwellinq units or the principal buildinc� footprint. In addition fo the criteria outlined in Section 9,25, al! zonin,�, buildirrq and parkinq requirements shall be satisfied as a condition of approval. . � . Review the afitached draft ordinance and if found accepfable, approve Resolution 730-03 which recommencis amendment of the zaning code as suggesfied. �� . .. . James Ericsan (nterim Cify Clerk/Adminis�rator _,... � Atfache�nents: 1. f�r�ft 4rdinance 2. Resoluiion 73�-D3 ?C ?�; 'J, _.,,.' ) t7 ;i � •; ,� : � '�, � , ' < �,� r;. --r '.j;, � � � x. �- �, :�. i _. . . _ �? �� i ,; i �� , �. � � ; r , , _ _ � �' �'�. �� :; . _'-; �. � "'�_r `.. : • �� _ • -'� : 1 • . I �: . . .� � . � �� " . � . �� . '�. . � � , ��" ! . _ - THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEVV ORDAiNS: SECTIUN 1: SectiQn 1108.04 of fihe Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to conditional uses within the R-3 Zoning District is hereby amended by adding new language ur�el�rli�eci �o read as follows: 11 �8.04: CONDITI�RlAL IJ�ES: Th�e foNowing are conditionaf use� in �n R-3 Districfi (requiring a condiiionai use perrriit based upon procedures set forih ir� and reg�lafed by Section 1125A1 of this Titie): AI! conditianal uses alfowed in an R-2 District. Multifamily dwelfing sfructures confiaining six (6) or less dwelling units. Il�uliifarnilv Exparasio�. Muitifamilv develot�ments havinq been constructed prior to_ ,;,, January 1, 2003 shafi first abfain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP} qrior fo expandinq the nurrib�r of dwellin� unifis or the principal buildinq fioot�rint. In addition to tf�e criteria outlined in Secfiion 1125, alf zoninq, buildinq and �arkinq requirements shall be satisfied as a condition of approval. SECTION 2. This Ordinance becomes effective fihirty (3Q) days after i#s publication in the officiai City newspaper. Read by the Ci#y Cour�cil of the City of Mounds View on this day of , 2003. Read and passed by the City Council of the Ci�y of Mounds View this day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayar ATl"EST: _ James Ericson, fnterim Clerk Administrator (SEAL) �...� � � � �. Cifiy At�orney i;. '`'f s � - . , � - � � � � ��- � �;"�- �-,� ��'�� i �, � 7 .` ,t: at � � L; — � ' � 3 , .. . ., , . . . _ _ , . . . .._ ., _ , .. . :" � � '�: � . . ; . : ."". ; 1 '-.: .' �' : � � : .' � .' ... , :� '� � . �. . �-�.; : � ,i' � �. -�:.. " : . ...� ,� .!� � ; i� .�i • '; � , � �� ' � '� '� - � �' a; � `_'� . � �, i_ .� •,' � .,_" lNH�i��AS, ii is �h� desire of the Planning Commission to recommend (anguage to a�nend the Zoning �ode �o require Cifiy Councii review and approval of muiti-farr°aiiy residential expansio�s; and, V4I�IEREi�S, on April 16, 2003, the Mounds View Planning Commissiart reviewed fanguage pertaining io condifiional uses wi#h th� R-3, Medium Density R�sidenfial, Zoning Dis�rict; and, �I�IEREA�, the Plan�ing Commission recommends the addifion of the �olfowing language 4o Section i 108.04 of ihe fVlo�nds View Zoning Gode: �llul�it'a�rtilv �xpansio�. �/lultifamily developments havinp been consfructed prior fo Januarv', 2003 sh�ll firsf obfain a Condifiona/ Use Permit (CUP) prior to expandinq �he number of dwellinq units or fhe ,principa! buildinq footprinf. In addition to the criteria outlined in Secfion 1925,__al!_zonin.q, buildin.q and parkin,,,g requirements shall be satisfied as a condition of approval. NOW, TFIERE�ORE, �� IT �ESOI�V�D that the Mounds View Planning Commission recammends approvai of an ordinance amending Sec#ion 1108.04 of the IViounds View Zoning Code to require a Conditional use Permit for any expansion to existing mulfii-famify resideniial facilities. �E IT F��lALLY RE�Oi�i/�D thai the fl�ounds View Planning Corr�mission directs staff to forward this resolution to #he City Counci[ prior to a�proval of #he minufes. Adopted this 4th day of Ju�e, 20Q3. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATiESi: � . _ . James Ericson, lnterirri City Administr�for -_ (SEAL) /.....-o. . .... , ��. _ . ,.,. . .., .., . ./-. .vi i i... ..y...i . .. . ,. � ., nk� ... .. , �irl.. i ... , , l r �ieT12 ,� { C�ty Of �IOUnds TIZeW � �1 .1; �` ' 1� :1 , ,� :,, , �� , , , 1l , ;:,, . „ . . � , v,.� . .., .. �. . . _. . ,_,.... � , � ... �_ .. . . .,, . _,:. . . , .. „ �% .,,..,;. < � � w, t� , .. / � ' :� .�� ' ��' ' � . ". L:, �' ': , . �,: ',, �� ': �:, '. _,i �-. � : � : • _ ! .1; � ; . . ��„ / i� p�` 1 `: "- � i'_: s �',, �; ; `, ' #- ' ,; < " #'' �, t�; � � '� ''� . .�: ,, �' .,. . '' � �r ''', ? � : " . �.; <�. •, ';�; ? ': _: I�ttt°odtcciiono Minnesota Statutes require that the Flanning Comrnission zevie�r and make recommendations regarding proposed purchases of real estate vyithin the City of Mounds View by the City to make sure such acquisitions are in keeping with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City of Mounds tliew has the opportw�ity to acquire taY-forfeited properrtty located between 3000 and 3016 County Road I�2 for $68,901.14 (See attached calculation statement from Ramsey County). The City currently has a use deed, however, acquiring the 1.5 acre lot in the narth central portion of the block would facilitate the development of a signifcant housing subdivision in the City of Maunds View. Discu��ron: Currently the City owns or controls approximaiely 6.5 acres of land in the block bounded by County Road H2, Knollwood Dr., and Woodale Drive, axid what would be Pleasant View Dr. if it exisfed (see attached parcel map}. During the past eight years the City has acquired three lots along Co. Road H2-2946, the parcel behind 3000, and 3016. Two of the lots are over 630 ft in Iength and are among the largest in the City not fully developed. The lot between 3016 and 3000 is a tax-forfeited property owned by Ramsey County and controlled by the City though a use deed. In Februaty of tYtis year, one of the neighbaring property owners, Blaine Fyksen, expressed a willingness to work with the City to develop his properly for single-family homes. Mr. Fyksen owns several parcels (totaling 4.1 acres} that border ihe Ciiy's property to the west. He does not want to see high-density residential deveiopment in the area, but would be willing to sell if the property would be developed for high-end homes (approx. $400-500,000 each). The entire block is currently zaned R-1. During this spring three developer groups liave been preparing concept plans for the proposed Caunty Road H2 Residential Proj ect. City Staff p�esented these initial concept plans io the Piazuling Commission at its 5/21/03 meeting. The developers (Dave Regel Construction, Hoznes by Jatnes, and Pro Craf� Homes} were present to respond to Commissioners' questions. The Planning Commission viewed a11 t�e concept plans as appropriate and ones that would be positive for the City. The Planning Commission encouraged that aIl three developers be considered by the City Council. Tax-Forfeited Property Acquisition June 4, 2003 Page 2 5taff presented the concept plans for the proposed residen�ial proj ect to the 1!Q[ound� View Economic Development Auihority on May 27th. The majority of the EDA members expressed support of the proposed residential development and authorized the City to move forward with soil borings on Mr. Fyksen's and the mur�icipal pYOperty. Staff has developed additional developer selection criteria and requested that the developers submit this additional inforrnation to the City by June Sth so tha� it can be considered at the next EDA meeting on June 9t�`. Once a developer is selected, the City would seek to develop a Letter of Intent or Pre-Development Agreement with the respective developer ihat would govern the project. � + , , ;l , , c : i ; Adopt ihe attached Resolution 729-43 that recommends to the City Council approval of the acquisition of Parce136, the tax-forfeited property located between 3400 and 3016 County Road H2. This acquisition would enable the developmen� of a 15 to 21 unit housing development in the southwest portion of the City of Mounds View. Respectfully submitted, /%� a�a�- �. Aaron Baclanan Economic Development Coordinator Attachments: 1. Purchase Statement from Ramsey County 2. Site Map \Wtserver\CityHa11�DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV�Planning Commission�PC Memos & Reporis�2003\Tax-Forfeited Property Acquisition - June A, 2D03.doc � �. y = g ��- __ ��=- �'�' _ �. op��y R�co�ds and �ev�nu� Richard J. Wendt, Division Manager 6ZOB Government Centec West 50 West KeIlogg 13oulevard 3ti. Paui, MN 55Id2-1557 Fiamsey Counly Departmeni of PropeRy Records and Revenue Tax Forfeited tands Section 50 Kellogg Blvd West Suite 6206 Saint Paul, MN 651Q2-1557 Calculation �taternent City of Mounds View Attn: Aaron Backman, Economic Develbpment Coordinator 2401 Nighway 10 Mounds View, MlV 551 9 2-1 499 �IN: 07-30-23-32-0005 P,4: Befiween 30�Q & 3016 Counfy Road H2 Iteml�ed Fe�s ; '% Purchase �'rice 3% Assurance �ee SYate Deed �ee Recording Fee Ag / Con Stamp Deed Tax Stamp iotaf Cost of Serv9ces j Totaf Amount Due type 2 ,. . �- . - $ $ $ $ $ zo.00 5.�0 1.70 26.70 Fax: 651-266-2Z10 5/20/2003 Purch�se � 66, 600.00 � 1,998.001 $ 2�.00 $ zo.oa $ 5.00 $ 226.44 $ - $ 68,874.44 iOT,4L AMOU�tT FOFt �OTH R��0�4�/EYANCE � PL#RCWAS� P�ICE $ , 68,901 _'t4 If your department pfans to proceed with acquisifiion, you will need io submit the folfowing information: 1} A certif9ed copy of a City Councif Resofution, approving the reconVeyance back fo the State of Minnesota, "irust �xempt", and approving the purchase and the infiertded public purpose for acquiring the property. 2) Your name as it is to eppear on fhe state deed, plus c�mpiete maifing address. 3) A check payablE to R�m�� Cour�� in the amounfi sfiated abave. 4) �nclosed is ihe reconveyance forrn pieas� finish filling out and return wi�h the rest of the paperwork. If you have any question regarding this staiemenfi, please contact Colette Vofiel at (651j-266-208�. hlii�e�i�'� �ar�i �o�e ��le �o�i� prin[etl on recycled paper wlth a minimum o! 10%past�consumer conteni � � � � , ;. . �' � . �� ' � � I,' � � I- � �- + �� _ �� ' i ` h --- ; � ; ' �1�� e��: � �� _I ! I i.�... .��7 ' i �s __,--- ��,' � � ' � � �� i �` . � � �,�CS, . i ►� C��I � � ! � � `��` •�� .. � � � � � � � � ; � r � � � ` � :� � � � ; �,�,.� ' c��l � � �� ,� � � 1 - _ � t°� �" �-� �gj � � ,� 4``� i�� 4'e� ° � '� m � �� ia � a a � ,tv � '➢ �� { � � � � �� 1- � @ ;� ��: � ,� � � � -e �'�;� � is , ; B �� ; a m �� , i� . � � ;� � � � � � j� �J �'a ,�1 � � � ; �� r � � � �. ' �� .p� � � � � ' o � i ■ � � -� �� a !- - � e '�k_ _, ___. __...�_,,�— --._�IL. • .� '��ea�eaBm��q��g ��e 1 �' �i—,.-. � '� C �.'� � � '- � S J �� F ;� 1 I � � � .� � � � � _• ` � �. � i � � . � ! �: a. i�.,, � �� a�� a � � a � � a�o�� ae�mg�aa � � � e � � . m ��aa�mm� # � : . rt � ��: , � �g e � a �y, ; � ; �' ; "�' ` '� � � � � ° � � �'' � � ' � 1 � # � m m P"�P ° � ° C� , �j � Ctil • C41 < �I # �`� � � ' ' , B � ' � I � ��,�-�.�� ! ` ; ,' m ;. i ' , .; � i ; �. ; , , tf �� f i � � 1 � I �: � ..�-� . �-- -..�-�.-.��. _J...-.-.-�. ` ` �. �I._ � � �; 7��- '� l �� ._ -_ .------- --._,-- �– ,� �� a L i �r ' F �� L I m.j I r � e! i...__ �..___.,,. • ... ..:-,_._ ...... ._..:.,.,_, .__ i � , � ��' �'. �� `--- ... _ , � I .;�... :: _. .�. .� --•,�� ' Q� �- a� �.....-'_ -- � � --� _.. . �... _ . - e�■�¢��a- a . ..--�.-- -.. ... � � : � a t 1 °:: � �� C; �� i� ---�-�--•�....,...,..- �--�--�..__._.._.,_. � , 1 � � ' y� i °g � '� �if� g . � � ', a ; �� , Y � _ _o_..._.-�— -.. . __�-� . . . � �_ _-,-� ._ _. � m, '� �� i m .s ,B � � � �� C.,- ------ : c� �a : � ._� . _.. i �_-�... .J �__. ; � ' � � � � � ; ; e ' --- - . .. ' � �� ... � '--- �� I � , o�. ; � � � 'c� � �j ►�3 .' � ``=�� k � � 1 �• i �� } i f - -- — �� r� � -. �: ._ .+ 1 ��--- ,�� ,-- .��1�_� �1�f J R�� ---^-I 1 � �� ; � I' �:°d i �- 1 i "'� � ``� ' � 3 �ii� � � � � � i - �t��x; � C`-.1 : {''�f I,..-._-.�,. � ^J � ' g ?��- � ..._.--- ,� �-� ___<_..---.� . . - � -•-- � �� '4P�V � _ . , _ �.._� .�— t_ � i�7�_._. � A � . c� . .. �; _ - � R � � -. �. .f �: ; — ` � � - �. .� � :,� + .. � �: i >l ,�' 1. , ;�, �; „ ;, �, �; : �. ��. ;�; y� . �; ��. �, �� ,, �. �,; ;��. �! . 1� ' � � _ � ,�. �., .�_ ; .; , , ,, :�. � : �: ; . �, , � , �-.. , .> ,� . � �`�� •� _�� . � =�. , ` ;�, �,, -��' �. . . �. , , �. ., . ;, �€E�A�, the Mounds View Planning Commission is required to review proposed acquisitions of real estate within the City by the City; and, i�'HE�A�, the City currently owns or controls five lots covering approxullately 6.5 acres in the block bounded by County Road H2, Knollwood Dr., Woodale Dxzve, and Pleasant View Drive; and, `1VI�E�A�, the proposed use of this property would be to facilitate the development of a housing subdivision in the Cify of Mounds View; and, = WFIEI�AS, the City has sought and obtained residei�tial concept plans from `� three area developers interested zn deveioping municipal and privately-owned property for such residential development; and, VVHE1tEAS, the City was notified by Ramsey County that the tax-forfeited property legally described as Lot 36, Knollwood Park, is available for $68,874.44 and the reconveyance cost is $26.70; and, �IE1�EA�, this parcel of land is located within an area designated for low density residential development according to the City's Comprehensive Plan; and, W�IEI��,S, fihe anticipated use of this property would be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. 1�OW, THEREFO�, �E IT 13ESOI.�I� that the Planning Commission of the City of Mounds View, finding �he proposed use consisteni with the Comprehensive Plan, hereby rrecommends approval to the City Councii of the City of Mounds View regarding the acquisition of Knoliwood Park, Lot 36, the property between 3000 and 3016 Co. Rd. H2 with the PIN number of 07-30-23-32-0005. �E �T �1�TAI.,I,�' 1��OL�I? tliat the Planning Comtnission directs staff io forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. `l Adopted this 4t�' day of June, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST James Ericson, Interim City Administrator (SEAL) _--; \1Ntserver\CityHal[1DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV�Planning Comxnission�PC Resolutions\'I29-03, H2 Ta�c Forfeit Parcel.doc ;, , ;. _, _: ; j'. i PROCEEI�dI�GS OF 'THE 1�/IOLTl�dDS VIE� PL�I�III�G COTVIMI�SIOI�d CI'I'�' OI'+ 11iI0iJI�I�S VI�+ �' - �7�� aJl'��I9 1W1A1`I1V��5��tf. �2:e�lilaY I�ee$III� I�� 7, 2003 I�/do�i�c1� V�e� Caty �Iall 2401 I�ightivay l0y iV1OIIIlld� �Ii'�Yy 1V�1 �5112 1. Cali io Order The meeting was called to order Uy Chair Stevenson at 7: 2. I�o�I Cal1 Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: =-J Commissianers Johnson None. ._ Index io:I!>iuttates Plan�in� Case �iJ03-002 Location: 7988 Edgewoad Drive Pla�ning Case I'I�03-t�0� Location: 2442 Co��nfy Highway 10 Piaa�nflng Case l�io. �P 214;Aii3 Pavvx�shoU Ordinance ` , 3e ; -,. AP nent Director S oiig; � er, Scotch, a1�d Page 2 0 4 ' a � ` Apri12, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Scofch/Miller. To Approve the Plannuig Commission Minutes for Aprii 2, 2fl03 as Presented. Ayes —`7 Nays — 0 Motion carried. ; 1Vlounds 'Yiew Plann�ng Coan�ssion Reg�1a�° I�eet�ng � None. C�tizens I�eques�s and Cou��xe��s on Items IVot o� ihe Age�c�� I��Iay 7, �003 Page 2 �. Consideration of Conditio�al U�e Perrz�rt I�equest 12egardie�g Properiy I;oc�ted ai 79�8 �cIge�vooci I}rive Cammunity Deveiopment Director Ericson reviewed fihe conditional use permit request «Tith tlle Carnmission. He then indicated that the applicant had revised tlle plari �o orient the garage ' differently to bring it into compliance with the City's Code for frc�ni f:ooiage. Commissioner Niiller asked what the combined square footage ofthe garage and sl�ed would be. Mr. Eyler indicated thai the square foota�e would be ap}�roxi�nately 1,644 and that would be withiu the 1,800 square foot limitations. Chair Stevenson asked how many useable gax2 ` Mr. Eyler explained that he has three coilege c boat and a snowmobile in the garage, He:`ihen best utilize the space and be able ta`gef the boE doors ihere at home and tiiat amounts to five cars, a ed how: lie intended to ori ent the garage to the Chair Stevenson asked where the garage doors wexe arid how many were off of fhe driveway. Mr. Eyler indicated there wo�ld be one 18 foot door and one nine fooY door and, in the bacic, there would be an eight foot roll up door for access to the boat as weil as a service door along the side. Community De�elop�ieni Director Encson read Resolution 726-03, a Resolution recommending approval of a 1,344 sqizare fciot garage�at 7988 Edgewood Drive. Mf � Rei nity Developmeni Direc�or Ericson indicated that the Resolution requires the applicant to the second curb ;��t. '<', Johnson/Hegland. To Approve Resolution 726-03, a Resoluiion ival of a 1,344 Square Foot Garage at 7988 Edgewood Drive. Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Mation carried. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that the City Council would hear ihe recommenda�ion and malce a final decision. ;:i � I�Ioun�s'View Planni�� Ca�nmt�sion 11�ay 7, 2003 itegular Meeti�g Page 3 6e Co�x�iclea�ation of I)evelopme�t I�evievv 12ec��e��s lte�a�-din� Properties L,ocated a� 2436 a��t 2442 �-Iflghway 10 Community Development I�irector Ericson explained wl�ere the parcels were provided an overview of the developrnent. Director Ericson indicated that the applicant would need 60 shrinlc the size of the building to conform to Y1ie Code. Director Ericson indicated the applicant would need to adj acent residential properties to confoim to the Code. Dirscior Ericson indicated the applicant would need to to the garbage enclosure. Director Ericson ind'zcated the landscaping plaiis review it and make recommenda#ions for specifi� Director Ericson indicated that no sign plan,had been what type of sign is ailowed. irig"'stalls or would need to hotometric analysis for. the ' z7-tlier spccifications with regard d,look nice but'tlie; City.�'orester wili igs. ` �tnitfied yei but t�ie PUD will dictate _ Director Ericson indicated that it looks as though fihe site plan submitted was carried over from a ;_; � previous site plan so there are some n.Qtes to be revised on it �` Directar Ericson indicated that ali dimensional requi�emerits and setbacks are met for Outparcel B. Directar Erxcson iiidicated tYiat Staff is recomrnending that the developer revise the plans and correct them as nated but feels no �-eason not to approve the development review at the next meeting. Commiss��oner Mil�er asked if Staff addressed ihe distance from ihe pond as it seems there would be additional parking available D�ector Ericson indicated the prablem is that the pond is already there and, if it is adequate to ,,, stu't the needs of the site��t may nat be possible to change it. :: vvu. Zwim asked hovv long Rice Creek would iake to review this development. indicated it usually talces from 30 to 45 days for Rice Creelc Watershed Audie Tarpley adci�essed the Commission and apoiogized far the shortcomings in the drawings and explazned that Iimited engineering work was done in case the project is h�rned down. He then said that the buiidzng is 12,500 square feet of useable space and that is what they based the Niouncis V��vv Ptannin� Coenmiss2oza Reguiar 1Vleeti�a� I1�ay 7, 2003 Pa�e 4 parking on. He further commented ihat #he pians would be amended and they would meet all City requirements should the project proceed. Chair Stevenson asked if �he ex�ra spaces could be added. Mr. Tarpley indicated that they had tried to respect the setb site with some consideration from the City. Ghair Stevenson commented that the Commission is affect the surrounding area and will ensure that the d �ut„could add six rnoYe spaces on •e of haw parking issues cari ; has adequate parkin�::: Commissioner Miller asked how many uses were expected for tbe b Mr. T'arpley indicated he expected four or five and na rxiore tlian six Commissioner Johnsvn asked ii the tenants would be n�edical and dental .: Mr. Tarpley indicated he thought so but lost a b�g user that he`was planning on. He then said that he has been talking to other medical practihoners but they are not as heavy�as a use as what was initially proposed. The Commission asked whether a Mr. Tarpley indicated he was disnzpt their,relationships wit 7. Cc��sider��o� of Oa•c��ices �2e1� Communi for the Go �e shop was possible .� ,' very l�ard on a coffee shop but said he did not want to adlords by i�aming names. , a ltesoiution iteca�mending Approval of'I'wo Zo�rng and Ilieensang in I�o�nds Vfew overviewed the history of the pawnshop ardinances Dir�ctor Ericson indicated he had not added the manager definition but will do so. He then asked for elarification on the bizy hold and the pawn hoid and reviewed the other changes that weie made based on the'e1.�.iscussions at the Iast meeting. Director Ericsoi2 'vidieated that Mr. Sonterre had raised a number of issues at the last meeting and averviewed therr� witl� the Commission. He then said that ihe way fhe Code is drafted coucerning �iolations and revocation allows the City flexibility to review the violation and malce a detelnlii�ation as to whether it warrants revocation. Director Ericson indicated that Staff had reviewed the fees oiothe� cities and found Moiu�ds View's fees to be in the middle. He then said that if ii is determined that the recommended fee is inadequate the fee would be changed immediately. 1 l�fo��ds �Tiew P��n�i�� Comxnassion I�ay 7, 2003 Regnlar IVieeiing P�ge 5 Director Ericson indicated that Minnesota Statutes sefis the rnaximum znterest �ate but the City of Mounds Vievv could set something less if the City feels 24% is excessive. Director Ericson indicated that the Commission needed to discuss the possibility of creating an overiay district and where that would be located. He then said the current uersio�i of the Ordinance allows pawnshops in the B-4 zoning district. Direcior Ericson indicated he would lilce the definztion of mariager to inclu�ie that the manager is „ on site an average total of 80 hours per monih. � ,; Chair Stevenson indicated he would lilce fee reco�runendations ta be uicluded when the recommendation goes to Council. Director Ericson indicated he would add it after the first now therefore be ii resolved. Commissioner Hegland indicated he would like to hear frorn �hief Somirier as io whether he feels the fees are adequate. Chief Sommer addressed the Commission;and provided` an overview of how the police depa�,ment would use the APS system Commissioner Hegland asked whether t1�e systeiu�was used,only far investigating or periodically. Chief �ommer. indicated.the use wouid depend itpon fiow mueh time the deparhnent can devote io ihe investigation of pawnshops. Comrnissioiier Hegland commented t�at #he APS system is a deterrent far thieves attempting to unload stolen goods because, if the systczn is used properly, they will get caught. Chief Soxrimer indicated that is a side benefit but there are many items of stolen property that end up in pawnshops with the autotnated pawn system. Commissioner Hegland asked'for the percentage of stolen goods pawned. Chief Sommer indicateri ihat some items cannot be easily traciced such as CD's and things ��ithoui serial numliers. He then said that he has no infoi�nation to Ue able to answer what the �, percentage,o,f st;oleri goods would be. Con�snissioner Zwirn aslced whether it was the consensus of the Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Mounds View Police Departments that the automated system becomes another avenue for legalized fencing. 1Vloe�ncis `View Planni�x� C�rnaa�ssion l�eg�lar 1Vleeiing I�Iay i, 2003 Page 6 Chief Sommer said he does %now thai some stolen property ends up in pawnshops but he does not want to make the statement that a pawnshop is a Iegitimate fencing aperation. Cammissioner Zwirn indicated the City's police department is stressed already-and adding�a pawnshap to Motulds View will take police man hot,us away from other duties and he is concerned that the fees being charged do not take inio account the •time for the �olice department. { Chief Sommer indicated he is not able to say how many hours'wzil be sperit on it because he , simply does not know what it will involve at this point. '' � . "; ,._; Commissioner Scotch asked whether Staff looked into how o.f�en police departments from oth+ cities are called to pawnshops. Commissioner Zwirn aslced whether adding the pawnshop because of the time involved. Chief �ommer indicated there would be more previously used on other tasks. Commissioner Hegland asked if a member can. Chief Son:�mer indicated the Citv':does not duties give� to someone Carnn3issianer Zwirn as] are higli enough to pay f city is picking up the tab Cl�ief S more ti� f . ��T that was ai� administrative staff the system so it would be extra .hat a�ready has a iull plate of duties. ed if, `in discussions with other cities, Staff had learned whether the fees �r the extra rriau hours or if the cities are in a deficit situation where the for tlie extra requiren�ez�ts from a pawnshop. that, cities fall into both those of those categories as sonle spend a lat Comrnissioner Jahnson `com�nented that there are cites that have large pawnshops in e�cess of 2�,000 square feet and th� pawnshop proposed for Mounds View is a lot smaller. , ' Goinmissioner Zwirn asked how many police calls are attributed to Mounds View Square for nialic'rous mischief, tlieft and vandalism. Chief �aininer indicated he did not have that information with him. Commissioner Zwirn indicated h� had learned from residents and business ownea-s that there are a number of palice calls to Mounds View Square. 1Vlound� VYea� Pianning Comrnission l�ay 7, 2003 Igeg�alar 1Vleetff�g ��g� � Chief Sommer indicated it would be hard for him to say how much extra time would be involved. Coxn�nissioner Scotch recommended getting some statzstics frorn the City of Commissioner Johnson indicated this is one small pawnshop. Comniissioner Zwim indicated he has issues with the 1� activities at Mounds View Square inciuding vandalism to something of this nature in that inall. �a issues and he i; _ _ Director Ericson indicated that Staff had researched the amciui�� of fiine other cities spend an managing pawnshops and then reviewed the time spent and the. cities ihat were checked. He then said that ail ci�ies contacted recommended not allowing haridguns. ' ;:., ., Commissioner Hegland indicated he did not have an issue with the applicant but wants to m�l�e sure that the Commission's recommendatian to Cauncil for this ordinance takes into consideration all the possible scenarios and possible ow�iers.. ; Commissioner Zwirn thanked Staff for the;;iiif pawnshops but then said that he has inforinati{ that pawnshops are an overpowering stress on for foliowing up on items stolen Furtliez, tho �n how mucli tune commuruties spend on laine, Anoka and Roseville that indicates tment,: arid they carrnot supply the dernand ients �eel that the fees are a joke and do not cover the manpower that is lost �y having a police officerrtaking time to do the checl�ing and not doing o�her things he is trazned to do makin� for dc�uble time iost. Commissioner Zwirn indicated h� feels the z�eed ta either increase the fees or deal with the situation with regard to pawnsliops u� 'the coinmi�nity. He then said tl�at all the cities he asked said they woulcl l�e better aff with out a pa��vnshop a�id he wants Commissioners to really consider wl�etiler they want a pawnsl�o� in Nlounds View due to the negative aspects associated with it. �inmer commentcd thai the City's police department is belaw the state average and the not allow the C�ty io hire additional ofiicers so there will be extra wark vvith the same of people. Mr: Przeiycl�i said he appreciated the concern that this could be a problem but said ii is a legal busi�iess and it is something that police departments da use to find recovered merchandise. Mr. Przetyeki indicated he has relationships with ather pawnshop owners and they have not had much of a problem wiih s�olen merchandise. He then said that he has an incentive to ensure that the merchandise he accepts is not stolen because, zf it is s�olen, he has to tui-n ihe item over to the police and is out the money he spent to purchase it. I'lZoaands �Iiev� Plann�n� C'omm�ss�o� Il�iay 7g 2003 �teguiar 1VTeetie�g Page � Chair Stevenson indicated that this Commission was challenged by Council to come up with an ordinance and a location for a pawnshop. He then said that whether they want a pawnshop or not is not the issue as the task is to ensiue that ths Commission malces a good recommendation:to Council on how to regulate pawnshops and where to iocate them. He furthei cainmente'd'that he feels the Commission has spent a lot of time and done a lot of research on the ordiaaafices arzd he feels it is time io send the recommendation to Council for further �discussioi� and public input. Commissioner Johnson asked if during all fihe research d they had ail said they would rather not have a pawnshop. Chief Sommer said, generaily, yes." Commissioner Zwirn said he disagreed with Chair Ste` effort needs to be put into this ordinance. He then said problem and he is vehemently apposed to the location � Penny Pinchers is right next door to the proposed iocat; with kids. �re only' S0 feet away irom the proposed 1�`ins and vandalism incidents at tha� t would be appropriate io a11ow a Commissioner Zwirn indicated that there is a li'ql pawnshop lacation and there have been nuirierou Iocation. He further commented that he does not pawnshop in that location as it would furtlier exa� certain type of person that pawnshops affract to a other _ _ __ vitli regard to how much time and �cdiericy is �iot the answer to this d. He t'urtlier conamented tha� that is ai� establislln�ent that worlcs the varidalism and break-ins and draw a Commissioiler Miller indicated that she went to a cauple,ofpawnshops and even made a purcllase and'she was very irnpressad with ihc opeiat�on and the way that things were displayed. 5he then said that the people comiilg and goiz�g frani the pawnshops seemed to be upstanding citizens so `she is not sure �wliat is meant.by tl�e types of �eople that frequent pawnshops. Director Encson.ir�dica.ted he would, prefer riot to have a pawnshop located in Mounds View but, legally, the City cannot �ay i�o io the'pawnshop but can decide where it goes and how to regulate it. He then said the Ciiy is spending a lot of money io upgrade the corridor and this may not be someth�rig the City wasiis irz t1�e corridor but, if not in Mounds View Square in B-4 zoning, then where should it be located? , CQmmissionei° Zwfrn indicated he feels the Commissian needs io put more time into ihis and fitid a location that will not impact the corridor and a family run rnall. He then said that he understands that the,applicant has eniered into a lease with the mall which is a little premature. He further comnaented that he feels that the City needs to create fees that are high enough so that locatuig ui'Mounds View is unattractive. He also said he is aware that the City cannot prohibit paw�sl�ops bu� could make the fees so high that it is not attractive to come to Mounds View and lie does not want the pawnshop in Mounds View Square. Commissioner Scotch aslced where Commissioner Zwirn proposed to locate the pawnshop. Ii�[or�nd� Vie�r Planngn� Co�aynission itegula�° li�ee�i�� 1V�a� i, 2003 Page 9 Commissianer Zwirn suggested the industrial parlc or across the street but not where children congregate and there is a lot of loitering and mischievous activities already occurring. Council Member Gunn addressed the Commission and said she has begun ieceiving input from residents that are concerned about the pawnshop and the primary concern is ihe p�oposed lacation. She then said that she feels it is time to consider �n alter�ate loca�ion. Comrnissioner Zwirn indicated he has fielded 30 telephone calls with regard to pawz�shaps„ �eing located in the xnall and a number of tenanis were not told about the pawnsliop proposal �r it was misrepresented io them by Paster Enterprises. Secondly, fhe:residents."surrounding the �nall within a three or four block area have indicated that they do not wa.ni a pawnshop in the mall ,, .; - Some were alcay with having a pawnshop but not in the mall and not ir� a family area they want it away from children and not around apartment areas and this Comrnissiar� needs io address that issue and/or raise fees so high that it is not attractive. Chair Stevensan indicated he is not opposed to limiting`Nfounds View Squaie Commissioner Hegiand aslced if there is any square faotage 1i�ni.ti to the size. of the operation or if ii is possible for this business to take over the entire IVlounds View �quare: Director Ericson indicated there is no Director Ericson indicated that he as .tp'tne size. the record malcing the fees high enough to discourage someone frorn'locating ul Mounds �r�ew. Director Eri.cson indicateci that the'Coinmission could discuss creating a new overlay district but he is not sure of a consensus on the position af tbe Conunission and aslced whether it would be necessary to discuss the location �'urther or if the Con-unission was ready to make a recommendatio�. Chair Stevenson indica�ed that one of the reasans why Mounds View Square was chosen was because fl�'the uniqueness of 'a B-4 zoning distric# and, this being the only ona, it would limit the number`of pawnshops iu ih� City_ C�mmissioner 5ong indzcated the fee is only an estimate and can always be raised if necessary. Slie then said she believes the owner will cooperate very nicely with the City. �issionex Miller. indicated the Commission discussed and determined tha� the best location be Mounds-View Square. She then said she has a problem with the comments concerning �es af peaple that frequent pawnshops after having been in one and seen people coming ►ing: Chair �tevenson indicaied he feels that the Comrnission has spent a lot of time on this recommendation and now it is time to pass it on to Council who will deal vc�ith the resident inpui and amend the recommendation as necessary. iVlounds iT�ev� P1annYn� Com�ss�on Il�ay 79 2Q03 �tegular l�/Iee��g Page 10 Commissioner Hegland indicated the City needed to limit the square footage for the business. The Commission agreed to a 5,000 square foot limitaiion. Cornmissioner Zwirn aslced if any of the Commissioners had gozae to Mounds View Square and seen the activity in the evening. He then asked if any of them:wanted the pa�vnshop in tt�e mall. Commissioner Zwirn indicated that nnost of the people that fie talked to had'not been given`a ; notice and nobody informed them about what is going oii. He then saLd lie is tired of this community passing things without informing residents that Iate�• i�egatively ixnpacts them Comrnissioner Jol�u�son indicated that what the Commission is doing does not require public notice and that is why no one is informed. He then said that.once the recomnie�idation goes to Council the notices will go aut and residents will have an op�artur�it� to cpnie to, Council and voice concerns. He further commented that the Ciry cai�. only do so much'to notify people and the rest is up to residents to lceep informed of what is goiug on vvithin the Crty He also commented that the informaiion wi11 be on the ��vebsite; cable, and in the paper so, if residents are nat informed it is because of a lack of effort. on� thei� pac-t. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he feels the Commxss€on n�eds,further information. Commissioner Hegland indicated it is not the Coirimission's job to inform the residents. �� _. Commissiazaer Johnson indicated tliat if there is as much,outrage at the Council level as has been eluded to at this rneeting then the pawnshop at Mou��ds View Square will not fly but that is up to Council to determii�e. ' - Comn�ission:er Zwinri saici 1ie laas been a vi�tim of this process with Mr. Mezzenga and he is still dealing with tl�e fallaut. He then co"inmented that the people in this community do not have the time that it iakes to warry about what variances are being approved and how that is going to affect them and it is the`City'�;;responsibility to inform thetn. il Member Gunn indicated' that residents are concerned as there has never been a pawnshop in the City arid they do not know how it will impact the�r�. She then said that the �onlmission has done a;:1ot of work on the ardinances and she feels it is time to forward the ' recommendation to Council for further research and public input. Corrzn�issianer Hegland indicated that no matter where the pawnshop is Iocated it is in someone's ` backyard and ihey will say they do not wani it. Cox�nmissioner Johnson indicated an overlay is a band-aid for the problem as it would have to be in the industrial parlcs and he is nat sure that is a goad idea. He then said he would like to limit the square footage and pass the recorninendation to Council for further consideration. 1!/Iouncis V�e� P�a�ning Co�xnuss�oz� Re�ul�r I�Ieet��g l�ay 7, �003 Page 11 MOTION/SECOND: IVliller/Song. To Approve Resolution 724-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of Two Ordinances Related fo Pawnshops, Zoning and Licensing in Mounds View. Ayes — 6 Nays —1(Zwirn) 'ed. Director Ericson indicated that there would be coverage of the, issue in the newspaper as well as the required notification, website and cable channeL He then;explained the reason the Ciiy does not go overboard on natifying for the Planning Comn�ission rrieetings is because of the sl�eei volume of opposition has the possibility of tainting the recor�3-mendat�on'to Council. Director Ericson indicated that the City is in no way trying ta exclude �ublic input and Paster Enterprises should have been more forthright with their tenants bui the City cannot control that. He then said that prope�- notiiication will be provided for the;Council z�eeting. and all interested pubiic corrunents will be taken. 9. I�dext P�a�nin� C'omrniss�on l0o Ad,�our�ment to Agencla There being no further business befoxe tlie Plal�ing meeting at 9:04 p.m. (The meeting irun�ediately adjoui� Respectfully submttted, . ;�, 2a0 Chair Stevenson adjourned the the Agenda Session) PROCEEI3II�GS OF TI3E l�OLJI�II)� 'VIE� PL,AI�II�iG C011Z1ViI�SIOI� CITY OF IVi0i7ND� ViE� � dSt�1VA�L' H ��Jl�fl Hy 1�'11i51'V�r��AL� Regular I�eet1ri� Ii�Iay 21, 2003 I�Tound� Vyew C�ty I�ali 2401 Highvvay 10, N[ounds �Ti��v, I� 5511� 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to arder by Chair Stevenson at 7:04 p.m., 2. Roll Call Members Present: Mejnbers Absent: Also Present: Planning Location: ian2436 Commissioners � Scotch, Song, an� I)E03=002 ;442 Higlaway 10 Page 2 � Appe�ove I�Iinute� a. April 1 b, 2003 [ON/SECOIND: Stevenson/Johnson. To Approve the Planning Coi�lmission Minutes for ,16, ;2Q03 as Presented. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 1Vlounds ��evv PIanni�ag Co��YSS�ora I�e��alar IVieetNng E� None. Citi�ens Itequest� �nd Coanrnents on Ite�ns IVoi on the Age��a 5. PabIic I�ea�ing and C'o�s�deratiom of a i�ari�r�ce I�eque I1oca�ed at 737� P�easa�� View Dri�ve. Cominunity Development Director Ericson indicated that thi setbacic at 7375 Pleasant View Drive. He then explained tlia making it unusual within the City. Director Ericson explained that the applicant would lilce to renio� construct a new garage maintaining the same one-foot setbacl� in site line to the bacicyard and preserv� mature trees. Directox Ericson reviewed the criteria that were Coinmission and indicated that Staff feels that t Director Ericson indicated that Resolution 727-03 He then �-eviewed the stipulations attached to the � Directar Ericson indicated tl2at the neighbors are � no calls or correspondence on the matter. Chair Stevenson o�ened the nublic hearin� at 7 l( __ Chair Ste�venson'asked why 1Viay 21, 2003 P�ge 2 :or a one-�t is only 66 isting garage and preserve an adequate �ith the of a variance. for this property. the project and he has received be sei bacic 50 feet. Mr. Loder explained tliat the garage is set bacic 50 feet to ailow room for an addition to the house at a later point in tizxie while still allowing access to the garage. Chaur Stevenson asked whether the applicant was awai•e of the requirement to provzde an approved surface for the driveway and �o rernove the fwo existing buildings. Mr. Loder indicafed he was aware of the requirements and indicated he intended to blacktop the di`ivewav. the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. MOTIONISECOND: Zwirn/Hegland. To Approve Resolution 72'�-03, a Resoiution Approving a Variance for a one-foot garage setback at 7375 Pleasant View Drive. l , Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Moiion carried. ;� I�Ioe�nc�s `Iiew Pla�ani�g Cora�m�ss�o� 1Zegu�ar I�/IeetYn; I�ay 219 2003 Page 3 6. Ca�s�dera�xon of Develo��eng I2e��e� l�equesis Ytega�rd'an� Pro�erties I�ocated a� 2436 an� 2442 �Ii��away 10 Community Developmeiit Director Ericson indicated that all changes that had been ' recoinmended by 5taff and the Planning Cammission at the previous meetuig had been addressed by the developer. Most importantly, the parlcing has been changed to include 10 additional stalls. Director Ericson indicated there are still some items requiri plan, garbage enclosure, signage, and wetland delineation. Director Ericson recomnlended approval of Resolutian 728-I developznent plan. He then read the stipulations set forth in Commissioner Zwirn asked whether the tenants Mr. Humason indicated the tenants have not the target is medical. Chair Stevenson asked how many more spac Director Ericson indicated that eithex four or what the City's Code requires. Director Ericson indicated `tlie corner. MOTION/SECOND: : Stevens Recommending 1�pproval of a Coun[y Highway' 10. , Ayes — 4 _ entxoi� sucn as a snow storage ,; co�mmending approval of tl�e :esolutiori. nnarily anedical providers. he caru�ot guarantee that but -e being pravided. being provided over and above Council auuroved the PUD amendment for office use at ihe 'o Approve Resolution 728-03, a Resolution Review for Properties Locaied at 243b and 2442 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 1�Tex� Flan�aing,�o�reiission 1@�Ieeting: Jur�e 4, 2003 AcI,�ouenffien� fo .P�ge�da Sess�o� There beirig no further business Uefore the Planning Commission, Chair 5tevenson adjoLUned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. (The meeting immediateiy adjourzzed to the Agenda Session) Ii�ou�ds iljew �la�t��ng Comrr�issgon l�egular 11il�eting Respectfully submitted, l�//Iay 21, 2003 ]P�ge 4 �'i � .�i � �"� ` _�. �, : 1 _ .�� .'� �: -- �' �- _ i � � `� � REGULAR MEETII�IG AGENDA 1. Call to Qrder 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes a. May 7, 2003 b. May 21, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda .. �. . ; . ;., � . � .��; .. i :l • ^ . � i F � j ��`.: •-. _ . 5. Consideration of a Conditional Use Pern�it Request for an Over-Sized Garage at 5220 Edgewood Drive. Applicant: Da1� Goettsch Planning Case; CU03-003 - :;:, APPLlC�.NiS: YOUR ATf�ND,AAIC� AT TFtIS fl�E�711VG IS R�QUESTED. PLEASE RlOTIFY T6�iE COMMUNITY DEVELOPN[EiVi DEP,4RTMEAdT AT 763-717-40�0 !F YOtJ AR� UfV�,�LE 1°CJ A1T��D. 6. Next Planniilg Commission Meeting: Juiy 2, 2003 7. Adjouinment to Agenda Session AGEIV�A SESSION l. Review Minutes: June �, 2003 Z. Staff Reports 3. Chauperson and Plauning Commissioners' Reports J�„�� I�em Rlo: 5 Il�eetin� Date��7, 2003 i'ype of ��siness: Corr►mission Business I � <, I, . _ ^ ; �_; ' � . " ,� ��; Mound� View Planning Gommission �r�m: James Ericson, Interim City Aciministrator l�em T°it[el�ubjecto Consideration of a Conditionai Use Permi� Request for an Over-Size Garage at 5220 Edgewood Drive; Planning Case No. CU03-003 .. . Property owner Dafe Goettscl� is req�esting approvaf of a conditionai use permii to construcf a detached 1,148 square-foot garage on their property locaied at 5220 Edgewood Drive. The applicant indicates that the existing garage is too smafl fio meet his needs and fihafi he would like to replace it with something [arger. There is a 35-faot long RV that currently sits covered in the driveway that would be moved info the new garage, if approved. The subject lot is � 0,538 square feef, which is slighily less than fhe City's current minimurn Io� size requirements. {Most of the lots in this subdivision, which was approved ir� 19�7, are the same size as the Goettsch's.) The existing garage wil{ be demolished to make roam for �he proposed garage, which wouid be built in the same focation in the rear yard, extending back an addiiional 13 feet ioward the rear lof lin�. [�is�ussiona Section 1106.4, Subdivision 6, lis#s ihe specific conditional use permit requirements far garages [argerthan 952 square feet. These requirements, such as setbacks and maximum square-foofage woufd be met with this proposal. The Code s�ts an upper limi� of accessory sforage space on a property a� 1,800 square feet, subject to a 20% rear yard coverage ihreshoid. The Go�ttsch's backyard is 5,772 square feet, twenty percent of which is 1,154 square feet. Thus the proposed 1,148 square foat garage satisfies this requiremenf. The proposed garage would mainfiai� the same five-foot sideyard setback and woufd be set back 9 7 feet from the rear property iine. There is currently a shed behind the existing garage thaf will be removed in conjuncfiion with the new garage. There is a ten-foot wide plat�ed easem�nt at the rear of the io# that will not be impacted by the construction. The Comprehensive Plan encourages fihe development and maintenance of residential areas so as �o improve the quality, appearance artd attractiveness of ho�sing units and resideniial property in genera[. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property, 5220 Edgewood Drive, as law-density residenfiai. The fot is typicaf for this area. fVlost of the homes in this subdivision were buiit with detached single or small two stalf garage5, which by foday's standards are too smalf for fihe fypical multi-vehicle family. Some o# the proper�y awners in this are� have aiready expanded or replaced the original g�rages. ) Goettsch PC Report June 18, 2003 Page 2 Adverse EfFecfis According to the City Code, the Plannirtg Commission musf consider �he possibEe adverse effecfs of the proposed conditional use. The fir�dings of the Planning Comi�ission shafl be based upon, but not fimited to, the foliowing factors: • Relafionship wifh fhe Comprehensive Plan. � The Geographica! Area Involved • lNhether such use will fend fo or acivally depreciate the area in which it is proposed. � The Characfer of fhe Surrounding Area � The demonsfrafed need for such a use. As stafed on the previous page, the proposed request ful(y complies with the Comprehensive Plan. The neighborhood has many lots of this same size and the proposed garage satisfies the maximum rear yard coverage threshold, which was established to ensure that 80% of ail backyard areas woufd remain greenspace. UVhile the propased garage will be 448 se{uare feet farger �han the existing garage, neifher property to the north or south should be impacted by fihe proposal. A privacy fence bt�ffers the properfiy to fhe south and fihe property to the north has its garage along the corr�mon properfy fine. The properfies to the rearwould be r�ost visualfy impacted by the proposed garage however i# wifl be less tl�an three feet wid�r than �he original garage so it shoufd "appear" only slig�tly iarger from a profile perspec#ive. From fihe front view, refocating the RV that is currenfiiy parked on the driveway info the new garage would be an improvement everyone would natice. The garage would nof depreciate ihe area and in fact would bring added value to the proper#y and would have a positive impac� to the fiax base. While many homes in the area stilf have fihe original, small garages, a growing number of proper�ies in fihe area are making similar improvements. As far demonstrated need for such a use, i have visified the property and c�n personally testify as to the Goetfisch's need for fihe additional space. Code Consistencv Subdivision fi of Section 1106.Q4 fists the condifions under which a conditional use permi# can be issued. These are as fo(lows: a. The accessory building must conform with Section 1103.06 and subdivision 1� 06.03(() of this Title. b. The combined sq�►are foofag� of all accessory buifdings on one (1) lot c�nnot exceed one thousand eight fiundred (1,800) square fee�Y. c. The building shal[ be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance wifih the dwelling unit. d. The width of the b�ilding cannot exceec4 ihirty-five feet (35"). e. The building shail be a permanen� structure. f. ihould the �rse for which the permit was grar�ted be cf�anged, the permit shafl be subjec# �o reconsiderafion, revocation or other action regufat�d by Code. Goettsch PC Report June 18, 2003 Page 3 Sectior� 1�03.06 refers fio the locaiion af accessory buildings in side and rear yards. The proposed garage satisfies this requirement. Section 9106.03 refers to specific stanclards such as height, area, setbacks, coverag� ratios, use requiremenfis, total nurr�ber of accessory buildings allowed and exterior siding requirements, all of which are satisfied wifih fihis request. AII of the requirements addressed above would be satisfied. •: ! �, i Based on the above informafion a��td the site plan presented for consideratior�, s�aff would recornmend approval of the requested canditional use permif for a 1,148 square foot garage at 5220 Edgewood Drive, subject �o stipulations. �Q�� James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Adrninisfirator Attachments: - 1. Application 2. Site Plan 3. Zoning Map 4. Phatographic Documenfation -� �� OMMUNIi� �EVELOPMENi DEPARiMENi PL.ANNiNG APPl�IC,P�`f�ON �� 40� c��,ty �o�a zo, �o�nas v�ew, �n� 5�i�2 � (763) 717-4020 F�x(b51) 765-1660 � � �� °�'r@SS � P�rtn��5�� P(ease '��+pe �r Prire� inio�°r��ian � Co�splete �o�h Sid�� af �'his �orrn ��plita�fi Inf�rr��t��r� - i�ame o� Appl�cani , �.�_1_,�_ €� �`�� .--��:; ��,.r., %9ephone 7 G "i _ "' �� ,..{ . _;�. Address <°�. ..�� -� ,� .� �� =,�z,.,�..� ;°� Fax _: � • � � 4� '�r'� �.,�F,�, C-m�iE� ,.� e_ r� �r�•�F� -� `�'r�t c-r„ . `�' �:�-, _ �� . Interest �n Prop�rt� (cheek appropriate 6ax} i� Owner of PropeKy � Lessee, Operator, Manager ❑ Other (explain) O Contra�t foe Deed Owner ❑ Agreemen� ta Purchase A�piica�iis �oe�s� p�ovicle evr�ence o� ir�te�es� �t� prep�� ghe ta�� o� ap�lic�timn, and if �au �re r��t the owner of t}�e pro��r�y, y�u tw�us� pravade a I�tter o# p�rmis�ic�n ��°orn �he owner gr��rag c�n�en� �s� t�e �lin� �� this apploca�io�a ihe propet°�y o�irtter t�us� s�gst t}�is app[icati�r� f�r it to �� a�c�piedo _ ;_=:.', � �r�perty Des�r6ption/�ropo�ai Address or Generai Location � � � � :� °� -` �� =L � �' ��' _ _ _ __ Legal Deseription ,� �� ta� �{t�?�- ,��i � �' - _ �4 � •' ��c �b::6 �:,.•=,a�� _ ,.�.�.�� Property Identificatian # (PIN #) , # af Acr�s Current Zoni�g �� , 6 .t.z� - � � Type of Applieation L7 Comprehensive Plan Amendment 0 Rezoning ❑ Major Subdivision � Minar Subdivision ❑ . . planned Unit �evelopment {PU�) PUD Arnendment ` Conditional/Interim Use Permit Variance ❑ co�� ea� � Develop Review/Site Plan ❑ Wetland Alteration Permit ❑ Wetiand BufFer Permit ❑ �loodplain P°rmit ❑ Other $250 � . $Z5�/acre (Min $250 max $1500} $25a/acre (mine $500} $200 , �500 plus $500/acr� , /; - -�.35Q � �" R-1, R-Z,�all others $30O Ra1, R-2 $1Q0 �Il oihers $300 �loo $iZ5/acre; min $125 max $750 R-1, R-Z �150; ail others $200 R-1, R°2 $25; alf others �100 $200 A deposit may be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and staff ar consultant time spent in the review, research or preparatlon of materials associated with this application. The appiicant shall be responsible for aU reasonable incurred costs in excess of the initla! deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encurnbered shall be refunded to the appliCant wiChin 30 days aftar consideration of the application is compfeted. �i�r�ning �ppfic�tio� Pr�sent Use of Property ❑ Undeveloped/Vacant !� SingEe F�miiy Dw�liing 0 pupiex%iwo Family Dwelling O Nfulti-fami[}/ Dweiling ❑ Business/Commercial Establishment C� Industrial Estabiishment ❑ Other (�xplain) �roperty Classi�eation � Abstract Description af Proposal � O Torrens .:. - BY MY (OUR) SIGNATUR� ON THIS APPLICAT.[ON, I N�REBY �ECL4RE THAT, TO THE BEST OF IV1Y KN0INLEDG�, THE IIVFORMATIp[V PROVI�ED IS TRUE AiVD ACCURAl°�. 5ignature of Applicant iVame of AppEican� (iypedJprinted) � �/:�..�n� �� .�'�a�M.~��._ =i: [✓ r..l..:��'.` lG C� ii.�^xN i` °: �_. �-e Signature af Propesty Owner _ �,�� - ,�,�r'°:��.,� �fame of Property Owner {tYped/printed} � t � r2 (� ��s .�w- °��-�,.�,.�. Address of owner Phone t�umber of Owner E-rnajl � �"Z C� �°� .� �..c,?��:� E� ra`' � .._ _�. �i �' f�-- t�, �, fi ��c=��. --G _ _. �,� —.. %� 7 ° ��G� _a �� i r�•t,��,?,_ .�^M!� ��5�'"'Y,� :C`c'.,,, � �,r �r` �a.� .?��s ,� cm ,:� ani_a.. � ��x��*��**��*��*��*��*��*��*��*�x��x�*�x*�x*�*x��x*�*��x�*��x��*�� FOR OF�aC� IISE OfdlY Date of SubmittaE �' " �`�! � � � � Date of Acceptance �-�' �i ^ o. Assigned to: _ Ptanning Case No. �� 6Q-day Limit 120-day fimit Cs.�03- � t� '� Fees Paid: Account # Check # Receipt # �/ q • Application: � �,.�� 1 O �� 11 / �� __� °'�'�°-� �ark Dedica�ion: DeposiYs: Other: Totai: 1/98 � � � . ` . ' .: :a:- � -� � �� c.s �- �. � ��P °'�'�` �? `"�`� �.; � tfa �� . u� t,� '�- : g �" ; 'd` ' �k' �' �F � I �� "�'.I S^w :. � � c��d' {`+� t �.? , � �� : �� S, rj P' �,��J, . : ,��' , �! i � ci } 4� .—� 4r} � :"D ►t � T `<, r� �-, ; ,�, �r"� �' °� r�, �r�a � � �- �- � , � ' � ,�' Cai d'�I s� i'�.4 C'�t " C i; k� ], d�ri ��,��iY� _ �Y �� . i � �� ; � F �- ; �� a �- � � �- � � ; � . � C'�i ! �0 C�0 , �'� � d ; �� C'� � � +�r � r�'S rt'r � �i ! gi'� ' ? g�. . aD� . CL5 c�G� ': � �'"j '; h^3 C`�[ � �,: � �',�-. �, *�', � �+ i� � �-� . � t� , �v ; �-,i : �� t;� s'� : v u�+; a� r,� - a`� ��' f�, � c� � t�; �° -�F : ►�} t�k � �Y- . 'dr *� . ,3- �iF �- s �' � �# ' C'� ' � N �;�! �, t �:.__ k4i � t�+ a�'i � 9n' dp (-� '� , p,�-� � C*4 : #� . �3 : �dl 9 '� �' ' '�P° i. � '� � . � � , °?' � �.r � �t c�r .�a ' ��' ; �`� : $"�� ;.9 �(.�: �1 �� 1�:�= �'�1�� i � �� .�: � � � � t +W p 4�- it� �� 1 �,�; �� 'a �1��; ��-�� i�!+� �1,�� ,r�: � ,-, ; � 1 F�'?�� ..�� ...�... .� ., ��. ��v�' � � fi�� '1 �� r��'�' .�]r1�� 1 �C3;. � 1 �4�s 5�ti��' ��? �r�� 3�1 V��}��r :�[�;� i �u � �� ,�� ' ��°� .,' ,��+� �,� �� ` ,�27't�; �� i�a� �'A��'I` ��[ .�2�C+ ��.4� ��•_�� ' �� ti ��iCk: �'�';�� ;� '' S;:�`� f `;�'d� �.�„Y� F �+ �"�� 1 � �`� ry �� i�,�'�� .�� ' �� <f � '' , l�. '� ��°�,,; �.�1. �� "��'?- � �.�`��' . �� +S` � `�T �' t `��.� . � � � � � �y .� � �+"""R�' � �'� w�`.ar. � � 4'4�4 "'�� '� �� L'� ��'�� ' �' � �i� �� . . .. � � .� �� S ; 5�� ,�,,.r �,,� _ �"' - - �.__ ....._ .�._._.... �� '�r _�t�� w:>� �` �'�"'" � �'� �.�'� � '��`"� � � � �' � �.�'�� =t � : �, �� ., � : ��-, ' .� �� : � f' �: �� _ i={ , ,�i}':i '� �. � �2�� .�� , �.�� , ��. �� ,� �� ..., �:.a � ,� '4 , •+, k �� :��t�, ��'�� ,,.. ,. ..,._.. �� _� �� J� ,��•.r �r : �,��'�, �'�'`'4`� ��'�� F.�f��3r`�� i�'� � �� '� ti�� . �� }� � ♦ � � � � � �� a ��` �� v�...�. �L-"�R�}'�� .�; � �.� ��, ��' � �G�� s�- - • � . -• . •.: . • s r- �. .: a . � _� � �_ :� - ;, * � � ,.:. : . ........ .. . ... . . �it� ��il ; � s �. i . �� ., �.��c, d �� '��,-.. : : ' li � � � i . � , •. . � . . . . . .. . . . �. : .._r.... ..., ,.. _.. . . � .��..... , . .. ..�..oa.u..� " _ . _�._,_A.�-�.,� .. .. � , . ;... :. . . . _ . :.. .__...... _ ._ ........... � .... .a. _. _ , , � . . ; . . . � _ . , . � � � . � , . , . . . . . .. .. . . . . . ; . . `� _.. . .. ..... . i i � � . ..- .... .. _ '. ... . �. ... .� . .. .. . ... . . . . , . . . _ .. . . . � : + �� -�� • I . . ...... ..... ..... ...... . .. ;.. r . _ .;. .�_ ... , ...� .. . ...:..... ... . ._. , . . _.... . . .. � �jq;Z_.. . : . �•� � a I ' . . ... . .. ... ....... .... .. ... . .. ..._. ._. ; .. .. .. ..... . � .,. � ._..... . . � A 7 ! . �� ;�� , ��. . , , , ___ _ ___ . __. , _ _ �_ ._ �,�,� �.. : . . , . � � �: � ° � � �_,., � : , . ; , , ..�...�, � ,. : , � , , : . y� .,. .. ....: '� . . . . .. . . . . ... . . ._ . .. .. . _ . . . . . . . , . , �,... . _ , . .... _ t: � : � . . � -� . . _ _ . . �- . ... .... _. . -_ ....... ... .:......... . �. .. g...... ._._.. � .... ..... �. .. � � ' , � � �•,4 . .. �. ..... , ._� ....... ; . .. _ . ... . .. . . . . ...... ..... .:. . .. : . . .. . . . . ... ,\ . � . �� : . � . . . 1 ' I . .. .. . _ ....... . ....... �., . ' � . . . .. ! . ,. . , .. �f.. . .. . .... ..._..... . .. . .. . ..i�.�.. �......._. ' , I i � . . .. . -.. . ... � �` : � . . . . ... .. . .. .. ... . ...... . . . . ._... . . . . ✓ i' � � . � '�. . .. . : . . ... _. . .. . .. .. . ... ... .. . .. . . _ . .. . . , . .... _.. . : : , .. ... '. � i �(` , .... . ... . . . 1 .. � . � . ' . . . _ . . . .. . . ..... . . .. �_ ... . . ... . . ..... ._ . . .... . . . . .. .. . . ... . I ` ..... .. . .. � . . A,}... � � !. 1 i i I � � • i i ' i ; , , � � ' ' _ ... . . .. .. .. ... . .. . I : i , � -..... ' . . ' __ '..__.... � . . ' .. ........... . . . __. _ . . -._. . _ _. ._ .., .__ .. _, .. - ..._ _ _. . . ..... ..... ., . .. .. . .. ,. . .. ._.. . . . . i � . i . . � .. .. . � .� ,. , .J.. ; �,..". �� . . , . ... ... �. . . � . .....;.. , . .. .. . , . ._. .. i , � . .�_.t:.. .. � ...... ........... . � ., _ .....,... ._..... ... . ,..... ;_ .....-.. . .. ....... .. . . . ..... __ . _-.. . i �.. . � i c , .-:. . -_...... .� ........ ... . .... .. . ... . ..:.... �. _.......,... . � .. .. _ . .... .... . . . . . .. . . . i , � � .. ._.. . ......� . .. ,� ... .. .... .......... ............ . . ........ . ........ ...... _ _ ._ . - ._ _.. .i , i . . ,�,� ��..�,. �� . . _.:. ... ... . _ . ._... ..__._.. ......... ... . . ..._...�..:..�..�« - r..-....Y..... � . .. _. .. , ... .r,.�,�.: .. ,�,:. _. � � �. ..... ' i ` .: . � _ � � .��' _ _ . t ' l _-_,:<,:;� ; �' " � : ,�- • .�' �- �i� t! �' '�I � :n � �� . . . ;,:,2,'. a > > '.�.. _�. t'�.« Jt:� � �� Y�LV. �'f ,� �v� rCt i .� +�;,�� A iF 5, fa'�� fC:'�� ec �� ' ,�.,,, "�$ ~� 3�1, y� � - �r. �', � � 1 � � �; � � ��'�� ' f � �. �� ' � : � t i, � - { I '��e �' ; 1I � � �� C:) I� � ��,��r a � �.,� �� r . l� 1' � �R ��i' .� .. . ,:. u, ' ,�, .. - ,�:r �' -- �--".'i . . ° �y� {`�.� � - ti, �,�-�..',';�_..gip; ... _ , _ � . � --=sc::;:�`.z,7� s�^vi._„�sim.: Front v�ew, looking narthe��t ��ar y�� vi��, looking sc�uth�est �.�_. .�j � `, � ` �� f ._ " . � ;' , :!, 1, . ; �� 8�� SiAiE OF �IPJIV�S�1°A _. � , , � �- �� • � :� ,� � �.� ��.. � � __ � , , �� .. � .� � i��. ,�� ;�,.��-:_' � . - t. �, °,' � ;� ;, -` j : � !1 . _ �'- ` . �. � ;f i�. �, i � . _ �_' . . � W_ . !� � � : ��' � ) �' . � .. � � . �; _ . ! 1 1 � �lW�REAS, proper�y owner Dale Goeitsch has applied for a condifiional use permit to construct a 1,148 square faot detached garage on his fot locafed at 5220 Edgewood Drive, which is legally described as follows: ,�. ��. i � �� .- F y � ,". ,./ l. 1: !i /.: • f WFl�REAS, The Mounds View Zoning Code conditionally aElows garages in excess o� 952 square feet in area with a maximum accessory building area nof to exceed 1,800 square feefi; and, WHERE��, the Planning Commission f�as reviewed the followi��g documents regarding ihis proposal: - a. Development Application \� b. Zoning Map c. Proposed Site Plan d. Photographic documeniation e. Staff Report !�lHER�AS, fihe Mounds View Plannir�g Commission finds that the proposal safiisfies the dimensional requirements as outlined in Chapters 1 iO4 and 1106 the Zoning Code; and, WHER�AS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the request is consistent with the Mounds View Comprehensive P[an in that tl�e Comprehensive PEan encourages the development and maintenance of r�sideniiai areas so as to improve the qualifiy, appearance and attractiveness o�` housing units and residential property in general; and, WHER�AS, fhe Maunds View Pfanning Commission finds thai the proposed garage woufd ��ot be ou� of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved and the size of the subject properiy which is ab(e to accommodate such a sfructure; and, !�F{�R�AS, fihe iV}ounds View Planning Commission finds thafi fhe proposed garage would not depreciaie t�e r�eighborhood; and, -' % WFB�REA�, the Maunds View Planning Commission finds that ihe applicant has suifiiciently demonsira�ted that a need exisfs for the proposed oversized garage. Res. 731-03 '*,r- N�UV, i�IER�FORE, �E li R�S�LV�D that the Mounds View Planning Cammission recommends approva! of the conditional use permit with ihe folfowing stipulafio�s: 1. The garage shafi nofi be used for commercial purposes, living space or other uses t�af aflowed within fhe R-1 Singie-Family Residentia! disfirict or by fhe Zoning Code. Should the use change for which the p�rmit was gran�ed, the conditional use permit shall be considered nu11 and void. 2. The building shafl be designed and mainiained to provide a uniform appearance with the dwelling unii. 3. The heigh# of the garage shall be limited to 15 feei, as measured from the floor fia the mid-point of the frusses. 4. �ecause the praposed garage wouid cover twen�y percenfi of the rear yard, no other acc�ssory buildings shali be allowed on t1�e proper�y. 5. The property owner shalf ensure that overhead powerlir�es maintair� proper clearance (min 3') above the r�ew garage. �E IT �I�ALLY R�SOLV�D that #he Nlo�nds View Planning Commission directs stafF to forward this resolution fo the City Councif prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 18th day of June, 2003. Jean Mifler, Acting Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson, Community Development Direcfior (SEAL) �'� ' �; 1, -,,. _ '�, ; :�� ', `�- 1= �� ' ! ;. :, :. ;�� : . , �; .,. �1 `�; � ��. .. � � _ �; ° :; �Ili� ay 10, 1. Call to �rcier The meetzng was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., 20 l�oli Call Members Present: Commissioners SteVerison, Hegland, Zwirr Members Absent: Johnson (eacused): l�lso Present: Comxnunitv Development Director Ericson =_ :� �- ; Index ta 1V.�inutes Zon$ng Code ��nendment to Requ E�isting 1Vluitiple-FamiIy I3weiling Considera�ion of Acquisation of Pr County 12oad � 3_ , A}�prove I�Iinutes None. -; for Expansion of �etv��en 3016 a�d 3000 Requests and Co�x�e�ts on Iteffis Noi on the Agenda 11�eefing � 49 2403 yet3� IIaII l�I 55112 Sang, and Miiler Pa�e 2 � IVlounds �Tie�� Plan�ing Coanmission �une 4, 2003 Regalar 1Vl�etiepg P��e 2 So Zo�in� Coc�e A�end�ent to Requir°e CiJP far a�y Ezpans►on of Exi�tRr�; IVlultiple� F'amil� I)�vellings Community DeveIopment Director Ericson indica�ed ihat this change to the Zoni require a CUP for any expansion of existing multiple-family dwellings. He tl�en. the CUP would give the City the chance to review any proposed expansion to dei potential impact to the surxounding community. Chair Stevenson asked if the City Attorney had reviewed Director Ericson indicated that the City l�ttorney had revi with it. Commissioner Miller aslced whether the proposeci change parking would be allowed in the front yard. Director Ericson indicated that the change does n requirements in the ordinance allow for parking � had spent a considerable amounfi of time searchin whether �here had been any agreement to maintai Director Ericson indicated that the plex that brought tkis issue to light through the CUP process. MOTI G� S 'C'onside�ation Count� Ftoad ] las taicen'in a ny subsequen Ta Approve ] nent to tfie Zo �wellings. ,,, , Nays — 0 ssue and found ;d that its concern that ;n indicated that Staff tation to determine greei� space. �it application for the four- wiil be required to go ution 730-03, a Resolution Code to Require a CUP for any Motion cart'ied. isition of the Prope�°ty �acated �etween 3016 and 3000 ; llevelopment'Coordinator Backrrian addressed the Corn�nission and explained tl�e nces surrouiiding the property in question being able for purchase by the City. He then that the City' is able to purchase the property for $b8,901.14 as a tax forfeited parcel �sey County plus a small reconveyance fee. E�conomic'Development Coordinator Backman indicated the City currently owns or controls approximately 6.S acres on that blocic and acquiring this lot would further assist with fhe residential redevelopment being considered. ;ti , `i � - ;:�-:::� l�ounds �1iew Plaa�r�aug Coa�rr►�s�ao� du�� 49 2003 l.2egu�ar I9�eetire� Page 3 Ecoi�omic Developnlent Coordinator Baclanan indicated �hat he had received quotes for soil borings on the property and those will be presented to the EDA on June 9, 2003 consideration. Economic Development Coordinator Bacicman indicated that Staff has developed addiiional developer criteria and requested that the developers submit to tlie City additional;information by June 5, 2003 for consideration on June 9, 2003. Commissioner Hegland asked for clarification on the reconve�ance fees. Economic Developzxzent Coordinator Backman explained that`the City has control of the property through a use deed and would need to convey the property bacic to Ramsey County before purchasing it and there is a small fee involved in that. Commissioner Song asked what the big ditcl� at 2946 Econoinic Development Coordinator Backman H2 bufi could be reloca#ed to accommodate the Commissioner Zwirn aslted how many soil bor'ii property. Economic Development that location. M� ��I 8. The� )ND: Zwirn/Heglaind. To Approve R Approval of ihe Acquisition of Tax F.� Ayes — b Nays — 0 A€ijournr��n� to .�genda Sessia� it is a holdin� uorid for runoff from acquisition be approximately two in n 729-03, a Resolution Property. : June 1�, 2003 Motion caa-ried. e heing no furtlzer buszness befare the Planning Commission, Cliair Stevenson adjourned the ing at 7:21 p.m. (T�e ineeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) submitted, Jim EYicson Community Development Director 1VIo��cis �Ifee� Plannz�g Co�massion I2eguiar N�eetit►e Transcribed by: Jaan Lenzmeier June 4, 2003 ��ge 4 ,; ': -i �� ; c �3 ao �... �- ; . !; .ti , i; ,,' °' ; •; =. 1 .. , ; �. : >I .1: ..,, i: �: �t �� ' ` �iEG€TL�iR �EE'TIlVC'i AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes a. June 4, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda � �. . , : . . 4 �.. .� . .��,,_ .:. � � . :��, �,� ,. 5. Consideration of a Variance Request for a Reduced Parking Lot Setbacic ai 2402 Coun�Ey Road I Applicant: Stephen Farreli Pla.t�vzig Case: VR03-004 C� 7. ��s��: YouR ,�TT��C� A� �H'S �E�r��G �� R��u�s��, P�EpaSE i�lO�IFY iH� COIUIMUN4T� DE�/ELOPM�h1T l7��ART�i�P1T' AT 763-777-�4020 IF YOU ARE i3Ne4�LE TO AT7�ND, Next Pl�zning Commission Meeting: Ju1y 16, 2003 Adjout7unent to Agenda 5ession l . Review Minutes: 2. Staff Reports , :, : ,. A�� o� June 18, 2003 . .} �: � . 3. Chairperson and Pianni�ig Commissioners' Reports �„ .r :'�.�:�.''J It�rr� No: 5 iVieeii:�g Dat�: Julv 2, 2003 3°ype of ��asiness: Public Hearinq and Comrr�ission Busin�ss ,' C�°it� of .Maur�d� �Pi�vv St�ff ��o�t �ao iVlounds View Planning Commission �ra�; James Ericson, Interim City Administrator Itern i°itlel��bject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance Request for a Reduced Frant Yard Parking Lot Sefback at 2402 County Road I Planning Case VR03-004 [ratrod�c��on. r The subject properiy is a small, commercial lot improved with a two-story office building at the southwesi corner of County Road I and Greenfield Avenue. The propErty is zoned B-3, Highway Business Corr�mercial and is designated as Ne�ghborhood Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan. The variance request would aElaw the property owner to expand ihe parking lot by an additional two parking stalls toward Greenfield Avenue, reducing the permitted setback from 10 feef to 2 feet. � . Saor� after the building afi 2402 County Road 1 was completed and occupied, staff began ;f recaiving complaints from residenfs regarding tenants and clients fro��n the ofFice building parking on Greenfiield Avenue, averflowing #rom the parking lof, After a series of rrteefiings on the subject, ihe Planning Commission recommended and the City Council approved a parking restric#ion on fhe east side of Greenfield Avenue, 35O feet back from the corner, except the area directly across from the office bui[ding. The fVo Parking signs have been instalfed and have been effeciive in eliminafiing parking in frant of the single-family dwellings. Mr. Steve Farreil, the owner of the office building, was not in favor of the parking restriction. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, there needs #o be demonstrated hardship or practicai difficu(ties associafed with the property fhat makes a litera! interpreiafiion of #he 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. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.d2, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardsi�ip exists when alI of the crifieria are met. The individual criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstanc�s apply to the property which do not appiy generalfy #o other praperties in ihe same zone or vicir�ity and result from !at size or shape, topography or other circumstances over whici� the owners of the property since the efifective dafe hereof have had no controi, b. The litera[ in4erpretation of fihe provisio�s of fhis iitle would �eprive the applicant of rights _ commonly enjoyed by ofihsr properties in the same distric� under �E1e terms of this Tifile. Farrell Variance Reporf July 2, 2003 Page 2 c. That the special conditions or circurnstanc�s do not result from the actions af the appficant. d. Thaf granting the variance requested would noY confer an the appficant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate #he hardship. Economic conefitions alone shall not be considered a hardship. f. The variance would not be materially defirimentaf to the purpose of this Title or #o other property in the same zone. g. 7he proposed variance will not impair an adequafie supply of light and airto �djacent property or substantialiy increase the congestion of the public sireets or increase the danger of fire or endan��r the public safefiy or subsfiantia{ly diminish or impair property values within the r�eighbarhood. Criferia Responses: a. The exceptional or exfiraordinary circumstances associated with this lot, as identified in previous variance resolutions, are that the developmenf potentiai of the lo� is restricted by its size, the County's taking of ten feet of right of way alongside County Road f and by fihe City`s corner lot sefiback requirements. b. While ifi car� be argu�d thaf the fiteral interpreta�ions of #he Code do noi deprive the property owner of rights enjoyed by others, the posting of the No Parking sigr�s has in fact firnited Mr. Farre[l's ability to utilize on-sireet parking. c. While Mr. Farrell does uitimately control the number of vehicles parking on the lofi and whiie he was aware of the parking limitations when he purchased the property, Mr. Farrell c{id not design the building or sife plan and had anticipated utilizing on-street parking for over�low purposes. d. Granting fihe variance would no# confer on t�►e appiicanf any speciaf privilege in that other commercialiy-zaned properties have been awarded reduced parking setbacks in unique situations. e. Approving a variance from #he approved 10-foot parking lot setback to a 2-faof setback is fihe minimum varianc� to alleviaie the hardship in fihat two additionai parking stalls could be added to the lo�. The variance would nof be ma�erially detrimenfaf io the purpose of �his Title or to other property in the same zone in fhat the variance would serve to minimize fhe amount of onm street business parking associated with the businesses at 2402 County Road I. g. ihe variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air fo adjacent property or subsfantially increase fihe congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or er�danger the public safiety or substantialfy diminish neighborhood property values. �, ; ; ::, �,::;:.:�..j Farrel4 Variance Report July 2, 2003 page 3 Re��rnrner�dat�or�: Open tl�e pub(ic hearing and eo��sider the testimony o� staff, residenfs and the applicanfi. If the Commission beiieves all of the criteria have been satisfactorily addressed and there are no reasons to deny the requesfi, staff would reeammend approval of the a#tached resolu�ion, Resolution 732-03. ��U�d/l t QrQ (�%�,'V iL James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Adminisfirator >; i:f ,vY .�S . _� �' `>��.��=�;;: :� �:. ^� . ::<>;: �:;� Efif�:.- .:. . ::: ti.i:�. M�if,' ...... ` {rl [ t �� ' �':l�i2i�;� ��. : COMMUNIiY DEVELOPMENT dEPARTMENi �� 240i Counry Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (7b3) 7i7-4020 Fax (651) 765m1660 P{ease Type or Pr'snt Information ° Complete Both Sides of This Form �.. . ,; �� •� Name oF Applfcani Address E-mail: Telephone ��' � `� �' ` z��''� Fax � � � %�i �c � C�iW:G f yttt�r�st'tt Prope� (check appropriate box) Owner of Property Lessee, Operator, Manager other (e3cplain) ConYract for Deed Owner Agreement to Purchase �pplicants maest provfd� evi�'ence of interest in praperty at the �ime ofapplic��ion, and if you are not the awner of the propertg% yo� must efther pr�dide a letter of permission from �he owner giving consent to the filing of thfs applfeation ar the property owner mcast sign thfs applicaiion for i� to be accepted. Property De��ript➢ot�/Propos�l �� .r _ �� `� lJ �� ;� �:� �. E`�i U v � c'.' � �.+; �.w � i�! Address or General Location . � Lega{ Description Praperty identificatlon # (PIN #) # of Acres Currertt Zoning ,..� ,� � • ,,; r � � , _ . ? a � � � � 7 � 7 � � � � Comprehensive Pian AmencEment Rezoning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) PUb Amendment Conditianal/Tnterim Use Permit Var'sance Text Amendm�nt, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develop Review/Site Plan Wetland AEteration Permit Wetland Bu�fer Permit Other �z5o $500 $500 $250 $750 $350 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $32S R-1, i2-2 $150; all others �325 $150 $125 $125/acre; min $125 max $750 �-i, R-2 $ISO; all �thers $200 R-1, R-2 �25; al€ others $100 l ':� - :r `a `j 1'� L � �; Mounds Vi�w Planning Appl ��er�t lis� of P�op� c s S�3 � r,�. � C��-�; c� I�,� ; I ��.� ��'ope �l��i�i��ti�r� ? Abstract ? %rrens ��S�ripts�� f ��6��s�1(at�ach additfonal supporting documentation if neeessary} _ Page 2 ��ae IYo : App cants are Such fees a to paid in es+ nok limited co for consuit also be req Ir Eo cover cost associated ' this applicati amount. A portionofthe � of the ap atian is comp te I ACK WL D�E THA � nt �,.% . . . Name of App[icant (' Signature of Applica �..�. � le ll costs incurred assoclaeed wikh the filing, review and processing of this application. �o 'or upon rscelpt nf statement from the City of Mounds View. Fees may include but are i b the City, consultant planning servlces, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposlt may , n tic s, materiels and staff time spent 3n the review, research or preparation of materials p ica t shail be responsible for ail reasonable incurred �osts in excess af the initial depasit • pe ar eneumbered shali be re€unded to the appii�ant within 30 days after consideration ent park dedication fees is required with suhdivision applicatians. all f Yhe inf atlon fisted in the Planning Applicatlon and fuliy understand that X am � relate the processing oFthis appiication. PA jC� �� V� 7 Date , � - 1: �3 �J " .'.� ,�� '. � , � , , � � .., �.,�„ ' � � " { � . , ) � ,- � .. !� _. _ �,. ", -. � �. , � �z� y• � Name of Property Owner (typed/ i d) � �'1 �"C„ � �L ( � Signature of Property Owner �'�� Address of Owner ��-i �7 yZ� C-v. ,�� r� .�- �1 i�.:��t� J��,.� � n,; 5� E� Z Phone Num r of Owner � t �� - '` � U' � ` E-mail 7� Lt� �_t,��__(G o1�l� �� LU--, ��*�****�:**��:�*�:��*�****�*��*�*�*�*��x�x�*��***�**�:x**�***��x**�***�*****�*�:�:*��*��*��** FO� �FFI�E dlSE O�ILI' Date of Submittal -� R- Q� Date of Acceptance: 60-day L{mit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) .�/�� c�c-�� ' Assigned to: Fees Paid: Account # Application: �� • °� � o � � � � � Park Dedication: Deposits: Other: Tota 1: Check # Recei�t # � � C� � _ i ,�f.� �- � io�oz Per aur agreement with the City counsel af Moundsview, I am fozmally requesting ille following varience to 2402 County Road I. `�� 1. The expa.nszon of the parking lot 10 feet toward Greenfield Avenue to �dd an additional twa paiking spots. 2. The change in tlie garbage area to be moved to the back of the building where we will build a small fenced in area next to the aiY'conditioning units. The fence will be at least 5' ta11 but no taller than 6'S" ihat will keep the irash bins oui of site. �, - ;'i Zoning ap �f�� r�� ?`�, �� ?a�5 7�tr F��IJ � T�Ya�' f �4J� ., 7� q� �; 7�� 7�� 7r�?� � 1��ti;�.��3.� i�� 7��a� 1�G4, xii� �7f � 77�� 7��$ �79� , �� ;�� >+�t�� i ��9, a7�� f 3;g r �+ �+ 77��.;�� 7�9 �7� `��. i�'1 �;�� a � . . .� _ � 4 .q � . t'{ c 9 t 'a c y �. ,' [ . C`s t''� l � . i`� ';-- ` � �'�K�`�� 78�� {� � � �. - �: ��}�� ' ��1� ��1za i�� 7� �' �- �6i .c� ��2 �e�1r � l�� 3��' � ?�4�� Y — � ''ry�] , ��, ��,f��s ��+.� ; { �' }� � � �� / (,; � ._.I� : 'I. .-4 � �� i�J�J; �4i� 1 i�� i£s2 � � _ — . �'�� , :�� '�,��!=�� ?� � 7' �' _ . �.�--`—�'.� -` � . .. , . .�- ��'J,, r� �� ; � �:�� 55�7 78�r � � /"� �-=='' 't :-� F;f � � ��7 � ��r�` ��r�l f ,T-.�„ � ! �Pr � 4 ea t�1 °45 �3�� ," � r 77� 1.��,: �,,: �po � ° _-' � �� _ �� #.�, $S � F ; ��'� ��74 ° �I��C�� _ �� 's � °c, ra � ,�:,; �.�:3� �� •3� v .. � �7 �T 6� � �� l�"� � F '��'� • ' r�) rr, NS erD f€i �c�' � �.'� ;. ,�7F3.�5�� 0 ca �a �2 c�a � "� ..`' i� , �� ' ,�,� -- �j. 7j14� 1 '77�? � �7f �� , � ur � r`� ,��5''� � �� 6� �5� � t� , � - � �? � � � � `-, � � n,� �5�z 1 �r�� "�� , � �+"?'Ji ra �� --� �, t�a ��:e� .,.�� e �� 6�� f�� a�ti�� ',� ��', � • � �� t� 5�[�'? :�� - � , �5.�`��C � � , �� ;p� � °°�r J ! �`�2C� � � r. ��ti�� ' � �� ; ` • ;` s: .,. , . : •. ._:- . ` ` � - - - '' ' •, ' � . :> ' •., � : � �,,t. „�. � ,�� : �, ,. �,,,.. ,:; :,,;,; ��::, ; �;.__:;:�: ii i ��%j i � ��//� :: :111�1111�1 ii i ��,/!//j� :: :111111/Il 2402 Countv Road I Stephen Farreli f'roper�y Involved: Planning Case No V 2402 Couniy Road i VR03-004 2402 Caunfy Road 1 �' ,� Properties Within 35a' ;, ,, I: � I, ., '; ' !' � '' � � �' " � � l; : �: ! �,`<'.f. -1' � �. �' � ;:; . . �:�. � i . � : ' �. ,° � .. .. , . c. � �' . ", � i ' ;E:_, �� . ', ' f" :� � . . ,. a .. � . � . � �� . � ?. � � ' # �. �.-�: . .. � � - �' � i " � �. ` . ., a ; . � �. * �. . .. � �� • � -� � � � , y �. . ;. - .. _.�R � : �y �t.: WHEREAS, property owner Stephen Farrell has applied for a variance from fil�e front yard parking lot set�ack requirements to allow for a parking lot expansion to within two (2} feet of Greenfield Avenue right of way at 2402 Counfiy Road I; and, WHEREAS, 2402 Caun�y Road 1 is zoned B-3, Highway Busin�ss Commercial, and is legally described as follows: Lot 30, Block 3, Greenfield Plat 2, Excepf fhe Norfh 1 D Feef thereof; County of Ramsey, Sfate of Minnesota WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documer�is regarding this proposai: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Location Map 4. Site Plan 5. Staff Report WHEREP,S, a public hearing was held on Wednesday, July 2, 2003, regarding this variance request; and, WHEREAS, fihe approved front yard parking lot sefiback for ihis fot is ten {10) feet and the parking lofi is actually eleven (11) fe�fi from the Greenfield Avenue right of way; and, WHEREAS, Mr. Farrell wouid like to add two addifiional parking stalls io his lot to alleviate parking difficulties and fio limit the amount of on-street parking occurring on Greenfield Avenue, hawever such an expansion would require a reduction in the approved setback to two (2} feet; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in fihe Zoning Cod� is to give relief io property owners when the strict enforcement of fhe zoning code requirement� imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due fio practical difficulties brought about by unique or exiraordinary features of the physical property tha� are beyond fihe properfiy owne�'s control; and, Resoiution 732-03 Page 2 WFiEREAS, according to Secfion 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set o� criteria, of which all must be safiisfied, in order to grant a variance fo the Zoning Gode. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings o� fact refated fo this request: 1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances DO app(y to this property in tha# fihe developm�nt potentiai of the !ot is restricted by its size, the County's taking of �en feet of right of way alongside Coun#y Road 1 and the Cify's corner {ot setback requirements. 2. The fitera! infierpretations of the Code deprive the property owner of rights enjoyed by others in that the posting of No Parking signs has limi�ed Mr. Farrell's ability to ufiilize on-streei parking to serve his business' needs. 3. While the app(icant is wholly responsible fior the vo[ume of parking on his lot, Mr. Farrell did nofi design ihe building or site plan and anticipafed u�ilizing on�streefi parking �for overflow purposes. 4. Granting the variance would not cor�fer on fhe applicant any special privilege in thafi of�er commerciaily-zoned properties have been awarded reduced parking setbacks in unique situations 5. Approving a variance from the approved 10-foot parking !ot s�tba�ck io a 2-foot setback along Greenfieid Avenue [s the minimum variance to alleviate the fnardship in that two additional parking stails could be added to the lot 6. The variance would lVOT be materially defirimenfial to the purposes of the Zoning Code or to any property in the Business Commercial zoning district in that the variance would serve fo minimize the amount ofi on-street business parking associated with the businesses at 2402 County Road 1. 7. The reduced setback wouid NOT impair a supply of light or increase congestion, nor would it increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or diminish property values. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon its review of the documentation, tesfimony presented at the public hearing, and the identified findings of fact, does hereby approve the requesf for a va�-iance io allow a two-foot front yard parking lot setbaek along Greenfield Avenue, subject to the foilowing: 1. The applicant shall submit three capies of a detailed si#e plan showing fihe proposed parking lot expansion at #he time tFre buifdir►g permit is reques#ed. Adopted this 21 st day of �/iay, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson, Interim Ciiy Adminisfrator (S EA�.} '? o. o/ G-�y �� 4 r � `� `,, \ ' i�"_"' . . �' '`/ ' . /.' % . i/ � , ' ! I � i � � ---% � . � ��\ ' - -, \ \ 4 • M1 ,Y� 1 �" , ' � � /! . . }/ _�� !r i , ' f_.. ; /�� _ � L', � ; � 1 �\\\`'�\ \ ,\\ %,; ' r �.' \ ``� ` . . . �` i -� � ' � �� O /'' N ' o y� �� U � � O _ -::.�I '�� _� . / �1 � S � _ . i �: � �� r � ' �' ,� ``� ': 1 '?, i .'; ' I ,; I �! ' '�r �� i� i � ` � j -� \ � , t � i 1 : � I �! � ± / A o S �� i' � � � � U ` ' W � v $ � � J f9 0 � � �v o r _ p � 1 J u �' ` � � ° �' ' !!� O J �a O � z° �a ° o � F m � p R N I ar 1-°-1 ,� P-W� � CIa u � �' �,+. � �� oi 3 v x a ' a b _ � I R i � � � _ � � G � x "i T ' S � � � z � � � � _ ', -; , , P�tOCEEI➢Il�GS OF 'I'Ii� 1VIOLJNDS �EW PL�'I�II�G COI��/IISSY�I� CI'I'� OF IVi0�71�1)� �TIEi� �41VISEI' C'O�'FY,1l�I�I�E�O'�'.A, �iegular 1V�eetin� , .T��e 1�, 2d03 I@�Ioumds �i�w ;�id� Hall 2401 I�ibhway l0y 1V1��ITIIi� V YeWy �T 5�112 �. Cail to �rcler The meeting was cailed to order by Acting Chair Miller 2. Roll CaII Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Planning Location: 3. Coinmissioners S 0 and p.�n: Page 2 a. May 7, 2003 _ b. May 21,,2003 M�TION/SECOND: Zwirn/Song. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes far May 7, 2003 and May 21, 24�3 as Presented. Ayes —� Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4o C�tizen� l�eqaaests �ncl Co�affients ��n Items IVot mn tbe Agend� None. IVlounc�� View P�anni�ag Cominassi�n Ju�te 1�, 2003 Regul�r I�Iee�ir�g Page 2 5. Consi�erat�on o�° a Co�ditio�al IJs� Permii I�eque�f fo�° a� Over�S�zecl Gara�e �t 5220 �dgewooci 19rive. Community Developn�ent Director Ericson indicated that tlus is a request for an o garage at 5220 Edgewood Drive. He then indicated the dimensional requiz emerits have been met and Staff is recommending approval. Director Ericson indicated that the garage would be 1,148 square feet and that is v� allowed accessory structure limitations based on the bacl�yard"axea. He then indic� applicants have a demonstrated ��eed for the garage as they have a 35-foot RV that Code like to park in the garage ratlier than in the driveway. -. Director Ericson read the stipulations contained in the Resoluhon recommending appxoval. He then indicated that this item would be on the Council's agenda for public hearing on Monday, June 23, 2003. Acting Chair Miller asl�ed who would verify requirements. Director Ericson indicated fihaf Stafi acts upon c then Staff would determine what the situation is Commissioner Johnson asked for that required before. Coirunissioner � midpoint of the ated that power lines ic�ted that Staff chec �sked for an ex�Ianat unissioner Johnson c unissioner Zwirn as� Goettsch indicated tl llow power CUP , if there was one, procedure. requirement, as he had nat seen �sually run across a building lil{e in this that is the required spacing. ion of why the height of the garage is measured to the �urement would be. of the point where the trusses aare measured. igh the apex of the roof of the liouse is. the heighi of the garage and house are almost the same. if the new configuration of the garage would allow room to pull into _ �, Goettsch indicated that there is room io puil the vehacles inta the garage. Connnnissioner Zwirn asked if the concreie slab would be removed. Mr. Goettsch indicaied that he would be adding on to the exzsting concrete slab. � i '; 'J l�Ioa��ds Vie� P�annin� CoYnr�i�s�on lte�ular IVleetie�g .�u�� , Zoa� Page 3 MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 731-03, a Resolution Recommending Appraval of a Conditional Use Permi� Request for an Over-Sized Garage at 5220 Edgewood Drzve. Director Ericson indicaied thafi this matter has been set for public hearing this Monday, June 23, 2003 in an attempt to expedite this matter. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motiori carried. 6. 1Vexg Planning Co�e�is�iora I�Ieet�n�: July 2, 7. 1�d�our��ent to .P��en�ia Session ) adj ourned 1�I0 S � P� I�IG CO �SIOI� Ju(y 1�, 2003 -- 7:00 P.l1�. l�EGULAR M�ETING AGENDA l. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: 3une 18, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda : :. . �.__ . , , ; ,: �, .�� , �:.� • , .: , .':�- r- 5. Plau�i�� Case �03-005 Consideration of Resolution No. 733-03 Appraving a Variance io Allow a Reduced Front Yard Setback to Construct an Addition Location: 2229 County Road H2 Applicant: Joan Bosard 6. Platt�si�g Case Il�03-002 Consideration of Resolution No.734-03 Reconunending Approval of a Minor Subdivision Location: 8430 Knollwood Drive Applicant; George R. Grone 7. Special Plannin� Case 5P-114-03 Discuss proposed inodifications ta Proposed Ordinance i 11, an Ordinance Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops j_. � � : � �.. ; .. �, _ � . � * 4... ,!:" ,.' , i, ' �. � .. ' , 1 1 ' •, ; . ' . : •; , R, 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: August 6, 2003 9. Adjouznment to Agenda Session . �. � 1. Review Minutes: July 2, 2003 2. Staff Reports 3. Chaiiperson and Plann7ng Co�n�nissioners' Reports N:\Data\GroupslComdev�Planning Commissian�PC Agendas�2003\07-] 6-03 PC Agenda.doc `:! j 3 ; ,<� 1tei�i P�o: 5 �e�fiir�g ��t�: Julv 16, 2003 Type o� �ea�er�e��: Public Hear�nq �`�,� I �� , � � '�.� �. ��; Mounds View Plar�ning Gommission �r��: James Ericson, Interim Ci#y P,dministrator Itern ii�le/Se�bj�ct: Public Hearing and Consideratio� of a Variance to AIlow a Reduced Front Yard Setback for a Buildi�g Addition 2229 County Road H2. .;..;. . : Joan Bosard, property ovuner of 2229 �ounty �oad 1�2, has requested a variance to constrtacfi ar� expansion to her i�ome which would be six feet closer t� �i�e stree� thar� the existing building. All of the homes fronting County Road H2 �n this block are se� back the same disfance�-approximaieCy 75 �ieet fror� the c�rb or appraximately 50 feet from the properky iirte. � . Sefiback requirements are addre�sed in Section i 10�.01 of the �onit�g Gode. �ach zoning disfrict is listed wiih fihe correspondirtg front, side and rear setbacks. In ar� R-1, Singfe Family Resideniia{ district, the �ypical �etbacks are as �oliows: Front, 3� #eet; Side, 10 feet; and Rear, 30 feet. It is #ootr�oted in the Code that �heds and garages, attached or detached, can have side and rear setbac{cs of 5 feet. (No accessory buiiding can be located in a front yard unless ii is attached to fhe principal structure, and ever� �hen th� minimum set back is thirty feefi.) The front yard setback is furfher faotnoted to address the issue of "prevaiii�g setbacks", articulated as follows: "Where principa! buildings in exisience on lofs wifhin the same block on the same side of ihe sfreet have front yard setbacks �Pifferent from fhose required, fhe minimum fronf yard setback for any r�ew principa! buildings shal! be the minimr�m froraf yard setback in existence for any one lot. ln no case shal! fhe front yard sefback be less than fhirty feef (30}." The home at 2229 Couniy Road Fi2 is set back approximately 50 feet from the fron� properky line, as are all the oiher homes on this block, which means �he preva�iling setback is 50 feet. No home or part thereof shall encroach infio the prevaiii�g setback except by v�riance. . . . For a variar�ce to be approved, the applicant need� to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficuf�y associated wifh the properiy fihat makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictiv�. Minn�sota sfat�tes require tha# ihe governi�g body (th� Planning Commissior�, in this c�se) review a set of specified cri�eria for each appficatior� and make its decision in accordar�ce with thESe criteria. Tf�ese criteria are set forfh in Section 1125.02, __ �ubdi�isio� 2, of t�e City Code. i�te Code clea�rly sta�es tha� a hardship exis#s when a!! of ihe crit�ria ar� rr��t. The criteria are as fallow�: Setback Variance Report 2229 Cou��ty Road H2 July 16, 2003 Page 2 a. Exceptionai or exiraordin�ry circ�m�tances apply to the proper�y which do t�o� apply generally to oiher properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from 10# size or shap�, #opography or other �ircumsta�ces over which fhe or�vners of the properiy since the effective date hereaf �ave had no cor�trol. ihe property �s zoned R-1 and fhe property owner is seeking a building permif io expand the �rsf level of fhe home by �bouf 30Q square feet and consfrucf an upper leve! expansiorr of aboui 9,100 square feef. The lof is not irregularly shaped and ai 23g 52O square feei is more than double ihe size of a standard lot. Other than the deep froni setback, ihere is nothing extraardinary abocaf this property. b. T.he literal interpre#ation of fhe provisior�s of this Tifle wou9d deprive the applicant o� righfis commonly enjoyed by other propertie� in the same disfiric# ttnder fhe terrras of this Titie. INhile fhe litera! in�erpreiafion of fhe provisions of fhe Zoning Code would nof d�prive fhe applicant of rights enjoyed by other properfies in fhe same zone, because fhe horrae (and a!! ofhers ort the block) is ssf b�ck where ii is, expansion and reinvesfinenf is perh�ps moYe dif�icr�lf. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do �ot result from ihe actions of the applicant. The special conditions do nof resulf from ihe acfions of the applicanf. d. That granting the variance requested wouic4 not confer on the applican� any special privilege that is denied by this Title fio owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the sarne district. Granting the variance would nof confer upon fhe properfy owner a special privilege in fhaf every p�operfy owner has the right fo apply for a variance to improve the funciion and livabrlity of their home. Many improvements benef�� fhe neighborhaod in a broad sense in fhat �he reinvesfinenf offen iriggers similar rein�estment in adjaceni properiies and af fhe rrlinirnum moiivates properiy owners fo take a greater sense of pride in properfy ouvnership. e. That th� variance requested is the rninimum variance which v�ould alleviate the hardship. Economic condifions alone shall not be considered � hardship. 7°he property owner as�erts in her lef�er dated June 19, 2003 ihat the six foo� expansion i�fo fhe fronf sefback is the rrrinimum variance to alleviafe the hardship. ,4nyfhing less �han six feef would be impracfica! and would nof add enough space fo the Iiving room to jusfify ihe expense. Any�hing more fhan a six foo� expansion, while perhap� desired, would be in excess of fhe minimum space needed by i�s. �osard. Setback Variai�ce Repo�-t 2229 County Road {-12 July 16, 2003 I'age 3 f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to �khe pu�rpase of this Title or to ofher property i� fhe same zone. Grartfing a variance fo allow the expansion to encroach six feef into fhe fr°onf sefback would not be maferially defrimenfa! to the purpose and ir�fent of the zoning code given the large fronf set�ack. There have been no objecfions raised up fo fhis point and the six-foof encroachmenf would not be noticeable from fhe sfreef and would not appear inconsisfenf wifh fhe a�'joining homes. g. The praposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of fight and air to adjacent property or substantially increa�e the congestion of 4he public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or subsfantiafly diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed variance would not result in any of the abave-ci�ed adverse effects. � Ail of �he criteria, as indicated above, need to be satisfied to justify the granting fhe variance. !n addi#ion to S�aff's reviev� of the criteria, I1�s. �osard has provided #he Planning Gommission with a defiailed letter addressing the hardship criteria along with a set of building plans that would be submiited if the variance were approved. .; . . .. . ,� � After holding the pubiic hearing and taking te�timony frorn sia�f, the property owner and af€ected neighbors, the Commission can take one o# �he foliowing actions related to the reques#: 1, Approve ihe variance as requested. Resolution 733-03 is attached for the Commission's approval if that is the chosen course of action. 2. Deny the requested variance. To movE forward with this option, the Commission should move io direct staff to draft a r�solution o�f denial with findings of facfi appropriate to support the denial. 3. Table the request. If add�tional information is needed before a decision can be rendered or if more disct�ssior� is needed, the Commission can simply move to tabEe �he requ�sfi until stach informagion has been provided. �ecause of �he 60-day rule, fihe Commission would n�ed to act upon ihe request as soon as reasonably possibie however to avoid an inadvertent approval. �J� James Ericson Interim Cifiy Clerk/Admir�isfraior �a� o� ��7 -� : n "�,� �� ,1��I P°d'rers @ Partn�rS�`�@S COMMUNIIY DEVELOPMEI�T DEPARTMEIVT � •: � � � � � Z4O1 County Road i0, Mounds View, NEN 55112 {763)717-4020 Fax (651) 765-1660 Please Type or Print Information - Complete Both Sides of This Form Appl�car�� Ir�fo�°matio� Name of Applicant �J D �<�i %r� S ��''c� __ Telephone ��.-�' �.� ° � 7Z( Address � - Z % .�%�' �� /,-f--z �L°,�.f` � Lc.}� � fs `I --�. �?l �'] Z� �,�Ji�7.�� r°c�r ►d I'd2z�, S ��l r '� �-t7181�: �,�i �',� Y' r-( �' Gr [� � • C_'_c+�r� / �t�t�res� [� Prope (check appropriate box) � Owner of Property ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager 0 Other (explain) � Contract for Deed Owner � Agreement to Purehase ••.. ,.�. ,- .- - . ,, :..- - . _;, ,. , .: �,.�f - ,. - ,. - - ; `� � R� � .R�. _ � , - Fr . �'.." - - ` .X k'�- - ; , �� , . � ..__„ �. _ . . . ,:.< - . , : .. - . . ._ :. . - -- �� .. �, , r � � �� _ '�; � i - - F; .� _: i � �. � .-! r " � i �:�,= i, ,- �;�: i . � i I '�1 .f"� R� 1' " ".l � �� /�, Propesty �escription/Propos�l Address or General Location Legaf Description Property Identification # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning �. �� - . �= :. ,. .� � . : �: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ is ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ % �`rr��r�? s ��r � �-u — Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezaning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Pianned Unit Deve{opment (PUD} PUD Amendment Conditionaf/Tnterim Use Permit Variance Text Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develop Review/Site Plan Wetfand Aiteration Permit Wetiland Buffier Permit Other $250 $500 �500 $250 �750 $350 R-1, R-2 $i50; all others $3Z5 R-1, R-2-$15�; all others $325 �iso $125 $125/acre; min $1Z5 max $750 R-i, R-2 $150; all others $Z(3� R-1, R-Z $Z5; all others �100 , � Mounds View Pfanning Applica��un ,: � Page 2 �� . �� : � Prope�°ty Cl�s�ifECa#�on ❑ Abstrac� � Torr�ns (�escri�tson of Propos�f (attach additionaf supporting documentation if necessary) _ ,�J �� /� /�,�� /� __�-�-- �-i ._ _ � ,,,_ _ Please Noice; Applicants are responsibte for alI costs incurred assotlated with the filing, review and processing of this application. Suth fees are to be pa(d In escrow up front or upon receipt af statement from the City of Mounds View. Fees may include but are not limited to costs for consultants retained by the City, consultant pianning services, attorney, and engineer fees, A deposit may also be rec�uired to cover costs of public notices, mater(als and statf time spent in the review, research ar preparation of materials associated with this applieation. The applicant shall be responsibfe for alI reasanable ineurred costs in excess of the inifial deposit amount. Any por�ion of the deposit not spent ar eneumbered shall be refunded to the appiieant within 30 days at�er consideration of the application is completed. Peyrnent of park dedication fees is required with subdivislon applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE 7HAT i have read ail of the Infarmation listed in the Planning Application and ful]y understand that I am responsibfe for�lf-epsts incurred by the Clty re4ated to the proeessing of this applicatian. Applicant � �—/ %`°a'� Date � .� : �. ' f. : .. , , i, >- � . � : ��-. .._ �- � : - ; t ; i+ . , � . =R ' " �: " ° � � ': �, � , � . �. ; . : a ��,� l �,: i', � •° � Name of App Signature of Name of Property Owner (typed/printed) Signature of ProperLy Owner Address af Owner Phone Number af Own�r _ 7� �3 —� 7� 5-_/.7� �. j E-maif r�h 6 S r`�,,�-c-� C�' _� l� i, �� ******�*�*�x�***�x**�*�*��x*�**�**��*�x****��*��:****��x��:*��x�*�*�***��******�*�:*�**�***�* Ft�R O�FTCE �BSE OIVLY � uate of Submitta! i� - f�� 0 3_ Date of Aeceptance: ��' ` o 60-day Limi� 120-day iimit: �lanning Case No(s) 1('&2� � m c� �� Assigned to: Fees Paid: Aeeount # Check # f Re eipt App(ication: 1 Sd� a� � S � ��Do° �3 S f 1� d park Dedication: Deposits: Other: TotaL• i oioz c� JOAN BOSARD 2229 County Road H-2 West • Mounds View, MN 55112-4745 Phone: 763-785-1721 � E-maii: jbosasd@aol.com June 19, 2403 City of Mounds �evu Community Developm�nfi �epartment 2�401 Hig�way 10 il�o�ndsVierrv, MN 55112�i499 Re: Appli�atior� for V�riance—Single Famify Resid�nce 2229 County Road H2-West Le�al description: Larr�be�t's�ddition E 40 Mounds View, lV1N 55912-4546 FT of Lof 16 arrd �X � 85 Fi Lof ? 7 B!k � The attacf�ed applicati�n f�r varia�ce is submitted as pari of an applic�#ior� for a building p�rmit for the above-eniitled property. Th� overali goa! is to add fhe square footag@ necess�ry to increase the iivabiEity o# this dwelling to the parameters nec�ssary in this d�y and age for a single family residence vuithnuf destroying fhe integrity of �he originaf ho�se. I believe � vari�nce shouid be granted ta exfend th� front of the house 6' forward increasing ihe siz� of fhe iiving room from an �rea measuring 11fi x 13 �/ ft to 17 ft x 13 '/z f�, a size proportionate to the rem�inder of the rooms. The depth of the froni yard presently is 75 ft to the curb and therefore a 6 ff exfension (18 ft i� width—blue area on the plat dr�wing) infio that area wouEd hardly be nc�ticeable, if at alf, fQ p�ssers by. Reviewing fihe seven circumstanc�s on the Variance [n#ormation Sheet, items (1) fh�ough (4) are difficult to understand but seem to p�se no speci�l righ�, privileg� or de�riment to me as properiy owner different from �ny ofih�r proper#y owner. ltem {5)-- the 6 ft extension i� the minimum I could do when co�s9dering the front entryway, efc, and my ine�ntive was eost saving. Ifem (6)—the variance �Ilo�nrs for a more pleasing exterior farad�, noi to menti�n adequate interior space with�uf which the room wou{d remain cramped with its presenf fimiied u�age. (It�m i) fhe variance would allow another wi�dow on the east side af this s�uth-facing strucfure and ihe neighbars on either side of ine ar� hoping you grant this variance because they like the overall iooks og the plan. Your consideration is greatfy appreciated. If you need any addifional inf�rmafion, !�n be reached at the telephone numbers iisted belov� or e-mail. Thank yo�a very rt�ueh. Horr��: 763-7�5�1721 (voice mail) Vlrori�: 651-632-5i26 (9-5:00} �-mai1: ibos�rdCdi_aof.com � �. Joan �osa �, / �. ��j,� ��U' � �nclosur�: $159.00 ZOnLr�g M�p 543� 54�5 5414 ;`��..�;.i+� �'n � �' � r° ! 5413 -.;� (..�"'; �., .._ _+-_�_� �_1..�- ; 5401 _�..., . _i_�__......r. � ° r� s � � ev : ,— . p � c� � . ._.., , t• ca . ,n �s°i w { r� � cv r'3 , c" . i ,...-,:_..� _-4 t� f C� '� i Cy '� C� �, .__. _ r, !. �.. i r:- r+ r- : o� r �40� � 54C}� ��06 � rv� �a f tv ; ey ; cv ; r+ ;��05 rt ; cv ? cv : cv_! e�r i,c� I cv S�hf �RI�/E � N:cfl�r� c�t � a i a � ; i �.�i33 a�.�i+ �� S�A': P� tJfl�� 2 C� E Kp�7� i�' ��± �'`° ��q� �� i°� 5.3�2)...53.9 4 �J392i '�J.391 ' � •V ; � i `Y� � ! +,> k � � �V I � � � � � � � �V � P'° - -:_�_ ..__..._. ��-.�.. `' 538 C> ��. cv � cv i r� � c� i c� i c� � ra ; ra ��`d ;`°� �� s� 53�f 1��8 5386; �38 : �y+� UT ' ; � � I i � � ' -- .w,.�._, _.._... _.�..__..,.�:.�....,_ �d� 7 � i , i ; � I � I + E � �----..� �i �. { - �i � ! i � � ; � l : { �J��? �� i ��... ; # � � � i i i J:?�% - . ..�.i,...__.,.,_, .,- -.�,.. ..... G ��'i � ��. ._ %_.�. _. � _.1..._�_ � _l� . ��.... .,: � - . - --c.---�.---- 5�72} .�3i �3i2'; �371 ' ,�367 � � .:�... _f i .�_ ; ` � .. � i ^ t,. . ; � � f 5364;..�35 536� ` 536 . i � z : � � `- 53�6 � t ! � � � ; ��357 __.._._k�_.___ _,. _t...._..._. 5359 ...-��J� �3�5 5337 _ 5331 ^532.� 5�9 7 St 53Qi ' ��o� � �.�nr � �� ; ? ? ' % 1 i � � , 53�8� 535 �35�� 535 tt! �� F ►?'t1� ; v� � i �ii i � : � : pr} � �g_� -��,..., _. _... . ._.___,._� _ us ;�° ;� E r� cv � � r, v<, o ��, : ao 5�5�; 5�51 5352$ 535 CV t(y ; ty ° �� i Cy t t4 � r i r� _._...., �..--..�_ ,.,... __ ._ ..._..: cv � cv r��►1,� ,��° ! cv �' cv E cv I�� g3�41 5�� 5��4 � 53�- AVL� � ...._ .�..�,.._ _.__.t�...�_. � L�th�i B ��f" � r � `` "' ` c•� s cv i rv i 73�� Pf'�1 �i N i� ��} , � �� i � ,�.....�i.,_.. � � I { ,^,,. s � ; E � >�� r; ; � ` i � „� : � : : , If7 ' P� �� j r^ i h7 i 1C1 I�7 i i�"! ` �l? ? C+ i� i ; P1 t CO ? �17 1"�' ; e$` ? N7 tv: cV� +Ni Njed!.N; c*1� N [�1�Ni 1N� N�cViN!N�t�1 e��a I N�� i o!�� c.R �� 533g, �a33 533�;_ 533 . �.�_..__. ....� �, tv; ��cv c�'N. . � � � �, ; � � � ? �, � � . � � �3�p� �32 ��o. ��a � N � � ` � -,., ....... ........• -��--•-� ---�- -- � 5324; 532 � 5�2� i �32 � ; ; �� 3��...��,� � ��t.s;...�� . _ � �,. � . � .�r :�,._�. 53�� 30 U 5308 � 530 , � - -,�- : ; �� a, s�oo� �� s��o� ��s 1 1� 11} s� I,�r,--~6[7 'rJ2�$;,rJ�� : J�� h'r ° .h 1 {fl � � 1 Cl7 .. . ,. . .:.:. -.:_` -__.•._ j � IV ;,r t.-- i c— • , cv� N; �r !�t : N 52a8� ��$. 52�83 528 o p � a � � f � � � �l5 � � � � � } I � �°�. � � . �__� _.._ .. .. ..� ..,. _- -- - Mounds View ��siness ParCc `� I � � � . , �ODA,LE �u� ��r�t+ ' o i 52Q0 � � � � � b2�� C� ,:.�__._,.. 5��0 �� 1.`� ,�'P� �, �� 0 0 ea i a � ' � � � � � .e.1 O � � 53s r� a32� � ��z. � 531 � � 5:�.t„ � 53� 5�0 � 530 V7 ��o � ��s� ��y �� - �J � 52d1 _.._----_._ �-..._..s_ ...,..,_...,.............._,.., ......., � i !_— _ , ---.. __ __-.,.. ..': - _. :�� _ _.., � • I .� i � �� : .: �I �i J 0 - -'::`;>`j � 1 / p ± / p � / �- �y� 2y �o,�y7� �� ti�-L /dlce'f—� � !/ /OL�� Viev�. M��l d'Sl�L—�7S�S �'i�:/..tGsC �2 c�CrC'- •1 �l�t BaY� �%s99�3 �. � 6 ��asrl wTd- �a�ic�lts�d-� �1� 8 ¢,e� �'i`�ien/�°xq a� r (�C�ll� cR {++// sec�[ {4oer �ea �S° � 19TJPii , a� /�c;L dfr �oW,54ms: g��1ro�- ZB s S�F• Ir � d-i � � d //OO 3'•� �yaLf .�—� �Qipi � l,��y.a r�. `/`o?; 6'S/°�3z-57•30 %�:' �%6u�"%6$�' /72/ . ,, , � „ r � � � , . �� • ' < :• � '_: / „ .: w ,_�!' I� _ �ii ,:� i : � ` . -l.J i i i ■■ �� I �� i�.�� :;�'�. �� } � r 11, / �� Joan Bdsard Properfy fnvolved: 2229 Coun�y Ro�d H2 Plan�ing Case No. VR03-005 2229 County Road H2 �� ,',':; Prope�-ties W ithin 350' } �'�$��: �a. C��4i� OG� f�Q��D� M�C�� - �_��:�a�°`� o ��f��[�� QC�(��Q��fl� �ficanP to completm rrumb�r�d sp�ces or�ly� , SRE ADDRES5 � owPtER -- �//� l' corar�acroa v�/ �� U6E O� B!7(LDtNm / D�SCRiB ° QRK _ / oy � � � / AAAiLAD�RE5 �Sc'f,�c� ,S/� �a�ao��ss Sc�`�� san. aD�RESs ' 1��.5'/ 4��'� . w A r �^ / 2�i a/ -�i� � �; P! �� . z�� r�� zi� �taor�g P'NDNE P�so�aE VALU�4TID[d OF 1NOf�IC �`/�c� O�_ v� PtOTIC� � T�°' > u� co„� tti'v� /C� °-�' � jd! /� � �s � 0 'ikiE F'ERMii e6COh1E3 1d69fJ. 6+fdD VOID !F WORK �A Ct3NSTRU�YIOM Stae d �y �Q � > �1Tli01�lZED t5 Nd7 �OMAREPIC�D WlTH1N 420 D,�YS. OR i� COtoSTi�UCilOh6 �9- � /� � � � � -`oA WORK IS SUSPEPIDED 4A A&4NDOPIEp FG�Y A PERIOD OF t20 DAYS AY Roisf� so. Ft OFF STREE'F PARKlPdG 5PAGES AtdYTiAAE A�'ER WORK IS COMMENGER. Na o� I FiEREBY CERTIFY TH0.T 1 HAVE R�AD AfdD EXAMiN�D 7HIS ��y,9un�� f � S�(/��.a APPUCI4TION AFdD KfdOW TFtE 5dME i0 BE TRt1E AND �ORREC� ALL � AROVISfONS �F LAWS AND OFtDlNANCES GOVERNING TH15 iYPE OF WORK �� _[ f�� B� �` r��y VJIL! BE C�MP1.]Ep WITH WH6THEFi SPECIFIED HEREIPI DR NaT , THE peecripi� '7� � GRANYING OF A P�RM1T DOES �lOT PRESIJME i0 G[VE aUThlpRITY i0 �' .' �,!G r% VIOLATE OR CAtVGEt YHE PROVISlQhlS OF AWY �THEFl STATfi OR LOCAL IAW �,Approvele Rapuired � REGUI� G COt�[STRUCTION OR THE PfRFQRidtP+NCE O€ C�NSiRUC710N 2DH11dO ,i /� � � � =_� _ � —� �000 Pww %'f G v SI OF CO CTOR Oi; AUiHQRIZED AGENT (pAT�3 W�� f�G _ � ` � DRAIHAGE REPORi SIG � E OF OWhtE 9WNER BUiLDER? ��A�� OTHER (S�c�y) !l��ORiAN7 T� �F�LICA�B°T ��LEAS� f?,E�D �•.s�M�srs o v� Na�,�•.��a�:�,�� SP�CIAL CDNDI710N5 S�PARATE PERMITS REQU1f;E� FOR: �AL'UPv9�lP�G # �idEdCa, VEAfTIIAikI�C OFCAERCOA1DIii0AlIP3C# - .��c��Y ��ac�ar ELECi�lCAL # " BLACKiOPP1NG # S�I��R #� � WATER � ' CONTaACTSRS LiCENSE e _.v SYdYE J NOTREBGIRED C YES T�i� i� �i� e��Lfi��1i�� f-� pERlAfTFEE � TF�{� p��SMIT WiLL �E I�SUE� .�FTEFa PLAN CHECEC FEE su�^wawoe REV[�WW�4L QF TFi� APPLECATipPd. �u,,,, rN.aPE �1�� A 2��H0�1� NO�I�Em �� Q� �ecerpr e � yV � � N� m n� 0 f/� I CS/�e�.� � I ��Yea ❑ No u,� � � ww R��u.d nrPeaavEC Fon iswu� �v � �! � '" `� ' �' �� . � ; € � , ,< �; _ . i . ?. �' , !; `. l .'. ;' � ' �; ;, � .z;, , , : - �; . • ::, '� :.' � �� s r : �;- �; . ' ' ':_ �'. `, ' '� �_ . , � ` 1 ` �; �;. ti . . _ �, :�: .� ; '� : '� � � �: " . .. . i. . � � ': _ �ti � _ _ . ] .i, �'. �, k,.., , - t. ' �; �.- �i . . �� .. ' � �.� ..� �VH��EAS, the applicant, Joan Bosard, has applied for a variance from the rriini�num front yard buifdir�g set�ack for ��ingie��amily dwelfing at 2229 Couniy Road W2; and, V�H�REAS, Seciior� 1104.02 of th� fViounds View Zonir�g Cod� indicafies that ihe minimurn front setback for a principal buildir�g i� 30 feefi �r�les� the prevailing setback for existing structures exceeds 30 feet, in vuhich case the p�°evaiting se� ba�k IS the minimum setback; and, WH�REAS, Ms. �osard i� requesiing to ex}aand her horr�e by 300 square feet on the first �{oor and 1,100 squ�re feet on t�e t�pper story wifh a� additiore that encroaches �ix feef into the �ront seiback; and, WHER�A�, fihe applicar�t has applied for a building permit for �he expansion; and, WHEREAS, according to Section � 125.02, S�abdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Cammission is to review a siandard set of criteria, of which afl rnust be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the �oning Code. �lOV�, THERE�OR�, �� 7" RESOLVED, the Ma��ds View Pianning Gommission makes the foilowing finding of facts related io this request: 1. The exceptional or extraordir�ary cor�ditions relating to the variance request is ihat the homes on this block are sefi back in excess o� 50 feet from the front property lir�e. 2. The Iiieral interpretation of the Zoning Code would restric# the property owner'� ability to expand and impre�ve upon the layout and furactionalifiy of the home. 3. ihe app[icanfi has not caused tk�e condition which prompied the variar�ce reques�. 4. �rar�ting the variar7ce �vould not confer upon the applic�nt a special privilege. 5. The variance req�ested is the minimurt� variance vvhich would alleviate ihe hardship. 6. ihe vari�nce vvould nnfi be m�iferially de�rirt�te�tal to t�e purpose o� this Title or io o�f�er p�rspeety ir� the sarne zo�e. 7. The variance would nofi impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substa�tially incr�ase ihe congestion of the public streeis or ir�crease the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substaniially dir�tir�ish or impair proper�y val�es within the neighbarhood. �JOW, THE�EF��, �E [T FL�RTHE� ��S�L!/�D ti�at fhe Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby approve ihe varianc� requested for a 44-foot �roni yard building sefiback to ailow far° a building expansion at 2229 Couniy Road H2. Adopted this 16th day of J�ly 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ,�7°i�si: James Ericsor�, Ir�terim City Adminis#rator (SEAL) '� I�em �lo: fi lVieeting Da�e: Julv 16, 2003 Typ� of �usiness: Business � :I .. . I ' ' " + �. ic�o Mounds View Pianning Comrnission Frorr�: James Ericson, Aciing City Adminisfrator ltern Tafiie/Subj�c�o Consideration of a il�inor Subdivision of 8430 Knollwood Drive; Planning Case M103-002 . .. : . G�orge and Patricia Gro��e, property owners of the 1.28-acre lot located at 8430 Groveland Road, have requested a minor subdivision of their property. The subdivision wou[d creafie one large lof immedia�ely souih of fheir exisfiing home. A minor subdivision is a division ofi land less #han.tv�o acres in area in which only one additional lot is created. The lot is zaned R-1, Single Family residenfial and the minimum iot siz� is 71,000. The Comprehensive Plan designafes this area for low density residential. The proper�y owners have submitted an outdated Register�d Land Survey (RLS} which had been created for an earlier subdivision that never took place. The RLS is provided to the Pfanning Commission for reference purposes only---a new RLS or Cerkificate of Survey wili need to be provided to approve fhe subdivision. a ., The Grone property is 55,700 square feet, or, 1.28 acres. There is 276.25 f�et of frontage on Knollwood Drive and the !ot could pot�ntiafly be split into three lots. The proposed subdivision however would create only one large fot south of the Grone's home. The new fof would be 37,�25 square feet, leaving 38,575 square feet for fihe improved lot. The area south of fihe Grone's home is nat maintained and is covered with dense growth and mature trees. The proposed lot wo�fd satisfy afl minimum zoning requirements for a single-famiiy residential lot. Once the RLS or Certificate of Survey is received, staff wiif forward copies to the engineering technician, public works director and City Attorney for their review. The City Attorney wil( afso need �o do a title commitment to ensure al! parties having an interest in the property are represenfed on �he subdivision documents. Park Dedication Requirements. Every subdivision of land is subject to park dedication requirements. Because the subdivision is less than 2 acres in area, fihe fiee is 5% of the iand's markefi value, less fhe value of ihe land where the house sits. Rafher than require an appraisal for every subdivision, staff typically uses the assessment vafuations available through Ramsey Gounty. Unfor�unatefy, Staffwas unable to verify fihrough the Ramsey County Assessment Office what the fand value is for the whoie parcei. The value, once known, will be divided by the total number of square feefi to arrive at a per�squar�wfoot value which would then be multiplEed by 3i,125. Staff anticipates a value in excess of $50,000 which wo�ld firanslate into a park dedication fee of at least �2,500. ___:' This fee would need to be paid prior to fhe Ci�y s#amping fihe new deeds for recordation. • �:. R Sfaff recommends that the Commission approve resolution 734-03, a resolu�ion recommending appraval of a minor subdivision of 8430 Knollwood Drive , with stipulations �� .��L� James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Adminisfraior A##achments: 1. Plant�ing Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Lacation Map 4. Proposed Subdivision Map 5. Unrecorded RLS 6. Resofution 734-03 , �:>` _::; -, <::1 _::: { ; �J�� 11 li V � �f � �� -o � (i(��'� mA f°�r@rs o Partners�`�QS COMMUNiFY DEVELOPM�Ni DEPARTM�NT r . � . r. � • 24Q1 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (7�3) 717p40�.0 Fax (65f) 765--1660 Please Type or Print Information - Gompfete Both 5ides of This Form Applfca�t Tr�forma�a�n Name of Applicant a Telephane��s� °�� Address 7� �� d� o�i r a r� �� „ �,1 t1 � Fax . � � �o� s � %� r.�: /�� .�1:� Eamail: Zr�tere�t a� Prope (check appropriate box) awner of Property � Contraet for Deed Owner ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager ❑ Agr�ement to Purchase ❑ Other (explain) `.. i[ Y - - " I I: l ' _ " .1 ' _ / . " f' ...��, � . - ": .i' , i S=: /' �� t� '.,,*, '! " ,.' _', f ` /' .I..l'o ". I' _ l::.I 1 ": _ ' ' 1 � �;,=. :.,-�. , '..,,, _ ._ . � . .: � � � 1 " , . �� -'.' , ' . . � .. :I� ,.�; + ', : I _ �' � ' / , ' I /" _ . - _ � ' .t. . ,, �, . . ,, I f ► ;.. - �, ; � � I�'I'- 1- ' • � • i "' '�.' �� Prope �escr�ption/Propc�sa� Address or Genera! Loeation Legal Descriptian �� GG �-�l�,c�� Property Identification # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning ��,� � -� .�=� ,. ,., �, � , � � ■ �y,, �-A ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ � .� � � � r Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezoning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Deveiopment (PUD) PUD Amendment Conditional/Interim Use Permit Variance Text Amendm�nt, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develap Review/Site Plar� Wetland Alteration Permit Weiland Buffer Permit Oiher �25� $500 2�� 7 $35� fZ-1, R-2 15a• all others $32.5 R-1, R-2 ��50; all others $325 $15Q $125 $125/ac�e; min $125 max $750 R-1, R-2 $150; a!I others $200 R-1, R-2 $2S; all others $100 ��-- l��,�� Mounds View Planning ,4p�lic�tion � � .�- � Page 2 �r�pe�j �t��s�c�tac�r� ❑ Abstraet � Torrer�s D��criptiors o� Propos�l (atiach additional suppo�ting documentation if necessary) 9�r x;� . � . � ,�' ��°�'" �.�iG�°' . 9L-1 f � -�°�'- � Please kVote: Applicants are responsible tor all costs incurred assotiated with Yhe filing, review and processing of this appiieation. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon receipt of statement from the City of Mounds �ew. Fees may include but are not timited to costs for consultants retained by the City, tonsultant planning services, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposit may aiso be required ta caver costs of pubfic natices, materials and staff time spent in the review, research or preparation of materials associated with this appf ication. The appEicant sha11 be responsible for al! reasonable incurred costs in excess of the initial depasit amaunt. Any portion o€ the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the applieant within 3D days after wnsideration of the applieation is completed. Paymeng of park dedicatian fees Is required with subdivision applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I have read atl of the informatian fisted in the Planning Applieakion and fuily understand that I arn responsible for afl costs incurred by e City related to the processing of Yhfs application. � � � �,�r �, �. � � Applicant � Date � '� , ; • � i. � ' � i : i, #i � * - ; - �� : � ��. � � � r . ; ,.. . . � � ., _ ,., l ; ' �: : . .�. ;t� K . . Y . �. , :` � . . , 1Vame of Appficant Signature of Applic� Name of Property Owner (typed/print�d) �1.v,2�� , _ ,f � �-� �J�� Signature of Pr�pe Address of Qwner Phone Number of i I� *�*��*=x*�m�x�***��*��*��:�*x�*��*�x��,��?��*��**�x**�zm*��**:��*x��*x��*�***�**��*x:*� �� ' � FOR OFFICE 6�SE O�LY �:. . , ' n: �� c �� . ' �ate of Subrnitta! 7-�- 0 3 Date of Aeceptanee: 60-day Limit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s} +^� � 0 3- o o a Assigned to: �� Fees paid: Account # Cheek # R�cei t#� Applicatian: �-s � • °° Q p � Park Dedication: Depasits: Other: TotaE: � oioz �� Z�n�ng a� �� .� — -- � � --��-�- -.--_ �� ro _,. � � - ^ , , . _ ��t�� :.�� ; � ' � 4 ' � � 849 $49� �49a � ,' rr� : ra�j : °i„� � 84�3; cv , r.t : , .. ... ... .. .... .... .. � $49' ; _ _.._ :_ ---.;_._ ., .. . . N ;�� J �r�8� 8�$� $�$�d �4$• . .. .._ .. . � -_ .. _ , . ... CS�r�� gQ 8480 . . _ .. .. ,.. 8479 g47� � 8��2 `84�1: 84fi8 �� °84%4 �4�G9 :. ....,. 8465 - -.847� $47' � .�. . - - , -� _ _ -- � � '.. $4i ' _ - w s .... : S?�fiQ _ . __ ° . 8�6 ` ' 8�s� � '84�8 8�57 � 845�- o E48D �463 °� 8456 8�61 ; 84�0 8��' _.. ,_ . ...___ ......... ....._.. ... $$��. TFi �,Rf£ �hJE $�55 ..'$45 8459 ♦ 845�J 8455 _ . _. _.e � e o 8�4�i . ..._ _.., �a s�� s�a� ; a�z ... _. ... .. _.. _.. , !._... 84�9 844Q $�ka� �444 ' 843� �' �43i ...... ._.: ; - ��3� 8431 ; $�36 . � �4a9 8�4�8 843t � ; ...... . ..'... . _ 8425 ... 8�€3 �. . .. A , .. ._. , . . .. . . ..., 8�24 y _ 1 _.._ .._,.._ ... � 84�9 8432 �415 . . 8425 842� 342 � ; �43(3 8q21 New � 8423 . 8�12 H4�� -....:..__ $�i`J .._.. _ � � --:. ., ��1� Lat _ .. ,. .... _,. . .. t�s --- _ . _..., 840i3 ,... ..... ._.- ��19 _ . .. 8��2 � _ � 844t .. '--._. �. _....... �- _ 8�i9 8�20 839Z ... . _. _ _ ,... ...__ _ : $ A6 8�7 84� 84€5 �14 �4f:� � :83s4 #�9� 839�: .. � ..,.� . _ _ _ ' __ `...._ ,� . . - cr, . .... . . __.... __,.__ a��a g�sg : ��a g��.� �aos s�� . . ,!�o� .�s7 � : � s37s 3a� .. . $�a� . . _. . - . . . .. _ . _ __ . .. ' s��s � . �� . ._. 83�9 � 8�88 8387 : 8380 � 839� 8406 g39 �<�, 8388 R €-'� '� �37 -... . _ _. _ . _ $380 8385 . ..--- .. . �� 0_ 5382 �65�8�. • .. .8:378 3i� �'• � `83& 8,�6�r ......... .. .... .. .... ._ _.. . ... .. . 8374 � 4 � � . ... : .... � - - � - m `�' 83f>a ... .:........ . $383 �372 8373 $.365 � 8�69 ��5� �s7E3 � 8379 - - - . _. ._ . _..._. - .. 8368 ., :,. .. . , . .... . _ . . .. ... ,... _ __.._. 8371 5368 835i ' 834 8365 83�4 ,... . _ . _ $3�5 __. ,.. . _._._.. ....... _ .. � 83�9 ..._.. $36C} � S36Q � __ .. .. - $36�J , 8344 83�1 $34G 8�35 . 8r ;i , . - ,._ _ _._ . � 8347 . : . --- - - 8350 83�� 83� 8��8 83�b1 _ .._., . , -.... . _ _ _._ _. g343 83�€2 _. ._.__ _... ,_ 834p 8�3a � �334 8334 ,..... _._.. _. �4�2� ' 8345' . .. �.. � S33S , :. _ .. . .._ . $33� 83.32 . .- 8315 --�� - ..__ .... _. .. . . ...... ..... ... . .: 833D $,3�8 8�325 833�1 8333 , ... . $3s�: �`r 8334 8�33 8322 . . ,.... ,. . _ - - , .._. .. _ . . ..:. --- _._ __ , _. ...... _--_ _ _ . . - � - �32{} 8325� 8315 8322 � 8321 . 832� 8340 � 82�5 _ .... 8316 . _ _ - . : � ._ . ...... _ . ._ • � 83�£� �315_ . .. _, �311 8308 � 83i p ' ,� 82�5 � : .___ ._ :: s3't2 8297 _ _- �303 \ � i;�C}�/�I�4N� [� . 8300 83�5 .. $298 . - �_ ..- _. _.... - _ 8289 �2�C� 8285 1'\ P��K � $255 8��4 8285 " 8290 . ... . ..... - � �..... _.. __, ... _ _.....: .. ... . .. . .... __ 8�8i $250 8261 "' � 8280 $2�5 . ..:... _. . .... _ .r•�t, �- 8 L °° � � -- - - � ...,, - 8270 8265 823a 82�� : � : � "� c :: � , 827Q � $265 : „�� _ . . ... .. ... . .... 8��0 825�i o � aa cv � ,..,..; ; ca ; �„ � ; oo � a ��- ° cfl .. t�s .. _ . 8248 ;r o cs o � � � �€- :. 6� O} .� ��'�--E 00 DD : qp ►'') N.�. O; O' 1�F tC3 4V hl , i*i fV �, N .' �..;_ (V '��' � � ; C�! - � - � � � � � .„... .__��....... . $2.�'?� f� �.�'c�.r'� �"�- -.....,,.— .......�... ., __ ...__ . � $�Lri� ��. $Z�3 ', ��2C3 -- . $ZQ6 82�5 .... ........ .. 8227 _ - � _ . . ... _ .... . ..... � - . � � .4 1fi : h .. .. .. _.. _. _... --- _.. .._. . � . F �23 �� 1 � ' . . ._. .. . . ...__ . . ... .: _ �... ..... ( r t� ', N � � 8�.�1rJ' �..._....._.. �Z3O $Z�% $�'�� ZO¢J j � N ' C .. . � g�� ' : -- '-_ .. _ . .,. . .. - ... _.. - .. _.. ,_ � � ud �. _. . .: .. _, ; ..- : 2 8191 819� t� E3203 $2�$ . . ..- _ _.._ -_. ._' ....._�1�b . , � 'r. :.- � t, � �2 � �. (� $� 23:: � 3 80 8 i 7 5 . � � . . � ' c°6v �204 � � � 2 : ; _ .. . �.. ��s�� ..-- - _: . ,...� . ��. s��-s � iA�C1R�" . . �-°� ��Bd ,,, : a, � �- . •- � ni : � � . ,�� rt � , � � � b � � (gy ; N � i �� M ; N : ' C3 ; t7 � > _ - �3; $15$ ` � : � a> :; $'k 38 � � N � ; � � Ob1: 8��6 �°i�� ,�..� -- • �� _._ < _ . _ , : . � , .. � :. : $ 32 : � �� °`�� $i�€�: � ` �� j �' �...... g. ... 89�7 ., . , � �: a - , �: �: i ,� +` _.° � : , ' � i` � �' `�: , . � � � - - �� ,i i •' ; � �i:. �,. . ... �: �_ • � .�:'. :'� `,� ,.;. � � � � � � � � � a { =-c� G� � 8 t ve '�� l � � � � � � � � � �: � � � � � � ��, � � � � � � � � 0 � � :- �ie. � � � � � � � � � o� c� - a � � � a ,� = � � � � � � � � � 0 � 0 � � ■ � 0 � � �; � �� . , ,t �� . � � '� �� i � � � � � ■ � � � � � � � ■ �:� � � � �!_ � �t a ao � � � � � �� Eo � � � � � � � � � � �0 � o � � � 0 Q �� °o i . I I 1 � ? ) ;. � � '� .� �; ,.. � ; � �' ` ; ,�' �' �. i �': . �' ,. , ,. � � ! �' � ; � '` � �: � �� -�► ,� !, �: 8430 �18,�7� �� Proposed l�ot Line-� _� � _�' � �'. :'.'' � (37,125 sf} ;�; ,:r a. 1"` . �. . �; �; ;: � -N.W COH OF 5£C R C M SC.I-M} ---- ! H W �Op . 6, T 3 O , R 2 3 � ° ° � � � � � � �N. LIWE OF SEC. 6�T, 30� A.25 "M B9°44�32" W 2122.20-�- �— ---1155.3T--. — - _ n � ',yT.y i�= � r+ s8 � � ` � ��- ' 3B � �N LIN£ OF LOT 38 I,� �DO EXCEPTION - ��- � �-.-- „f�, � -- �7r � � . i . i �t� ' i; �-= ° � . i4� i I' i l�,� �`, - _ l,, I�- �,• i._� � . ' : i��; �� • -'__ N 69°44,'3Z"y�/ :; � ' i.' i �, i i 224.50 - �rL - I 23a I ' �9c SO 3D.0 50 - I C �INE PARALLEL TO �, � N.LtNE O` LOT 3B O `�� ,��• -, ;�,•r o s � ; �. �= . "' L: � l ', � � ., m Lfj � - � o � � EXCEP`CION 3 �miRACT� A � .,) '., i�: � �_JJIg � .. li � J' o a . � `- -' � iY °' � o - ; � S m �- f I ' � 44. � J 2 � • " 0 LINE PARACLE! 2`3�" Z ¢ � � _ � TO N LINE DF LOT 3B `3 /� � � 234. I �� _ ,� 90 ' j� 194.80 1 ,..._ ,r, -- - zit __3-, .o °- `-�� --' -r� ' LL N 89^ 44' 32" W 97.6D = �,r,; ; `: ;, I O N ; ° �; � m u� z�Wm ��_ EXCEPTEON�^m ��;�iRACi" � 1 o � aa3o - - 2I1 -2_� 217.bD - � - - 247.60 N 89°94'32" W � 5 IINE OF �OT 3B Sa • r- i �,. � r I i "' f_ i�� <" r _ _� .� i r". 1 _ �: 1 J �. __ i,�J �. i1`l �` L.� i I i�� !�J L.AND St�RV�Y �10. N. !!4 OF SEC- 6� T. 30,R 2� _ --- R C M I G f. M) "' _ "'966.63 "' _ _'_ . � ..o .._� L _�� I � -- � m o.� _N_ _ mF mo D ' z� 0 w z ' W SCALE: t INCH = 100 FEET o �oa zoo SLALE ItJ FEEi � I " 0 0� � �' J N _ F a� ~_ 3 = _ � i � `° Y O m i 300 0 =G�"' ° =w o z N) z �� N m� o oa MW 00 ' �o li i L-♦ `_' `L � � ' � _ I It BEARINGS ARE ON AN lLSSUMED DATUM e DENOTES IRON MONUMEhTT FOUND o DENOTES IRON MONUMENT SEF I, David E. RotgeXSen, Land.Surveyor, hereby tertify that in accordance with the provlsions of Chapter 508, Mirtnesota Stakutes of 1949, as amended, T have surveyed the following described tracts of land in the County of Ramse��, State of Minnesota, to-wit: Lot 3B, AuBitor's Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except a 1B9 foot strip zlong the northexn-most line; also excep[ that part described as follows: Commencing at the North- west corner of said Lot 39; thence Sovtherly along the West line of said Lot 38 a distan�e of 1B4 feet to the point of beginning of the description; tbence Easterly alonq a line parallel to the North line of said Lot 38 a distance of 239.1 feet; thence Southerly along a line paralle2 to the West line of said Lot 38 a distance of 291 feet; thence Westerly along a line pa�allel ko the North line of said Lot 38 a distance of i39.1 feet to the West line of said Lot 38; [hence Northe=ly along the said West line of Lot 38 to [he point of beginning; and also except that pazt described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said Lot 3b: tbence Southerly along the West l�ne of said Lot 3B a distance of 375 feet to the Qoint of beginning; thence Easterly along a line parallel to tAe North line of said Lot 38 a distance of 21I feet; thence Southerly along a' line parallel to the West line of said Lot 3B to the South line of said Lot 38; thence Westezly along the Soutberly line of Lot 38 a distance of 211 feet to the S4est line of Lot 38; thence Northerly along the West line of Lot 38 to tbe point of beginninq. Subject to a 5 foot s:rip easement along the rear line for public utility use, such as setting of poles, stringing of wires, ttimming or removing tiees if necessary £oX line clearance and laying of underground conduits. That the suivey shown hereon is a correct delineation of said survey, this day of 19 . Davi,d E. Torgersen, Registered Land Surveyor M].hnesOta Aegj.stKation No. 17551 Approved arsd accepted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, this day of , 19 . Mayor c.cerx Taxes for the yeat on land described herein paid, no delinqvent taxes and transfer entered, this �day of , 19 Director By Deputy Pursuant to Chapter 7, Minnesota Laws of 1976, this Reqistered Land Survey has been reviewed and approved, this day of , 14 , and the conditions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505-�3, Subdivision 2, have been fulfil2ed. David D. Claypoot Ramsey County Suxveyor ReqistT'aX of Titles, County of Aamsey, State oi Minnesota I hereby certify that this Aegistez'ed Land Survey No. was filed in this oEfice this day oE , J.9 , at o'clock .M., as Document No._ By Deputy Lou MclCenna, Registrar of Titles � �-.:-� --. i � � �: '.� . ': ,; � � �" � �" L . � �' � ", � � ' _.. � � � : �'_ ��' _ � �. � �� . � �.... � � : .� � . ''. `. . . �',� , . �. _ L , ..,.. . ;. � . . � , , a . .. . .:'. � 1;: � - � � ,�. �, ' � i� . 1 ti ■ . � �, � � ' a � .�� r� � • ' i , ` � ''� �� , :� . . � �'�� . �� .: . ' �' � � � �� : '�� " � � '� . � ,� �1' ; ,� ,�' i. �� ;.. .�. - �, �� , �, � �` � � = � �,;' ' %, ' . . � ; ' ; . . � : - � `. � �� . 1 1 : WHEREAS, George and Patricia Grone have requested approval af a minor subdivision of 8340 Knoflwood Drive, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residentiai, and legally-described as follows: Lot 38, Audiior's Subdivisron No. 89, Ramsey County, Minnesota, except a 184 foof strip along the northern-mosf line; also excepf thaP parf described as fol/ows: Commencing af fhe North wesf corner of said Lot 38; fhence SoutherJy along fhe West line of said Lof 38 a disfance of 984 feef to fhe point of beginning of the descripfion; fhence Easterly along a line para!!e! fo the North line of said Laf 38 a disfance of 234.1 feef; fhence Southerlyalong a line para!!e! fo fhe Wesf line ofsaid Lot 38 a disfance of 191 feef; fhence Westerly along a line parallel to fhe North line of said Lof 38 a disfance of 234.1 feef fo the West line of said Lot 38; thence Northerly along the said Wesf lrne of Loi 38 to fhe point of beginning; and also excepf ihat part described as follows: Commencing af the IVorihwesf corner of said Lof 38: fhence Soufherly along fhe Wesf line af said Lof 38 a disfance of 375 feef io fhe point of beginning; fhence Easterly along a line para!!el to €he Norfh line of said Lof 38 a distance of 219 feef; fhence Soufherly along a-line parallel fo fhe West line of said Lof 38 to the South line of said Lof 38; ihence Wesferly along Phe Southerly lrne af Lot 38 a disfance of 219 feet fo the Wesf line of Lof 38; fhence N�rtherly along fhe Wesf line of Lot 38 to fhe point of beginning. Subject fo a 5 foof sfrip easemenf along fhe rear line for public utility use, such as setfing of poles, sfringing of wires, frimming or removing trees if necessary for line clearance and laying of underground conduits. WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the 180.75 feet of their lot �o creafe a buildable iai fronting Knollwood Drive; and, 1NHEREAS, the Planning Commissian has reviewed the applicants' request far a minar subdivision and has determined that it is En cor�formance with Chapfiers 1104, �201, and 1202 of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the PEanning Commission finds that the applicant's request for a minor subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHER�AS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, a park dedication fee equivalent to 5% of the market value of the new lot is applicabie; and, f�OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED fihat the Maunds View Planning Commission recommends approval of fihe minor subdivision of 8430 Knofiwood Drive subject io the following stipulafiions: ; Resolution 734-03 Page 2 1. The applicants shali submit a Cerfificate of Survey or a Registered Land Survey Prior to the City Councii approving this subdivision. 2. The applicants shafl arrange to have a Title Commitmenfi drafted and submitted prior to the approva! of the subdivisian by the Ci�y Cour�cif. 3. The applicants shall submit the requii-ed park dedication fee prior fio the City ap�roving the deeds for recordation. 4. The cerfificate of survey or RLS shall indicate a(I easements present dedicated in addition to fhose easements tha� are necessary, which are as follows: Front and rear (ot lines: 10 feei; side ]oi lines, 5 feet. The Certificafie of survey or RLS shail have text which states, "Separate drainage and utility easement documenis over the proposed easement areas have been executed and recorded wiYh Ramsey County," 5. The Certificate of Survey or the RLS shal[ indicate the footprint of the existing home on 8430 Knollwood Drive so as to ensure proper setbacks are fio be maintained wifh the new subdivision. BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Nfounds View planning Commission directs - ', staff to forward this resolution to the City Councif prior io approval of the minutes. �" >� Adopted this 16ti� day of July, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson, Interim City Administrator (S EAL) 9�e�tt N�: 7 i�eetir�g Da��: JuEv 16. 20Q3 iype of �ea�iness: Discussion �_ ,, ` �. - ,�' � `J %:;.i' -��o �ionorable �ayor artd City Cour�ci! F��a James Ericson, Acting City Administrator t�e�rt iitl�I�ubje��o Discuss Nlodificatior�s to �roposed Ordir�ance 711, an Ordinance Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops . :.: • ; The Cit�+ Cou�cil adopted ar� Ir�t�rim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which directed the Pfanning Commissi�n to review �he iicensing and zoning implicaiions related #o pawnshops and io recomrnend a,pplicable provisians. The Planning Co�nmission disct�ssed this issue at r�eetings in Marct�, April and f1�ay af this year, reviewing �tate statues, ordis�ances from adjoining communiti�s and ordinances fror� communities where paw�shops �urrent�y oper�te. Th� Commission also heard t�stimony firom represen�atives of th� Mounds View Poii�e Department vvho did research on their own, discussing the potential impacts of a pawnshop with other police departt�ents. After significant discussion and input from interested parties including residents and tenants from ll�oundsvi�w Square, the Commission aciopted � resolufiion fon►varding two ot°dinances on to th� Cii� Gauncil for their consideration. , ,, . ,: . The Ciiy Gouncil has reviewed the proposed ardinance� (the ordinanc� to regulate the zoning and the ordinanee regulating the licensing) ar�d they would like to explore the overEay concepfi fuether and have asked for fe�dback tor�rard thaf end. Additionafly, fhe Councif would consider opening the overlay district up to other uses beyond Pawnshops, uses such as "Adu1fi" uses, tattoo shops, piercing e�tablishme�ts, gun shops, check cashing facilifies, e#�. r ., :: The Gity Council heid a public hearing on fVfay 12, 2003 at which time pubiic commenf was accepted. The Council chcase io deEay acfiion untii they had an opportunity to discu�s #he proposed ordinances further a�ithe nextvvorksession, June 2, 2003. Atthe�rorksession, the Gouncil discussed �he possibili�y of creating an overlay zoning distri�t that rrvould allow for a pavvnshop outside of the cer�fral business district of the Ci�y. Two potential overlays were identified—either north of Highvday 10 or south of County Road H in the Mustang Drive/Circle ind��triai area. To estabiisi� an overlay district, a11 that would be needed is io revise proposed C)rdinance i11 to refl�ct the cr�ati�� ofi t�e nevu "Pawn �verlay District" vvith �ssociated supporfing f�ngu�ge. �ec�use there was �ot a clear c�nsensus t�n uvhich of the tvvo overl�y are�s vvduld be mor� appropria�e ar�d beca�se �he �ouncil would like io include other �ses in the overlay, the F'l�r�ning Comrnission sho�id review fch� passibilities and provide a r�commendatinr� � io the City �ouncil � • ; :... Revievv and discuss the two potenfiial overlay disfricts ar�d consider �he fypes of uses fh�a� rnight be appropriate (if any) fo include with Pawnshop�. �� James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Administrafor Attact�rnents: 1. List o� adul# uses, per City Code 2. Niap of proposed Overiay Districts , .j ;s:=:i . : � ,� u. �+ Subd. 2. Adult �stabiishment. A busi�ess engaged in any of the following �ctivifies or which utilizes arty of the foilo�ring business procedur�s or pracfice�: a. A busines� th�i is conducted exclusively for the patronage of adufts and as ta vvhich rnir�ors are specifcally excluded from patro�age, either by operation o� law or by the orn�ner� of sucl� business, except any business licens�d und�rChapters 501, 502, 503, and 5i4 of the Mounds View Cifiy Code; b. Any business that has (1) at feast thirty percent (30%) of iis i�venfiory, stock and trade or publicly dispfayed merc#�andise, or (2) at feast thir�y percent (30°/O} of the floor area of the business (not incfuding s�orerooms, stock areas, bathroorr�s, basements or ar�y portion of the business not op�n �o the public) devoted io items, rner'char�dise or ather materials dis�inguished or charact�rized by an emphasis on materiaE depicting, exposing, describing, discussing or relating to specified �exual acfiviiies or speci�ed ar�afomical ar�as; or c. Any �dtaff use as defined i� subdivi�ion 3 of this Secfian. Subd. 3. Adult Use. An adult use is any of the activifiies and businesses described below: a. P,dul# Body Pain�ing S�udio: An e�fablishmen# ar btasiness which provides the service of applying paini or other subs#ance, whether transparent or nor�-trar�sparer�t, to the body of a pafiron wi�et� s�ch person is nude. b. Adult �ooks4are: An �sfabli�hment or business used for the barter, rental or sale of items con�isti�g of printed matter, picfiures, slides, r�cords, audio tape, videotape, or motion picture fiim ifi such business is not open to the pubiic generally but only �o one or more c[asses of �he public, excEuding any minor by rea�on of age, or if (1) a� least thirty percent (30%} of fihe inventory, sfiock a�d trade or pubEiciy displayed merchandise, or (2) at least thirty percent (30%) of the floor area of the business (nofi including storerooms, stoek areas, bathrooms, basements or any portion of the business not op�n �o ihe public} is devoted to items, merchandis� or other material distinguished or characterized by an emphasis on the depiction or description of "specified sexuaf aciivitie�'° or °' specified an�tomical areas." c. Adu{t Cabare4: A busi€�ess or esfiablisf�ment fhat provides dancing or other [ive entertainment to patrons i� the dancing and live entertainment is disiingtaished or ch�racierized by an emphasis on ihe presentation, display, depicfiion of matter that seeks to evoke, arouse or excite #he pafirons' sexual or erotic #eeling� or desire. d. Adult Cornp�nionship �stablishmen#e A business or esfiablishment tha$ excludes minors by r�a�on o� age, and which provides the service of e�gaging in or fisiening to conversatiar�, tafk ar discussio� betwee� a� employee of the est�biishment and a customer, if such service is di�tingt�ished or ch�racterized by an emph�sis on "specifed sex�al activitiespP or °'speci�ied anatomical areas." e. Adult Conversation/Rap Parfor: A business or establishmenfi that exciudes rnir�ors by reason of age, ar�d which provides ihe services of engaging ir� or listening #o conversaiion, t�Ik, or discussion, if s�ch service is disfing�ished or characfierized by an emphasi� on "specified sex�al acfivities" or'°specified anaior�ical areas."" f. Aduit HeaithlSpo�t Club: A health/sport club which excludes rninors by reason of age, if such club is disti�g�ished or charac�erized by an emphasi� on "specified ��x��l aciivi�ies'° or'°specified �natomical areas." g. Ad�lt i�otel or fViofel: A hot�f or rnotel �rom which rninors are specifically excluded from pafranage and where mafierial is presented which is distinguished or charac#erized by an emphasis on rnatter depicfing, describing or relating to "specified sexuai activities" or "speci�ed anafomical areas.°` h. Adt�it Massage Parlor, Fiealfh Club: A rr�assage parlor or heafth cCub rrvhich restrict� mir�ors by reason of age, and which provides ihe services of rr�assage, if such se�vice is distir►guished or characterized by an errtphasis on °°�pecified sexuai activities" or "specified a�atc�mical areas.°' i. e4duifi Mini-fi�otion Picture iheater: A business or es�ablis�ment with a capacity for le�s than 50 persons used for preser��ing material if �uch material is distinguished or characterized by �n emphasis or� matter depicting, describing or relating to "specifi�d sexual activities°' or 11speci�ied anatomical areas.°' j. Adult Nlodeling Sttadio: A business or establishmen# th�it provides cus�omers figure models v�rho are so provided w+th the ir�tent of providing sex�aal stimula�io� or sexual ?� , gratification fio such customers and who eng�ge in "speci�ied sexual activities" or " display °'specified anatomical areas" while being observed, painted, painted upon, skefched, draw�, sculptured, phoiographed, or otherv�rise depicfed by such customers. k. Aduifi Motion Picture Arcade: Any place #o �hich the public is permitted or invited where coin or slug-operated or electronically, elecirically or mechar�ically controlled or operated stiil or motion picture machines, projectors ar o#her image-producing devices are maintained tA show irnages to �ive or fewer persons per machine at any one time, ar�d where the images sa displayed are disiinguished or characterized by an emphasis on depictirtg or describing "specified sexual activities" or °'specified anator�icai areas." I. Adult Motion F'icture °fheat�r: A mofion picfure theater vvith a capacity of fifty (50) or more person� used for preseniing material if such theater as a prevailing practice ex�lud�s m�r�ors by r�ason of age or if suc� m�terial is distinguished or characterized by ar� empi�a�is on "specifed sexual activitie�°' or "specified anatomicai areas°' for observ�tion by patrons. m. Adult Nc�vel�y �usiness: A busir�ess which has { 1) at least ihirty percent (3q%) of it� inve�tory, stoc6c and frade or publi�ly displayed merchandise, or (2} ai least thirty percent (30%} of the flcaor area of the busines� (not inclt�ding, storeroorrts, �tock areas, bathroom�, basement o� a�y poriion ofi f#�e b�siness �ot open to the p�abliG) devofed to items, merchandise ar ather m�ieri�l or devices vvhich s�imulate i�c�mar� genitals or � devi�� vvhi�h ar� design�d �or sexual sfimulatior�. r�. Aduli Sauna: A sauna which excludes minors by re�son af age, and v�rhich prc�vides a stear�n b�ih or heaf bathit�g room used for #he p�rpose of bathing, r�laxatiot�, or reducing, utili�ir�g steam or hoi air as a cleaning, relaxir�g or redu�ir�g agent, if the service provided by the saun� i� disfinguished or characterized by an emphasis or� '°specified sexual activities" or °'specified an�iomical areas.°' o. Adtalf Sfiearr� Room/Bathhouse F�acility: P► building or portion of a building used for providing a steam ba�h or heafi baihing room used for #he purpose of ple�sure, bathing, relaxatior�, or reducing, utilizing ste�m or hot air as a cieaning, relaxing ar reducing agent if suc}i b�ifding or portion of a building res#ricts mir►ors by reason of age and i�ihe service provided by the sfieam room/bathho�ase faciii�jr is dis�ir�guished or cY�aracterized by an emphasis on "specified sexual activifiies°' or "specified anatomical areas.°' I j ^ - / �' -�� : ':� , , . }' ' � � ,l B L A I N E � r � � � a�ee�a �-�.:3 �� Overlay 2: i�us�ang Drr�e 1�c�sta�g �ircle f I I t � I ` s � w I — > � w € � I � I � �n � '� �, ',. . �: i ` ' �' ' ��, "> ,• � : . •, : �- � :„ _ � .. . . . � � • ^.; ��. � . ." � �: � �' �, � .. �� -� . � . : �' : � . � � � �.. !'� t �� . . � �� '�" �. . _ °" ' � �� .. � '. i�, 1 " � '" ?� � ;� ,� .. . _ _ � . _ ._ . . .. , ..: �* . f .... ,. ,. n TH� CETY OF MOUNDS VfEV!! ORDAINS: S�CTCON 1: Secfiort 1102.Q2 of t�te Nlour�ds Viev� Zoning Cade pertainin9 �o defniiions is hereby amended by adding �ew definifions as ��derl6ned to read as �oliows: _ , .. �, ,.� * �: .� = .;, - :. . : . . . � .: .._. . . . � ` ; . ` . ._ , . . ., ;�:.. .. . �.. ��y.: . ,�y'�.i' ., a - y'" ' •��. � ` i ,. �.. ,-' i �.: �,.. : . .- _„ � , , � . � -. -, r' � ��-:i. �•�'�. ''> •...:: �; �._,. : .. -. �; .�..� ., y-. y��. % s�a";, '� ��' =�" " �� ' � ! . - . ; . � -, -i�-- -r •� �� ,- -:i�:, � , .�_ �. �; � .r:.; �- . ., .: ' = .: •. - . :. . i: �: . �„ .. . ;. - -:- . •' . - •• • .; .. . .`. - : . r: .; ' _ � . �• � - . ' - � - • � ,� -;• : ., . - .. - r - .. : - -• ��r• , , _ � �• ; • - ••. � �= . . _ , r . � s - • � . : � - : - . . . - a . : s ' . .. � . � . . , r. . • ^ , i _ . �i . ' �; ' ; . ' �. . ' • • � ' :s ' .ii ` • • s : • , � � � - .' • �� •' . .'a • . -. . ' � .s ' • ' � ' ' ' � - . l' • s � . : - � a r ., , . - � • ^ �i , .' +' ...; • . � •- - � - , _ . � - � ' r ,. � ^'a . i... • . ..' � . ^ � . . .. ' _ - �_ [ � . �� • -�r . ..' - � �,.�� ^ i . _ . � - • ' . . � • � � - ' ♦ ' • : :.:� - -�-�. �: i �ubd. �7o P,�WN�HOP° 6fPawnshop" rneans the locat�on at which or rernis�s in whi�h a pa�►r�brok�r r��tarl� �ondu�t� b�s��ss. P►II existing subseqtaen� s�bdivisions vvithir� Seciion 1102.02 are I�ereby r�numbered as appropriat�. S�CilO� 2: Sectior� 1115.02 of �he Mo�nds View Zaning Code perfaining fo Permitted Uses within the �4 Zoning Distric� i� hereby amended by alphabe#ic�iiy inse�iing �he followir�g underlw�ed �ses: : •:,., ..� .�_�� .: �.: � �, �, ,,� ,.�.. � �� :.; :,, ►' - SECilON 3. Ti�is Ordinae�ce becomes effecfive tt�i�ty (30) days after iis puiaiica�ior� ir� fhe official Ciiy newspaper. �ead by the City Gouncil ofi the City of Maunds View an this � day of _ , 2003. Read and passed by the City Counci! of the City of Mounds Vi�w �his day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayar I�i�� James Ericson, Ac#ing Cierk / Adminisfrator (SEAL) •---* � % �. - �-T . Ciiy Attorney PI20CEEDIl�1G� O�' T� I�O�JI�� E�I P�,�1�II�1G COlVIIVII�SI�I�T CITY OF IVIOLII�TI)S V�E� . . ��Y ��B.J��Iy 1V3ffii71`I�ti7�iL-� ;. ,I�e�r�ia�° 1l��eeting .��1�� 29 2003 19�Iou��s �'�e�i Ci� Hall 240� �Iig�avvay 10, IVloiuii€i� �T�er��g I�'�T� �5412 - _;j l. Call ia Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7: 2. lZoll Ca�l Members Present: Members Absent: Commissioners Johnson None. Int1e� t� 1�'Cinutes Plannin� Case VR03-004 Location: 2402 Count 3. :; ` �,PProve 1Vlini ,, a. June 4, MOTION/SECOND: 4: 2003 as Presented: t rent Di 0 Hegland and Page 2 ohhson/Miller. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for June Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4. Ci�ize�►� l�eq�ests �nd Co�tnen�s or� items 1Voi on i�e Agencla Mr. Grone of 8430 I�ollwood Drive indicated he had be�n told that the next planning meeting was tonight and that he should bring his paperworlc filled out to the nieeting. 1l�io��cis Vi�rr�v Pla�n�� Commission �2eg�ala�° l�eetfng July 2, 2003 Page 2 Community Development Director Ericson indicated that an application for a subdivision to be heard by the Planning Commission needs to be turned in to Staff for processing before it zs placed on the agenda. He then said that there is usually a three weelc lead time between when the application is turraed in and when it is heard by the Commission. Mr. Grone indicated that he vvas not aware of the requi meeting. Community Development Coordinator Ericson indicated � Grone after the meeting to discuss the application and exp 5. Consrd��°ation off a�ar�ance I�equest foa- a Iteduce C�unty Road I. Community Development Director Ericson reviewed' tlie req provided a brief history of the property in questiori. He the�i indicated that he would attend the meeting but is not present; There was no publie coxz�ment conc Comrnissioner Johnson asked wheil Director Ericson indicated that Mr '` approval Reso�ution that requ�red t Comm�ssion could make a.recomm` inside. ` Con�missioner Johnsa�l commented aslced whether it';has.lieen enforced. Director Ericson indicated tliat ZUIr: had:been issued for �he fence;,.:.. �,nd'was told to come to this ruld meei v�ith Mr. and IYIrs •.. \'. :lie process. P��ki�n� �� Setba�k at 2402 with the`Conniiiission and eated that 1VIr. Farrell had issue woulel be deali with in this Resolution. Farrell had made an application to Council to amend tbe he garbage fo:;be kept inside. He then said that the endation to Council if ii felt that the garbage should remain garbage being outside is an enforcement issue and Farrell has been talked to about the garbage and said a ticket �sioner Zwirn inciicated that Staff has written Ietters and contacted Mr. Farrell and he has an acrimoniou� relationsl�ip by denying and ignoring leiters and discussians and not �o meetings and he just puts it off to I dici not lrnow. He then said that IVIt'. Farrell is in ness of readin� coniracts but ha throws his hands up and says he is innocent because he Commissioner Zwim asked for an update on the enforcement of the timelines provided zn Mr. Ericson's letter io Mr. Farrell. Director Ericson indicated a ticicet was issued to Mr. Farrell. ", IViou�ds View Pla�►�ia�� Comanassion I2egular IVIe��Y�g Comrnissioner Zwirn asked when. Director Ericson indicated that tlYe ticicet was issued over the weelcend and Monday's mail. Cominissioner Zwirn asked what happens next. Director Ericson indicated that Mr. Farrell does not feel l�e should put up,tl and, if the City Co�mcil does noi amend the previous Resolutian of approv up in the court system. Commissioner Zwirri commented that he did not appreciaie telling the City that they are not going to cornply and forcin Director Ericson agreed Mr. Fa�ell is not being Commissioner Zwirn indicated that by not I�stexiing � telling the City he wili not comply and malang the C has to go to caurt or if he does as the ne�glibor to the Director Ericson indicated ihat w then City is forced to go to court. Zwirn aslc�d if it the Ci July 29 2003 I?a�e 3 the mat�er w111 eud ; ie comiil� into the City and ty fo go:io court. :he cbnditian go to �court:. uYh. not to cornp] i' 1)uTSUe ti11s. is required to pursue it. and ab'iding by them he is 3e,tlien asked if the City with an enforcement issue Commissioner Zwirxi: con7meiifed that apgroving this variance would mean there would only be a two-foot boulevard on Gi-eenfield. Director Ericson clarified t3�at'tl�ere would be a two-foot setbacic but there is sti1117 feet of greenspace prior to the paverrient ' missioner Zwirn indicated there is not that much space and suggested someone go out there a tape and measure i�t. ommented that Mr. Farrell indicates he ��ants to work with the City bui meeting and asked why. Gominissioner Zwirn indicated that he says he wants to be a good neighbor but his actions do not show that to be true. i I1�o�ncis View Pl�nn�� Corrira�ission I�egula�° I�/Iee�in� J�aly 2, 200� Page 4 Commissioner Hegland indicated he did not thinlc the Commission should conside� this request when he is in violation on other issues and he does not think this variance would heip the parlcing situatxon. _ . Commissioner Johnson asked whether Mr. Fan•ell has the right to apply for is in vioiation on the fence and the t� ash. Director Ericson indicated that he has the right to appiy. Commissioner Hegland con�mented that the issue is vvhether and he thinks he did. Cornmissioner Johilson i�idicated that he felt that before come into compliance with the ather items. Chair Stevenson indicated the Com�nission has the ri being that he is not complying with the City. He, tliei Farrell was in complianee with the other issues ':' if he this Mr. Farrell should issue the variance with the reason �ould consicier the variance if Mr. Coznmissioner Scotch indicated that Mr. F�arrell applied�fbr tlie pei7nit so he is addressing this portion of the issue. Diractor Ericson indicated that Mr Farrell has reguested mad'ification tio the resolution regarding the garbage issue as he wants to bu�ld a garbage e�iclosure to store garbage at the rear of the property. < ,; MOT��N/SECQND: ZwirnTHegland. To Deny'A�proval of Resolution 732-03, a Resolution Approvirig a variance for a Reduceel Front-Yard Parl�ing Seiback of 2-Feet at 2402 County Raad I. _ C Nays —1(Scotch} Motion carried. l�ext Pian�in� Comaiaission I1�eetin�: July 16, 2003 ;; ;; ---- ::) Idlound� View Pla�ning Comgraiss�on duly 2, 2003 Reguia�° 1Vleeiiaag Page � 7e Adjour�ament to A�enda �ess�o�x �� August 20, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. ' � `` � � � '- 1: 1 ° 1. Cali to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: July 2, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda �-- �.� • >. �' � �� ,� �� ;�� ;; �, .� �rr� ��.4 5. Pla�n�ng Case �03-006 Public Hearing to Consider Resolution No. 735-03 Approving a Variance to Allow an Increase in Wall Signage Location: 2214 - 2222 Highway 10 Applicant: Mounds View Businesses, LLC 6. Plan�xing Cas� �03-007 Public Hearing to Consider Resolution_Ap�rovmg,a Var�ance to Allaw Two Curb Cut Accesses ''`'i ,` :; . . J: � � Location �3� „ �`o, ini �c 3d H� ��; ' � ' ' Applicant. "' 1�CT Aaphalt �pe�i�etttes'tuii bciiatf ui'vwciCi� .�cory'i,aBelle) _ :.= ; 7. 8. 9. 10. 11 2. , 3. Specfal Plan��g Case �P-11�-03 Consider Changes to the PF Zoning Disirict to Correct Zoning Inconsistencies Special Planni�g Case SP-114-03 Discuss and Consider Ordinances Relating to the Zoning and Regulation of Pawnshops in #he City of Mounds View Review Possible Amendrnents to tl�e Zoning Code �.. ; � . , �, ; , � � � �� ,�� ,� : '�, , � �- �� •�-�� ` � , � � _ r �� - � , � �� _ �� Next Plauning Commission Meeting: September 3, 2003 Adjounllneni to Agenda �ession A�� slo� Review Minutes: July 16, 2003 Staff Reports: Chairperson and Planning Cominissioners' 12eports N:�aCa\C3roups\Comdev�Planning CommissionlPC Agendas12003\08-20-03 PC Agenda.doc :J lterr� �o: 5 �A�etin� D�te: Auqust 20 2003 Ty�e of �u�in�ss: PubEic Hearinq /: I ' � .". ;� . Toe Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director I�ern Titl�/�a�bjec�: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Increased Sign Area at 2214-2222 County Highway 10; Planning Case VR03-006 ... . John Kopas of Abbey Carpet has requested a variance to ailow increased sign area at the newly constructed building located at 2214-2222 County Highway 10. For refierence purposes, this is the b�ifding just north of fhe Mermaid in the same iocatian as �he former Perkins Restaurant. Mr. Kopas plans fo have his business apen ai the site by September �, 20p3 while the 3 Seasans and 4 Sur�rooms business has already opened. (Refer to ihe photos on Page 8.) Signage for 3 Seasons and 4 has already been installed to the front of the buifding however they would lika to add signage fio the south building eievation. Nfr. Kopas would like to add signage to the north elevation in addition to #he signage proposed to the frant of the bcailding facing County Highway 10. i . The Sign Code alls for building mounted signage not to exceed 100 square feet per buiiding occupant. In most cases, 140 square feefi is adequate, especially for the businesses located at either Moundsview Square of Silver View Piaza. Issues have arisen regarding end spaces at either mall and for stand-aione buildings with multiple frontages. ihe Abbey Carpet b�ilding, referred to as the Highway 10 Business Genter, has three frontages with County Highway 10 visibility. Our Code malces no exceptions for multiple �" 24-0' building elevafiions, � thus limiting each end user to 1 Q0 square ; � �,. ,� . ,.; .� � ,S,,Q•� fieet. Mr. Kopas will be installing a 96 square foot sign above his entrance on the froni of the building, which wilE ap�ear as shown in Figure 1 at righ�. � .� t ,_. y�;. F a �. c- ,.f::. .r.m._: .t_:';:._;� �� ,� � �� a; m: �:� Kopas Variance Report August 20, 2003 Page 2 On the north elevation of the building, Mr. Kopas would like to install his existing signag� from the New Brighton location. The ar�a ofi that sign, as shown belaw in �igure 2, is 50 square feet. .»,� �� il�� ' ' ` � r � � � ,:: . �- �� ;� � ,;,; o ;� _., � _ �` As already indica�ed, signage has been installed #or 3 Seasons and 4 Sunrooms on the front elevafiion. They propose aciding signage to fhe south building elevation in an amount not io exceed that proposed by Mr. Kopas-50 square feet. The graphic belaw shows additional signage of the word "SUNROOMS" to the south elevafion. ti . �. 'i: :t�a� �ru ..��- w ��;� � � :::� � . � ��: - .r.i:.r� (� ,t:a:.;�. z r,,fi. ""i _. �.,Ji :'1l.��j.�r.�.,1 .r `�ti � �z� t 3„ �,> Budgei Liquor and Mario's Udeo were both granted variances for additional signage at Moundsview Square. (Both leased space at either end of fhe center.} Garmike Wynnsong Cinema also received approval for signage in �xc�s� ofi 10tJ square fe�t, Th� M�rmaid, through its PUD, was aliowed signage in excess ofi fhe City's requirements. Kopas Variar�ce Report August 20, 2003 Page 3 . ., • For a variance to be approved, the applicani needs to demonsirafe a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property fihat makes a liieral interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota sfatutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case} review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its decision in accordance with these criteria. ihese criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code cfearly stafies that a hardship exists when all of the criteria are met. The criteria are as follows: 1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do nofi apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinify and result from lot size or shape, topography or oiher circumsiances over which the owners of the property since the e�fective date hereof have had no control. A variance for additiona! signage is unique among fhe sp�ctrum of possible variances in thaf the Sign Code is not a part of the Zoning Code; rather ii is a chapfer wifhin the building code. The building code however indicates fhat any requesfed devia�ions be handled as would a deviaiion from the Zanir�g Code. The property is zoned 8-3, Highway Business Commercial. Exterior building mounted signage is limifed fo i00 square feef per building occupant in this and al! other - � commercial districfs, regardless otfhe building mass--its heighf and lengfh. Some sign -�' :'`' codes from other municipalifies allow for greater sign area for multiple building fronts while o�hers a!!ow more based on wall area. Mounds View's code simply limifs each building occupani fo 100 square feef. There does not appear to be any apparent exceptional or extraordinary circumstances involving this property or fhe request other than the bulk of the adjoining uses (the Nlermaid and the Business Park) which may hinder and or obscure visibilify to the subj�ct locafion. 2. The literal infierpretation of fhe provisions of this Tit1e would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in ihe same district under ihe terms of this Tit(e. The liferal inferpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not necessarily deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by ofher properties in the same zane, however denying the requesf would put the occupanis in an unfavorable posifion based upon fhe City's pasf practice of approving reasonable signage variances, especially for business wifh multipfe building frontages. 3. That fhe speciai condifiions or circumsfiances do not resuli from fhe actions of the applicanf. - The special conditions do nof resulf from fhe actions of fhe applicant. Kopas Variance Report August 20, 2003 Page 4 4. That granting the variance reque�ted wauld nat confer on the applicant any special privilege fhat is denied by this Title �o owners of other lands, sfiructures ar buildings in #he sarne disYrict. Granfrng the variance wauld no� confer upon the property owner a specia! pr'ivilege in thaf every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and viabilify of fh�ir busin�ss. 1Veither would such appraval confer a special treafineni as similar �'easonable variances have been granfed in the pasf. 5. Thai the variance requested is the minimum variance which would allevia#e fihe hardship. Economic conditions alone shall no� be considered a hardship. Mr. Kopas has exis�ing sigr�age ai his nlew Brighton locafion which he would like fo have insfalled on the north elevation. The area offhis signage is 50 square feei. The area ot ihe "Sunrooms" sign on fhe soufh elevafion is less fhan 50 square feet. Allowing fo�' an addiiiona! 50 feef ai bofh building ends would be fhe minimum necessary �o provide suifable visibiligy. 6. The variance would not be ma�erially detrimental to the purpose of this Yitle or io other property in the sama zone. Granting a varrance fa allow the addifional 104 square feet of building mounted signage ;: ! for fhe corner businesses would nof be maferially defrimenta! to the purpose and intenf of fhe building code. There have been na objecfions raised up io this poinf from any of fhe adjoining proper�y owners. Given fhe building's size, fhe additional signage would nof appear excessive. 7. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and airto adjacenf property or substantialEy increase the congesfion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the pubiic sa�ety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The requesfed variance would not result in any of fhe above-cifed adverse effecfs. � Afl of fhe criteria, as indicaied abave, appear to be satisfied which wouid allow fior the granting of the variance. Kopas Variance Report Augusf 20, 2003 Page 5 �r ,. F . _ ��. - After hoEding the pubiic h�aring and taking testimony from sfia�f, the property owner and affecfed property awners, #he Commission can take one of the following actions relafied to the request: 1. P,pprove the variance as requested. Resolufiion 735-03 is attached for the Commission's approval if #hat is the chosen course of action. 2. Deny the requested variance. To move forward with this option, fhe Commission should move to direef staff to draff a resoiution of denial wiih findings of fact appropriate to support the denial. 3. Table the request. I# addiiional information is needed before a decisian can be rendered or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move io table the requesfi until such informatior� has been provided. Because of the 60-day rule, the Commission would need fio act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible however to avoid an inadvertent approval. I ', ±r ,lames Ericson - '�; Community Development Director - =:1 Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Location Map 3. Planning Applicatian 4. Photographic Documentation ,, `� 1 1: :� 1T] � �—� 1�' �.�� >tou� — � _. '`i5259 5250� $��---•� -,..,..- 4�.524 5240� ,��5239 5230; �20 5229 5220; 1 D! 521 5? 10. .�_,.._.. ..._-- , nAlrnnn L�M1A%� �; � „v N � 5275) � i I _....---�-� � -- - .... _. . � � 1 � N � N -.._..._.__... _. _-..,.-.-..--, {y ` Wb00ALE � � � ` �� 5200 ..'..�:. � cv � � � N � S2O1 " -:. Z � �° � � _:: � � � �uSlnesS P�rk ._.. _ � ,; C7, - - — _—__.� - �y ,: �0 �ryy 5205 � — - ' ' ,•O ry`O �. 5150 �0 f � �', ' _. I I � r � \� / , C�`��."�.l�i C�'�'T i T�..�� - , � .:: � � . fiC�;7�� . .,: ., 2�1412218J22�� Highvstay 1 � �� _ �� '1 �� ;�F � �� Mounds Vievv Business Properties Properties invGlved: �21�12�18r'2222 Hvvy; 10 Planning Gase No. VR03-006 ��1�,12�181�2�2 Highway� 10 � Proper�ies Within ��0' Kapas Variance Report August 20, 2003 Pag� 8 . ;�.'.� � � . � + �., . Phoiograph of the buNding's north- east elevation J Photograph of fhe bui{ding's soufh elevation � �, � � �. � �� t = �; ' � ' = �' � � i__ � ��'"`: �' � �� . -'! .r�� ° �` ''. � : !.- �; `� , � � � :,_ . � � �-_ . �■� �•� �� . �. `�- ,� ' ,�, �� ' i f � �:4� � = �� .., :. � ��; _ `. � ` �� .. � . ,,: . . � ,� �, � , � _. ,, ,, . ' ; - y. � � .. �' � - .. .. i: _ � �� . . ' '' " ' �, ��° �. 1 '� 1 1 �� HEREAS, the ap�licant, John Kopas, has applied for a variance from the maxirrlum wall-mounted signage alfotments for fhe [�uifding iocated afi 2214-2222 County Highway 10; and, UlPH�REAS, Sec mounted sign�ge for a and, tion 1008.09 of the Sign Code indicafies that the maximum wall- commercia! building is 100 square feet per busi��ess occupant; WWEREAS, Mr. Kopas requests an additional 50 square feet per corner business occupant—Abbey Carpet and 3 Seasons and 4 Sunrooms; and, l�H�REAS, Section 1 b08.16 of the Sign Code indicates that variance requests be ;:, treated as any other variance request as articulafied in Secfiion 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of `';+ fihe Mounds View Zoning Code; and, lNNEREAS, according to Section 1125.Q2, the Planning Commission is to review a standard sefi o# criteria, of which aN musi be satisfied, i�� order fo grant a variance to the Zoning Code. NOU41, TFi�R�FOR�, �E IT F�ES�L�lED, the Mounds View Planning Commission makes �he following finding of facts related to this request: The building at 2214e2222 County Highway 10 is in need o# additional exterior wail-mounted signage or� the north and south b�ilding elevations to provide enhanced visibiiity adjacent to larger developments which may obscure the subject property. 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of #his Title would deprive the applican� of righ#s com��only enjoyed by ather properties in ihat fihe City has approved similar variances in the past for reasonable sign variance requests. 3. The special conditions or circumstances necessitating the variance request do not resu(f from the acfions oi the applicant. 4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a speciaf . privilege in that every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and viability of their business. Neither would such approval - confer a special treatmeni as similar reasonable variances have been granted in the past. Resolution 735-03 Page 2 5. A1lawing for an additional 50 feet at both building ends wauld be the minimum variance necessary fo provide suitable visibili�y and alleviate the hardship. 6. The variance would nof be materialCy detrimentai to the p�rpose of the Municipal Code or fio other proper�y in the commercial zoning districts. 7. The proposed v�riance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streeis or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safeiy or substantialiy diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NQV�l, iHEREFOR�, �� I'i Fl1RiH�R RE�(3L!/E� that the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon �he above id�ntified finding of facts, does hereby approve th� variance reques#ed for an additional 50 feet of signage at the north and sauth end of #he building loca�ed at 2214-2222 Counfy Highway 10. Adopted this 20th day of August 2003. Gary S�evenson, Chairp�rson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) ;'i �; � l�em No: 6 i�eet9n� Ciat�: Auqust 20, 2003 iype �f 1�usiness: Public Hearin * ; <• � , .', � - �. Mounds View Planning Commission �r��e James Ericson, Cammunity Development Director I�es� iitlelSe�bjecfi: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance io Allow Two Curb Cufis at 3001 County Road H2; Planning Case VR03-007 � . A Public Hearing was scheduled for this varianc� request, however subsequent to the publication, it was determined that a variance was not neecied for the two curb cuts. The Code states that curb cuts not in compfiar�ce with the code may be allowed to remain so lang a� �hey are not deemed a public hazard. Site inspections reveai no apparent hazard or danger associated with the two curb cuts, both of which access Spring Lake Road. (Neither curb cut access County Road H2.) Visibility and spacing on Spring Lake Road is sufFicient. The Planning Application has been voided and the fee refunded to the applicant. � �a�e d C� James Ericson Community Development Dir�ctor �•`7��, F'1 i J1'I : f��hd 1 t Spec i 31 t i�S FRY N� 0514"4^�6.5 u 1 5 7��y3 t�2 B2FM P a _ � .i i ° �2 t� . . C � � ifY+ r� r"h k �.,i LJ �.,'C-. - i i .{� ...L� „� . . : ��-�, -,'� ' : � r. »� -�.�. $� R t � �f`d� � �, `''x�yn�� c� . •t� �� ; ,. �.``.: �' "rfA...•:�� ✓� ,�,.,..,,,:�P..��... ��a��,:��.��t�_�;��,��'-. �.�'� YZ�..;,� a ��M„�, i S ��—.�c.�; ,i Ci�LE �. . , ,��,� L'J �� . S i � � � � (� . y. i ..- � G...f,.-�'�' c``— .�r : Y,'ATtRS �QF�FFIviS�bf� [7 - � 4 F A � �� POfA(k�%'f� i SO�tC� R(�TE aD � �[-, i � '. �OftA�r�tAC-��(�,;�. �� ❑ ; r- � � < < ' , S � ; � ° r , � C�'WI'n�G Y .� � � .. �' t . '_ 1., � P� S Y �' _. . t - �- c � - I HEAVH�Ka � � Q ' � LEAi!# �+l�'T� � ,�f �_ t f � � � Y _ �' .' L 1 ' _ . � i TREE LfN13S:,- �� y �� t' ; � a�osNr� EsrdaraR ! "ROt� WE�At� � ❑ �-^ —}�° . ' j `CHrJ�J SAVI' � ❑ :.:RROPFftiY;Lllv� DISiANCE t ° �` q� F : , y,�?.c�-00:: • � _�`�'° � �� sLO�c f�PRIR , � � CROS� $7R�CT . � ' ¶� � , . -� � . CALL=Gik''1�iER;:, ..�.,,; . . , EXCAUA�'� i � ' . r�a r�s ,, .;,�: , .. . , ; , ., . .'.' , `-: '. , =' ' . . ,' r . .:; �;45�. , .�.... . . :,,"�;. • REPLIICEA8IS "� d ' � � � . , . , , � . ... ; ' : Fi.�,RES' � � !� � � �f . ,. � . � • ' �;. ' - . 7YP� aF REMOVAL . , I . a� . � U�--'. � ; ., • . . AC , GRASS GRAVE ; ' t-wr��e�t� , . , ,.., � �x7R^" . � . . . , . . .-,." . � COhfCF2ETE OTHER - TRI�C,iC� GUf .. . ' • , � � . . saw cur ' . , ' . , , . , - ;^' �"' ' 3CF�DUE.�R: PG �!P .Cl. , . � , � � ,' , . EXTRR 7R14 . . � ' � • LG15D5 tN " _ o . . . ; - , . . � , . . , • � . N,lRhFl • . . , � , '� � . ' i - , . . .- . . , ' ,'.y . � � , A ��.� ' � . . . . � , , • ..�.� . . . - ; j� R�PLAC� . S°�� . , . . . . .� . . 0 �K 70 USE BOBCAi IN i Y--� WITH.- � � .. • � , YaRD, ousroM� fs R�sQON- ' ; I.�„. �: , . ` , SiSLE FqRANY YRR[� Dkfi4AG� � k ' � ' � �—. •� ; ANp RESTt3RATI0N, � , , . . . . . l�, . . , �"` . � . . . CUST.31G. .. - SiDEWAI.K ( : � . ; '"�' . � � �- , �, . . . �2EGAf�DtIVGTHIS INSTAI�ATION; ,;:' , • . �.''<. � � OR'iEf�4tS QF THIS PRC?POSA�, ;-. �.�____, � 0 ..� . . T p , ; , ��'�� . . , �^ . . � .�: • • ,� . . ., IS�ilERY7HfiVGYOUINA�l7�b � � l � � n�c• � � ., : ' � , ; ,� . , ftv WRlTiNGI i� hlQT, PL'E�ISE ' t "�..C�"1� -. , : '°� �'. , , ' .,� , � }'Uf•.Ihi.11l�2f71NGANDA'i�i'ACFi. :' ' '`�. - s�a[ca�7 � � � ' •. • � '� - ` , ". GtJS�OFAERTO P�YANY co�i: , . `'' ,�j_ ' , . . . , � . . . R�QsJI�DPFRMiTF�ES. SEAL3 � �(• . �, , : �2soaflt�rr�ot�FaR►�na�o� , ,�� _. � � � � . _ -. gLf�Cl(R�PAlR.:.... , �.., �l�';: ; . _ . . . .:. _ ._ . . E � � � +�a.��ri'�r��E;�.��c� � �, �; : ._ :� cu�r 5r�: �; � �Y°, �-_°'°�°__ 5 " � . . . . , . _, , i� .�-. . , �.� .�-� r .:� , . - � , . .. . � �. : .__ .;. � _ : voz ' ..-. ' ; " , ._ i • i � r ��...i�.M1� , f <� , 'e ��,�7 Sr"��°�,t'� ' rg♦ � � -- - ��C��= AG 2 OF� � ,� , � . � b SIti��.� � . - -'Y` E , � �- , , - � ..,�'�4 f�✓�'�S �� . � _ � '� . . . �. rF`' �,riC��.0 = . . ��. ��,c,�r.��'' .G� - �t�%Lj �'�t�� '�^ (�5 1 �/�` �-�-,l�o ,� Itern Rlo: 7 M�eting Date: Auqust 20, 2003 iype o� �a�siness: Commission Business / ` . <i ` `I .:, � , `� ; `To; Maunds View Planni�g Commission Frorr�: Jame� Ericson, Communify Development Director Item T�tI�1S�bje�t: Discussian and Consideration of Rezoning Actions Associaied with the Public Facilities Zoning Districts. Special Planning Case SP-118-03 ,,t ,,: On July 14, 2003, the City Atfiorney addressed tl�e City Council regarding the Mounds View's PF Zonin� Districfi and recommended that the City sirongiy consider revising the district`s purpose and to rezone some or all prop�riies wifihin the PF dis�rict to another distric4 more IogicalEy suited. The Cify Attorney'� lei�er, dated July �4, 2003, a copy of my correspondence fio the Ci�y Council and Chapter 111 � of the Mounds View Zoning Cade are attached for yo�r review. Also included for your reference is a copy of the City's "Facility Guide." The City Councii, responding to the City Atfiorney's repor�, directed s#aff fo bring this issue to the Pfanning Commission for review and it requested fhat the Commission draft a proposed ordinance for the Council's consideration. - -� Di�c�as�ior�: � >, -- The City Attarney highlights the recent Supreme Court decision relating to ihe Eiler Media `s (now doing business as Clear Channel Outdoor} request for bi(Iboards from MnDOT. The Supreme Court's ruiing called info quesfiion the Cify's zoning practices as it relates to the PF district, in thafi the oniy parcels in the disfirict are municipally-owned while other simifar uses are zoned difFerentiy. Zoning based on ownership rather than based on the nafure af the use is inconsistent wifh conventionaf and practical zoning concepts. The fo(lowing represents a fufl lisf of the uses tha� are present wifhin the City's PF districf: 1. City parks: (Groveland, Lambert, Random, Hillview, Ardan, Greenfield, Oakwood, Silverview , Lakeside �each and Woodcrest parks} 2. Wells & Pump houses 3. City Hall 4. Water Treatmenfi Plant 5. Wafer Tow�r 6. The gridges Golf Course 7. Community Center � Two maps are attached to ihis report. The first map represents alI PF zoned parcels shaded �� in dark blue. Th� second map represents the proposed rezoning of each of ihe PF parceEs fo one of three disiricts: Single family residential, industrial or regionai commercial. R�corr�rn��►da&ion: Examine the documentatian provided a�1d discuss the City Attorney's recommendation fa `''; rezone the parcels within the PF (Public Facilities) Zoning District. A draft ordinanc� will be made avaiiable the night oi yaur meeting for your considerafiion. ��'�,cs�-� �C-d�-i..e..�-�s�n. James Ericson Community Developmenfi pirecior At#achments: �. Stagf Repart to Council, July 28, 2003 2. Cifiy Atfiorney Letter, July 14, 2Q03 3. Chapter 1118 of the Mounds View Zoning Code 4. 11�ap of the PF Zoned Parcels in #he City of Nlounds View 5. Map of Proposed Re�oned PF parcels G. Facilities Guide Map (Park Reference Map} ':`:� ;E.a �g -�' IG� � �� 1'1'� � 0� f � � ; � �t . _ �. r f � , / .'` ^ ' . , �: . T�. C�: Fr�rn o liern Tit1elSubject: � , ., ,,. . ,, . . l�e� No: Item 11 B(1� �lleeting �ate: Julv 28, 2003 �'ype �f �u�in�s�: Request for Direction Honorable Mayor and City Co�€nci! Kur� Ulrich, City Adminisfirator James �ricson, Community Development Director Direction Requested in Respanse fo City Attorney Report on Supreme Court Ruling on Public Facilities Zoning District At the City Councif's lasi meeting, the Giiy Attarney addressed fhe Council in response to the receni Minnesoia Supreme Court ruling agai�st Eller Media ar�d indicated that it could be argued �haf the City's Public Facilities (PF) zoning designaiion cor�stitufies "spof zoning" in that the design�iion is designed to cover Cifiy-owned properties rafiher than fhe conventional practice of zoni�g according to the lar►d use. ��,� �� The City Attorney recommend� tY�at the Cifiy "strongly consider revising the zoning code to deal specificaily wiih zoning in the land use co�text ra#her than in the ownership contexi." Chapter 1118 is attached to fhis repork which is the section of the zoning code relafiing to the Public Facilities district. . .. . Staff is seeking direction firom the Ci#y Council regarding the City Atforney's a�dvice. If fihe Council would like to revise the zoning code as suggesfed, #he Council should acfi in accordance with the City Code and have ihe �'lanning Commission review the issue and draft an ordina�nce for the Council's consideration. �� -f�i.c��. James Ericson Community Development Director At�achmenfis: 1. Leifer from City Attorney dated July �4, 2003 2. Chapfier 1118 of the Zoning Code relating to the P� zoning districi C:1Documents and SettingslJimElFavoriteslAdminlPF Rezaning Report - Ju1y 28, 2003.doc /� ¢ f � � l, r�►.� F� � �� ; ��o� .�. �� Altomey at Iaw bieece Diat (612) 337-926U Emaz'1: sriggs a�r.ennedy-graven.com Tuly 14, 2003 N1r. Jim Ericson Interim City Clerk-Administrator City of Mounds '�Iiew 2401 Higl�way 10 Matu7ds �Iiew, MN 55112 RE: Zoning Code Dis9ric# l�ev�ew I3ear Jim: �. ligl�t of ihe recent �VIN Supreme Court decision in the case of In the Matter o�f Denial of Elier Media C�mt�at�v9s Applications for Outdoor Advertisi� Device Pemuts in the Ci�y of Mottnds View. 1lti�esoia and flie reasonin.g set for�h in that case, an issue that has been discussed by the '� Ciiy in the past regarding t�he City of Mouuds View Zoning Code and the districts cont�vned tiierein - now appears ta warrant addifianat review by the City ofMounds View. Specifically, the issue is the existence of a public facifities (PF) disirict iri the zoning code tha� covers a range of uses from public parks through wastewater treatment facilities. The PF clislrict distuiction is based solely on ownership of a parcel of land, which has to be by ihe City of Mounds �Iiew, and. does n�t deal with the i}pe of land use actually bei.ng made af a given parcel of Iand. A.s the MN Supreme �ourt points out in its opinion, zoning deals with Ia.ud uses and the City's auti3orify to regulate such land nses. In fhe case of the PF district designa�ion in the City of Mounds View's City Code, the desi�.ation e�cists solely far the purpose of convenience far categorizing Iand owned by the City and not because of the actual use being made or the intended use to be mad� of a parcel of land, which should aciva.11y be ti�e establishing or guiding fact�r of a zoning olistrict designa�ion. Thus, consistent with the MN Supreme Court's reasoning in the Eller case, it may be best to revise or entirely delete the PF district desi�ahon existin� in tlie Czty's Code {which only applies to Cifiy-owned parcels) and to revise such districts to guide ihe uses made af those parcels, e.g.: parks-residential; wastewatar trreatrneni plants-industrial; city offices- business/cornrnsrciaUindustrial; golf courses-busuless/industrial(golf courses ar� a pern�itted use in a business disirict as presently defined by tYie i�Iounds View City Code). The revisions or elir�sination of the PF disirict wouid be consistent with �tie 1VIN Supreme Court's reasoning in. the Eller case in tt�at ihe "label99 for �e u.se allowed in t1�e districY would actually ma�ch �he u�e being made of a�aven parcel of lax�d, arid that tihe i6label" for a district would not be merely detamli�ed by SJR-234529v1 MLJ125�7 N1Y. Jim Ericson July 14, 2003 , Fage 2 _>; ,, who own� ti�e property (which only applies in �e case of the City, as the %Vlounds View Cify Code is presently drai�ed). Additionally, it could be argued that the e�stence of PF disiric� "islands " for individual parcels of land that are surrounded by the City's other �oning districts (which are appropriately based on land use iss�aes) con.stiE�ates "spot zoning" as diseussed in the MN Supreme Court's Opirv.on. In any event, while over the course of the past three or four years tlus issue I�as been raised. because of tbe rezoning that zs required every time il�e City acquires a parcel of land, it would appear tha� i�e PF dis4rict designation makes littie sense as a designated zoning district in a land-use context, and that the Ciiy shouid strongly consider revis3ng its zozzixtg code to deal specifically witrla zo�iiag in ihe land-use context rather than in the ownersl�p context. Please feei free to cantact me with any questioz�s yau rr�ay have regard3ng this matter and the suggestior�s noted hereisi. Six�cerelY, tCi�l�l�►1�1Z�.�e�:7_ L ► � : : : �. Scott J. Riggs ��o�ds View City Attomey SJR:jms cc: Bob Vose SJR-239529v1 NNI25�7 � la �� i-cz c �� n-► �;� -� ,� �. 1 I 118.01 SECTION: 1118.01: 1 I 18.02: 111�.03: I 1 I �.44: CI�A�TER 1118 ,� y-. ;, , ;: . 1� :1: �1 �� Purpose Perm.i�ed Llses �iGC@SSO]C� �585 (:OIIC�lt14%131 j]5e5 1I18.03 � (Rev. 2197� , ; 111 �.(}1: P O�Eo ibe purpose of the PF, Public �acil�t�es Dxstt�ict is to provfde for la.nd areas, �v✓aterways and water areas owned, coa�oIled, regui�ted, used o� proposed to be used by the Cgty. (198� Code §40.22� 1 l 1�.02: PE 'I'�I� iTSE�o 'I°�e fallow�g ar� pea°an�t�ed uses ui � PF' Dista°�ct: .. Public buildings a�d uses. �'ublic parks, playgrounds9 a.thletic fields, parking areas and �olf �ourses. Public sewsrs, rr��ter lane� and vvater starag� a�eas. Public streets, easemen�s and ather pub�ic ways9 highways a.�d t�ZOroughfares. '�reatffieni and pr�mpu�� facilits�s and other public utility and publi� ser�rice facilitses. (19�� Code §40022) �: -. , - , . _ ,-. � r =. •�. � _. ; � - - ! •._ `°: . ��-� � _. . � � - �� i � : . .. � �� . � � ° - . .. ,� . . - t ` f' � 11-� : a. � � � ��.�i' '.i..: �, Y. �i�•i�_i.�r�..�� .:.��I "��;..�.�. `_ •�.•'' 1:t`� ��,,a .. .� : , �. ,: � ' . _ _ - ..: . ._ ' ,,. .'. ., � . .. .. � . . � � . - ...�.-. �. ils ... . � �. _ - � . . x 1 �. � , � _., � " � 1. ; — �, . f , �, � ._ � �� -. �....1{ .��. � . �",. ��, �, J ..�� : f .��I-�t—f._ .. �.i..,' �.., ;t ��":,� � _.R� .�^ .. ' - �f... , .r i:i �M�.: r � _', �. � ��:>s.. '.: ��. " �"�f�l"' • � . �� K?� _ _ _ � . d. . " ' � . i ' �` ' . �' ° : , .: .i. % , '. ' ` _ . E. :� . �� •. , a` " R �rt 1 " i"'�: � �1: ;, i . 1 i: i' a° �' i� � �' � � r �d� ��d�lPBf�S �� l I 1 �.04 ,+ I l i8o (l�ev. 2/� . 1 l 18.04 C�1��I'�'IOI�TAL YJSESe The �alIov,rin� shall be considered a conditianal use in gI28 PF D15�iC� (i�qillflll� a conditional use permi� based upor� procedures s�t forth zn and re�ulated by Sect�on 1125.01 of this Tgtle}: (Ord. 588, 2-1�-97) Subd. 1. �Vireless t�lecommu�ca�ons ta�rers a�d anten�ae subject ta �Iie provisions established iri Chapter II24 of the �oning Code. (Ord. 5g8y 2-10-97} `� ; , �i8y af �a�rr�rLs �eva� C l � �. �._- -.�.,, � i �:: �. � .,—�_w_____ � �—' MM H[ 1�E D L M I IV L--_ I� 'v �' _ � � _ _ _ _ � J @ ,� I � I YE � � 3 ¢� � � ,, e � Y a 3 w� Y� a 4 � s �r � I ,� Ij I i� � ��,� �� Nmn unc xr B L A I N E '_ '� � ,� ' �- �� f � � i } e .. . . �� s �. � � �. � C ��• .(1 :�. �: . � _ ^. �� : � �a, � �� . � � � : . : . . . . � �� 9� �� - - �� . . , . . .� _ . �� . . . � � ��'�j� - �� _ ; } ., ' - � ; ' -'� ;� � ��.,`� � � :� �j�� ..� a � � 7 .�,�� _ _ � - 1 � � _ � ��. s � IR!�!!!y' � � - r�` �� '� ; ___ �.� _ _ . � ��il��1�� i. Ard�n Park 2. Greeniield Perk 3. pakwood !'ark 4. Lambert Park 5. Random Park 6. Woodcrest Park Y. Silver�ew Park B. HiElview Par& 9. Graveland Park 10. Lal<eside Park & Seach i I. Clty F4aft Park 12. Community Center 13. Plahrra: Open Space Ardan Ave. & Long Lake Rd. F113fview Rd. & Knoli Dr. Oakwood Pr. & Quincy St Jackson Dc & LambertAve. - 5219 Long Lalce Rd. Woodcrest 17r, & Silver Lake Rd. County Road I& Siiver lake Rd. HElllview l2d, & Long Lalce Rd. Groveland Rd. & Ardan Ave. 7840 PleasantView Dr. 24Q1 Highway IO 5394 Edgewood Dr. 8290 Coral Sea St. A. Pinewood Elementary School S5D0 Quincy Straet B. Edgewood F°7iddle School S 1 DO Edgewood Drive L.__— --- — —.._. — — �iem �o: 8 �eeting [�at�: Auqust 20, 2003 iype of �usiness: Discussion I .. : �/ : I -, , ;.i, . .. w io: Mounds View Planning Commission Frarn: James Ericson, Community Development Director ffi�rn Ti�1�ISubjec�: Discuss Modificatians to Proposed Ordinance 711, an Ordinance Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops In�ra�iuction, The Cify Council adopfied an lnterim ordinance on February 27, 2003, which direcfied the Planning Commission to review the licensing and zoning impiications related to pawnshops and to recommend applicable provisians. The Planning Commission d9scussed this issue at meetings in Nfarch, April and May of this year, reviewing S#ate stafiues, ordinances from adjoining communifiies and ordinances from communities where pawnshops currently operate. The Commission alsa heard testimony from represer�taiives of the Mounds View Police Depar�men� who did research on their own, discussing the pofientia! impac#s of a pawnshop with other palice departments. After significant discussion and inpuf from inferesfied parties including residents and fienants from Moundsview Square, the Commission adopfied a resolufion forwarding iwo ordinances on to the City Council for their cansideration. The City Council deliberated on fhe pawnshop zoning and licensing matters befare sending the zoning component back to the Commission for additional study to consider (1) an overlay '�' district and (2) poiential additional uses fo include within the overlay. r . The Planning Commission discussed the two issues at length and from that discussion, many questions were raised concerning the legalities of an overlay district. The questions were generaliy as follows: 1. (s there a minimum amounfi of land that the City can idenfify as an overlay district withaut being unreasonably restrictive? 2. Woufd the City be ai "risk" if fihe overiay district encompassed ONLY unavailable property? (the go(f course for example?) 3. Which other cities (if any) currently have a pawn over[ay? 4. Some cities expliciily limit the number of pawnshops that can be sited in the City whi(e other communities ban them ou#right. Is either practice legally permissibie? 5. What ar� the lega! ramifications {outside of the scope of strict land use considerations) of identifying multiple "unwanfed" land uses within one overfay? �_ While there is some elemen� of (egal risk in everyfihing a city does, is the City afi greater risk if it creaies a"red light" district, especially if opposed by 4he property owners? Pawnshop Report August 20, 2003 Page 2 i- . ,�. 1. Is there a►�ninimum amoun# to set aside? No, hawever the City must be reasonable. 2. Can overlay contain only unavailable land? No. "lt would not be advisable for the City to sei up an overlay disfirict containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effec#ively prohibifi these kinds of businesses. S�ch action could be deemed arbitrary and capricious. " 3. Which other cities have an overlay? Brooklyn Cenfier and Robbinsdale are two such cities. 4. Can a city limit or ban pawnshops altagether? Probably nof. Absen# specific supporting facts and reasons, pawnshops should be �reated in a manner similar to ofher commercial uses. "P,n outright ban on pawnshops would not sun✓ive a[legal] chaflenge." 5. What are the ramifications of creati�g an overlay with multiple "unwanted" land uses? Landowners would probably argue thaf the creation of a"red light" overlay is simply irratianal-- that is, that such a district does noi promofie the pubiic welfare and is a bad idea. 6. Is the City at greafer risk if i# creates a"red lighfi" district ? The crea�ion of such a disfiricfi would likely be mefi with opposifiion from landowners in and around such disfirict. Obvious[y, Ci#y action that generates real opposition is more likely to result in lifiigation than less controversial action. Therefore, yes, creating such a district would likefy increas� �he risk of litigation. �� The City Council has asked the Commission to camment on the overlay issue as to which of the two proposed areas would be more appropriate and which properties shauld be included in the overlay. Aiso, fhe Councii would like a response regarding fihe �roposal to include multiple "unwanted" land uses within the overlay. The Commission should address these �wo issues in iight of the lega6 opinions offered and prepare a response (in the form of a resolutian) to the Ciiy Council. To assisi the Commission with the potentiai overlay boundaries, [ have revised the original overlay maps to reflect a smaller overlay area with fewer parcels. The Commission wilf neec6 to determine if the area and parcel availability wouid satisfy the "reasonableness" test. :. � .. .�� R - �- �� Review the revised overlay map and direci sta�f to draft a response to the Gity Council. �Q.,�.�Q C.:-i�.C$.v°� James Ericson fnterim City Clerk/Adminis#rator } ti � 'i t ;- 1.� � .? ��<1'1l�litil _ r :.. . FRO(Uttl Mary Tietjen DAl'�: August 6, 2003 RE: Mo�nds View Pawnshop Overlay District This is i� response to Mr. Ericson's email regarding the creation of a pawnshop overlay district. Minn. Stat. � 325J, the sfiate statuie governing pawnbrokers, allows a city to regulate the business fransactions of pawnbrokers. The only provision in the statute relating to the location of pawnshops is Section 325J.10 which provides ihat a pawnshop may nat be located within 10 mifes of a gambling casino and that any pawnshop lawfully operafiing as of Apri! 2, 1996 c4oes nof have to relocate or close. -- The zoning and regu�ation of pawnshops involves different issues than apply to adult uses. There are no first amendment/free speech issues that woufd affect #he city's ability to create an overlay district for pawnshops. f n other words, there is no requirement fihat a city provide a"reasonable opportunify" for pawnshops in the same manner fihat it must do for aduft uses. Moreover, I cannot find any authority thai either requires the City to set aside a minimum amounfi of fand for a pawnshop overiay district, or prevenfis the Ci�y from limiting the number of pawnshops or prohibiting �hem altogether. However, as with any zoning or land-use decision, a decision to limit or ban pawnshops would neec� to be supported by reasons and an adequafie factual basis. A ban or significant fimitation on pawnshops may be difficult to justify unless the City could demonstrate a factua] basis (such as detrimentaf impact on the community) to trea# pawnshops differently than other commercial enterprises, Par�icularfy, the establishment of a pawnshop overlay district must have some rational basis. See, e.�., Bilfy Graham Evangelistic Assoc. v. City of Minneapolis, 653 N.W.2d 638 (Minn. C�. App. 2002) (city's designation of historic-disfiricfi designation wifl be overturned onlywhen ii is unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious). It would nof be advisabie forthe Cityta set up an overiay district containing only unavailable land in order to limit or effectively prahibit these kinds of businesses. Such action cauld be deemed arbitrary and capricious. See id. (zoning decision is arbitrary when it is based or� whim or is devoid of articulated reasons). Memo fo Bob Vose Augusf 6, 2003 Page 2 I reviewed several other cify codes. Robbinsdale has a"B4p overlay district" fhat includes this type of use. I iooked at the Hopkins code-a which was mentioned by Mr. Ericsor� -- and note thai na license can be issued at a locatian thafi is less thar� 1,000 feet from any adult business, or a locafion that is less fihan 350 feet from any off-sale liquor businesses. I could no� pull up Hopkins' zoning ordinance on-line, so I do not know whether they have a special overiay district. Broaklyn Center also has an overlay disfirict. �.., � I believe that the City can regulate pawnshop locafiions, buf any regulations should be reasonable and, absent specific supporting facfs and reasons, should fireat pawnshops in a manner similar to other comrr�ercial uses. More restrictive pawnshop requirements must have a rational basis and be supporfed with adequate factual findings. >:i _ :j Overlay 29 th�usfiang Drive !��stang Circle � . ,. . ,�-�.. P p � r e-a � D . ..�. � ,-'. � .,.. ..:.:. � ' ' � , M1 .,- aic[ catcr, .. N i � � �" w � ; 'd F ' i.: r _ : : , i A_� .` F i _._.,. � _ _ .... _.__ �.,,,..�...._.� . �n �, _� \ w _...... .. _. . . __ .. _% ._.._ � '' '��CRA ? , i�` ` . . `�''�—� ' ) � 1 ' ! R-5 6-3 -- t TOwNS £CGE TERRACE ' � � AIOBiI.E HOME PNiK � — — g � y . . . _ F 2� iaw :- � i _ �� i _ 3 :��1:11,�`r- �,. -a '*-.- �" � .; :a , a i � � . 1; � !� A f t�: ;T �%�. `a � � tie � i �.��a - .a� .--.— � _ e:� n re�f-� ' n � u�s ° ; ' ^ a„ �5 sr i: " ei �� r � .�.:. +r� .,.o� �Vef�ay � i 1 1 i � I � I � 1 � � I �� d � ( � �: �XH1��7° C. P�°opo�ed Overiay Disfri�is �R�vdsecl) Overlay �: Norih of Highway 10 � � �r 1 1� � �� . _ . ... ._.. .. �'`� �. .. � ��.�.--__ �L �- - _ . - tna .�+ nare � �� ; r,i,ns. e.�x - e� Overlay 2o fVlus�ang brive 1 M�sstar�g C6rcle 0 TOW€JS EDGE TERRRCE M081L� HOiNE PARK —`_..�.__.___.u-�:......__....._.__..� U �48G0 f ' 4825 • 3 ` �.- 482 t � � ` � . . . _ __ .. ... ,._ . . . ...... ...... .... � ; �� _._......_. ' i�� . _< , �_ _ _ ,�.__..__._...._._.__._...- 482z ! i A845 d82p � oy a f a803 4818 ' `� '� '� 480i 48L`0 i H � N ,_. . . ✓,� i 4773 �e ._.. .... .,.,. 4775 ` , �.r".� 476t, �,�., : 476Z �, 475t �/ 474�� Y - - �� y . � 0 0 � ,_ .. c � t ,�y � �� 4$89 y ' o '�. . ,? . t.`._ :.��; ty �3 L �"� f Cri C Overlav Disfi. #2: Parcels: 3 Total �,rea: 16.� acres '; � I�ern No: 9 �ee�ing Da��: Auctust 20, 2003 i�� csf �usi�e�s: Discussion It ; � / ;_ �•� , ;�� _ . �o; Nlounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Communiiy D�velopmenfi Director I��rn iltlelS�abje�ta Review Council Priorities Regarding Possible Code Amendmenfis �,. , _ �� .� �� .�� . Through a series of goal-setting sessions and meetings to review priorities, the City Council identified possible amertdments to the City Code, which are being presented to the Planning Commission fior comment and possible action. The possible amendmei�ts are as #ollows: 1. Amend the City Cod� to increase the minimum square foofage requirements for a sin�le-family home. 2. Amend #he City Code fo suppori and encourage life-cycle housing and upper-end condominiums. --' =- ' 3. Amend the City Code to restrici or prohibit fasf-food drive-throughs. 4. Amend Zoning Code with regard to permitfed uses �- . The first proposed amendment is fairly straighfforward—increase fhe minimum floor areas for new homes. Currenfily a one–story home is required to have at least 960 square feet of first floor area. A two-story home woufd need a minimum first fioor area of 780 square feet. These areas do not incfude basements or upper stories. Should the area requirements be increased to prohibit smaller homes? The second proposed amendment is much more involved, in that there are a multitude of options that could be employed fio encourage the deveiopment of life-cycle housing and upper-end condominiums. One option fihat was recently adoptec# was to eiiminate the CUP requirement from townhames. Other optians might inciude dertsi#y bonuses, fee reductions, local tax rebates, etc. Another idea would be to allow detached townhomes (single family detached dwellings with minimal setbacks on individually platted lots surrounded by common areas.) The third proposed amendmeni is to prohibit or restrict fasf food drive��hrus. This could be done by requiring a CUP for drivewthrus so that ihe Commissian and Council would have an opportunity fio review the concept priorto �Ilowing the development. While an outright ban is possible, I'm �ot sure that course of aciion would be advisable. Possible Code Amendments August 20, 2003 Page 2. The iasf proposed amendment concerns the structure of the Zoning Code and how permitted uses are idenfiified. (Attached to this report is Chapter 11 i 3 of the Zoning Cade rela#ing to the B-2, Limited Business district which exemplifies the City's unwieldy zoning scheme.) In each district, uses are expficitly idenfified. If the use is noi listed, it's not aliowed. While there is some benefit io having articulated lists of uses, the problems iend to outweigh the benefits. The difficulty magnifies with each passing year as new uses and fechnologies enter the commercial marketplace while outdated and outmaded uses fall by the wayside. y. � .:� . Discuss the four identified possible code amendments and direc� staff accordingly. � G�.vu.� d ��e. James Ericson Community Development Directar Attachments: 1. Chapter 1133, B-2 Limited Business Zoning District `, 1113.01 SECTf ON: 1113.01: 1 'f 13.02: i i 13.03: 1113.04: Purpose Permitted Uses Accessory Uses Canditiona! Uses CHAPTE� 1113 ��:r r. � �i 1113.02 (Rev. 7/99) 1113.01: PIJRP�S�: The purpose of #he B-2, Limifec{ Business District is fo provide for low intensity, retail or service outlets which deai directly with the cusfiomer for whom the goods or services are furnish�d. The uses allowed ir� this District are to provide goods and services on a limited community markefi scale and locafied in areas which are well served by collecfior or arterial street faciiities at the edge of residenti�l districts. (1988 Code §40.17} 1113.02: P�R�I`f`fE� 11SES: 7he foifowing are permitted uses in a�-2 Distric#: Subd. 1. Service Oriented Businesses: Service oriented businesses which serve th� Mounds View community: Bank, savings and ioan, savings credit unions and other financial institufiions. Commercial (leased anci professionaf offces). Copy service but not including printir�g press or newspaper. Dry cleaning pick-up and laundry pickrup stations, including incidental repair and assembfy but not including process�ng. Educational or instruciional facilities. (Ord. 632, 7-26-99) Employment agencies. Finance companies. Health and beauty services. Insurance sales, claims and branch offices. Locksmith. Medical and denta[ offices and clinics. Pubiic utili#y collecfiion affices. 91 i 3.02 Rea! estate sales. Shoe repair. 1113.02 (Rev. 5/96) Trave! bureaus, tra�spor�ation tickef offices. Subd. 2. Retail: Limited retail uses which have, as #he principle use, sales with warehousi�g or display secondary fio that use. Adult establishment as defin�d and regulated in Chapter 513 of tE�e Municipai Code. (Ord. 574, 5-13-96) All permitted uses as allowed in the B-1 Neighborhood Business Districts. Antique shop. Art and school supplies. Bakery goods and baking of goods for re#ail sales on the premises. Bicycle sales and repair. Books or stationery stores. Camera and photographic suppfies. Candy, ice cream, popcorn, nuts, frozen desseris and soft drinks. Coin and philatelic stores. Costume, clothes rental. Delicafessen. Drugstore. Fabric store. Florisfi shop. �rozen food store but not including a locker plant. �urni�ure showroom wi�hout warehousing. Furriers when conducfed on[y for retail frade on premises. Gi� or novelty store. Hardware store. � ) ,� 1113.02 Hab6y store, inc(uding handicraft classes but not to exceed fifteen (15) students. Ice sales with storage not to exceed five (5) fons. Jewelry s�ores and watch repair. Leather goods and luggage stores. Liquor, off-sale. Meat market but nofi including processing for a locker plani. Office supplies and equipment. 1113.02 (Rev. 9/00) Plumbing, fielevision, radio, electrical sales and such repair a5 are accessory use to the retai{ establishmenfis permitfed within this Districfi. Record/music shops. Rugs, carpet, tiEe, paint and wallpaper sales. Shoe stores. Small appfiance saies and service. Sporti�g goods store. Tailor shops. Tay stores. Video rental, sales and service. Wearing apparel. (Ord. 452, 2-27-89; Ord, 487, 6-25-90} Subd. 3. Tattoo, Body Piercing, Body Branding, Body Painting or Body Scarring Establishments, provided thafi: a. Any such establishmenfi shall be separated by no less than one thousand feet (1,000'} from ar�y other such establishment located within fhe City of Mounds View, as measured from the property lines of the property upon which fihe uses are located. b. The minimum floor space for such use shall be two hundred fiffiy (250) square feet. c. The establishment and operatar� shall be licensed and be in compiiance with Chapfer 515 af the Municipa! Code. {Ord. 663, 9-11-00} , 1113.03 1113.04 1113.03: ACC�SSO�lI IJ��S: The following are permitted accessory uses in a B-2 Disirict: AI[ permitted accessory uses as allowed in a�-1 Districi. (1988 Code §40.17) 1113.04: CONDIT°I�IVAL U��: The following are condifianal uses in a B-2 Districf (requiring a conditional use permit based upon procedures set forth in ar�d regulated by Section 'i 125.01 of this Tifiie}: Subd. 1. Governmental and public utility buildings and s#ruc#ures necessary for the health, safeiy and general welfare of the community; provided, that: a. Con�ormity with the surrounding neighborhood is r�ainfained, and required setbacks and side yard requirements are met. b. Equipme�t is completely enclosed in a perman�nt sfructure wiih no outside storage. c. Adequafe screening from neighboring uses and landscaping is provided in accardance with subdivisions 1103.08(I) fihrough (5) of this Title. d. The provisions of subdivision 1125.01(1)e of this Tiile are considered and ;;�� 3 safisfactorily met. � Subd. 2. Commercia! planned unit development as required by Chapfier 1120 of this Tifi1e. Subd. 3. Sofar energy and wind generator systems and solar and wind ger�era#or structures1. (1988 Code §40.17) 5ubd. 4. Vefierinary clinics, animal clinics, and animal boarding facilities; provided, that: (Ord. 685, 8�27-01) a. Noise and odor are efFectively confined to the premises in accordance with Ghapter 6 of fihis Municipal Code, Nuisances. b. A mechanica( venfilation or exhaust system shall be installed to cantrol, capfiure and remove emissions or odors generated by such use. Such systems shail be separafie from other ventilation systems in fhe building. Such system shaU be designed to prevent the migratian of emissions or odors to other parts of the building. lnstallation must compiywith Minnesota Building Code Mechanical Systems, Chapfer 13452. (Ord. 441, 5-23-8�; Ord. 685, 8-27-01) 1 See Sections 1 I03A4 and 1103.05 of this Titte. 2 See Section 1001.0I of this Code for adoption of State Building Code; see M.S.A. § 16B.59 for State Building Code. 1113.04 i 113.04 (Rev. 8/01) c. Afl animal boarding activities shall be conducted indoors, except for necessary oufdoar exercise. At no time shall any animal be left unsupervised whiie oufdoors. (Ord. 685, 8-27-Q�} d. Ou#door exercise shall be conducted so as not io unreasonably annoy, injure or endanger the health, safety, comfort, or weffare of the public. (Ord. 685, 8-27-01) �. All animal boarding facifities shall comply with the Nuisance Codes esfiablished far the Cify of �iounds View. (Ord. 685, 8-27-01 } f. AI! animaf boarding faciliiies shall comply with the Minnesota Pet and Companion AnimaE Welfare Acf (Minnesota S#atutes, 346.35 — 346.44). (Ord. 685, 8-27-01) Subd. 5. Pet stores; provided, that: a. Noise and odor are effectively canfined to fihe premises in accordance with Chapter 604 of this Municipa! Code, N�isances. b. The boarding of animals is prohibited, except for the purpases of retail sales. c. A mechanical ventilation or exhaust sysiem sha[1 be installed to control, capfiure and remove emissions or odors generated by such use. Such systems sha(1 be separate from the other ventilafiion systems in the building. Such system shall be designed fo prevent the migratior� of �missions or odors to other parts of the building. Insta[lation must comply with the Minnesota State Builcfing Code Mechanical Systems, Chapter 1345. (Ord. 448, 9-26-88) Subd. 6. Wirefess telecommunications towers and antennae subject to the provisions establisl�ed in Chapter 1124 of the Zoning Code. (Ord. 588, 2�1 Q-97) Subd. 7. Day care center, group nursery; provided that: (Ord. 595, 4-14-97) a. No overnight facilities are provided for fhe children served. Chifdren are delivered and removed daily. (Ord. 595, 4-14-97) b. The front yard depth shall be a minimum of thiriy five feet {35'). (Ord. 595, 4-14- 97) c. Minimum iot area shall be no fess than one (1) acre, or as provided in Sectian 1104.02, subdivision 2b(3). (Ord. 590, 11-25-9�) d. Not less than for�y {40) square feet of outside play space per child be pravided and that such spaee be suitably fenced and/or screened in accordance wifih condifiions as specified by the City Council. (Ord. �95, 4-14-97) 'i � 13A4 1113.04 (Rev. 8/01 } e. Adequate o#�-street parking and access is provided in compliance wi#h Chapter 112� of fhis Title. (Ord. 595, 4-14-97) f. Adequate off-street Eoading and service er��rances are provided in compliance with Chapter 1922 of this Title. {Ord. 595, 4-�4-97} g. The site and related parking and service entrances shall be served by an arterial or collector street af sufficient capacity to accommodate the traffic which wi11 be generated. {Ord. 595, 4-14-97} h. Ail signing and informaiional or visual communication devices shall be in compliance with the iVlounds View Sign Gode. (Ord. 595, 4-14-97) f. The provisions of Secfiion 1125.01, subdivision 1 e of this Title are considered and satisfactorily met. (Ord. 590, 11-25-95) j. The distance betv�reen any outdoor pfay yard for a day care center or group nursery and the Highway 10 right-of-way line shall be a minimum of #wo hundred feet {200'), excep# as provided in Section 1123.02, subdivision 1 c. (Ord. 595, 4--14-97) k. No day care cenfer or graup nursery shal! be permitted where the distance from #he property line for the day care center or group nursery to a premise requiring a liquor license, as provided in Section 502 of the Niunicipal Code, or a license for an adult establishment, as provided in Section 513 of the Municipal Code, if five hundred ; feet {500') or less, except fihat the five hundred (500) #oot req�airement shall not appfy to any [iquor establishment receiving at least sixty percent (60%} of its annual gross sales revenue from the sale of food. (Ord. 595, 4-14-97) ; �'1�OC�EDIi�GS OF'I'�IE I��O�JI�� '� PL�PdI�iI�G COla�II�II�3I0iV CIT'Y' Ok' NIOi7I�IDS ��E�' �E�' C��JI�TY, l�I�INE��TA M 240� �Ifgi��ia� 109 I�Ioi 1. Call to O�der The meeting was called to order b5� Chair Stevenson at 7 2o I�oll Call Members Present: ComrrLissioners ; Members Abseni: Miller (excused) Also Present: Community De�i � Ite��lar IVleeting �taly 1 b, 2003 l� V�e� ��yy �Iall ��ie��,��l�I�d 55112 ; .,:.:� ., J��ly 16,:2003. h, H�glaf�d, '' ffndex to I��es P�a�n�ffi� ��.v�o��aos Location: 22'29 County Road H2 P�annin� Case I�I03�002' Location .:: ' `8�30 I�noll�vaad Drive `` Spec�al Pianning Cas� SP�114-03 Discuss Proposed Modifications to Proposed Ordinance 711, Pawnshops <':� A�p�'ove ;v�rirn, and Johnson Page a. ; Juiie 18, 2043 MQTI�N/SECOND: 7ohnson/Zwirn. Ta Approve the Plat�ning Commission Minutes fo� June 18, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 6 Nays -� 0 Motion carried. Tdlou�td� V�ew Pi�t�u��g Comnaiss�� July 16, 2Q03 l�e��lar 1Vlee�i�g I'age 2 4o Citize�s Itequest� ar�c� Coanrn�nts oe� �tems IVot o� the Agenda None. Se Con�ideratio� o� 12esolution l�o. 'i33-03 Appro�iv� � V�r��a�ce �� Allm�� a i�educeci Fro�t Yax�d �etback to Co�siruct az� Additio�. �IRQ3POfl� Community Development Director Ericson explained the a�plicant's reque'st and indic�ted iliat the homes in the area are all setback at 50 feet from the piopei-�y line arid'`are 75 feet frofn the street. He then indicated that he had included the letter frorri,;�the applicant explaining her requesf and addressing the issue of hardship in this case. Director Ericson indicaied that Staff reviewed the cri#eria and feeis that su:Fficie��t hardship exists to meet the requirements and recommends approval. He ihen indicated tliat tivs matter was set for public hearing and there are residents in attendance for t�i,e issue. �Ie fiirthcr commented that the Planning Commission would need to determine;w�ether it feels that the l�ardship requirements are rnet and, if so, can act on Resalution`733-03: approvu�g tlie variance. Commissioner Zwim aslced whether 2191.;, 2185, and;�295 are set back. at the 50 feet because it seems the lots are shorter there. , .��. Director Ericson indicated that he kiad not n�casured all the properties on the blocic but it appeared that all were at the same distance from ihe street `' Chair Steveuson opened t]ae �ublic.hea�-ing at 7:Q8 p.m: Joan Basard addresscd �hc Cornmission. and indicated that the street is at an angle to the properties and she c%aes riot think iliat those houses are as far bacic. She then said that �e iwo- stoiry house to the right of hers has a porch:tfiat sticics out six feet from ihe house. Diractor Ericson hanc�ec� out copies of the plans for the expansion of the home for review. Christy Moore of 2234 La�nbert said she faels this is a good plan to improve the property and the tax base for the City and,she would hope that the Commission would a�prove this improvexnent. ,, � She then commented th'at'ske wili wani to expand her small liome in the future and would be faced with a similar set:back issue and would look to the Commission for support of a variance i� tlie future. Cornmissioner Johnson asked why ihe City's Code is so stz�ict on ihis and said that all new deveio�n�ents stagger the houses rather than setting them all back at the same distance. Directorc Ericson indicated that the City's Code was drafted bacic when it was tha norm to set all the houses bacic the exact distance. T'a�ot�ucis V�ev� Plan�i�g Co�rarn�ssion J�ly 16q 2003 I�.egu�a�° 1l�eet�� Pag� 3 � Commissioner Johnsoil indicated he would like to irnow if other cities are still doing this and said he thinlcs the City gets better housing stocic out of not doing it. Director Ericson indicated that often times there are constraints with setbac�s whezi expanding existing housing so the City may want to look at the Code to encourage reinvest7nent iri its residential housing stoclt. He then indicated that once the City has� a planning �ssoc�ate on board the City could poll neighboring communities for how they handl"e: this type of issue. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:1b p.m. ,,i` MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Zwirn. To Approve Resoluiion 733-03, a Resolution Appro�i;ng" a Variance to Allaw a Reduced Frc�nt Yard Setbaek to Construct an Addiiion. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 1Vlation carried. 6. Consideration of Resolaatf��a 934-03 I�eco�arn��c�it�� Approval of a I�fi�oa° S ubd ��isro�. IVII03-002. Community Development Direcior Ericsaxi indicated tliat this case is a request for a minor subdivision and noted that the applicants own the pzoperty at 8430 I�nollwood Drive and would like to subdzvide it to create one additional lot. Director Ericson indicated that the„lot to be created and the remaining lot are large enough to meet the City's Code requixermelits`and he feels tl�at a nice house could be built on the new lot as it is a very nicely wooded lot: He then said thai ther� ai•e no issues that would not warrant approvi.ng ihe rilinor subdivision and Staff is waiti�ig for a 2003 value for the property before determinizlg the required park dcdication fee. Director Ericsoz� indicated that Staff is v��aitiiig for the RLS ar Certificate of Survey to be submitted for review by the City Attor•uey befare this item would be brought before Council for final approval. Dzrecfor Ericson reviewed ihe stipulations for approval listed in the Resolution. MQTION/SECOND: Zvwirn/Song. To Approve Resolution 734-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision. ' Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. T°�Ianncis `Izew PIan�A�� Com�assion .Tuly 169 2003 Re�ula�- I@�eeti�� Pag� 4 7. Disca�ss �a°oposeci IVYo�Iifications to Propo�ed Orciinance 711, a� Or°dinans� Relating to the Zoa�in� of P�w�shops. 5�aecial Plan�i�� Case �P-114�03 Community Developmeni Director Ez-icson indicated that the City Council had aslced that the Planning Commission discuss the issue of overlay zoning for the pawnshop a�zd other adult orzented businesses. He tk�en pointed out on the �nap the two proposed aareas for-:the c�verlay district. Director Ericson asked for input as to which overlay what types of uses the Commissian felt would be ap� district. Commissioner Johnson indicated that he did not Iike the too many resxdents. Z the Coxxaznission would prefeir, and ely located iri such an overlay ond optiou� because it is too close to Director Ericson indicated that a lot of people havc cxpressed a preferei because it is separated from any residential, churches schools, daycares heart af the City. Director Ericson indicated that the City would have some comment as zt is adjacent to them ari�i the sam district were selected. � one from the f Blaine as they may have New Brighton if the other Commissione� Hegland sai� he is concerned that sti�ch a laz:ge��area is being destgnated for the overlay district because everi `tliough right 1�ow thcrc may riot be many places to locate within that oveilay districi future uscs of that properky is unlcnown to the City and it opens the City up to allowing more af these types of�ises because tliere would be room available. Director Er-icsoii incli�ated the reason Council suggested a large area is to minimize legal risk for the City because creatiiig;a very s�nall district within which it wouid be impossible to locate could open t1�e. City up io a legal cl3allexlge. Commissioner Hegland sugg�sted that the area could be smaller because Mounds View is a small'City overall and there should be some consideration for i:hat in figuring the size for the dzstrict. He #hen said that;he`wauld lilce io do further research into the requirements and issues aundin the creation o surr g f an overlay dishict before he is prepared to vote on it. Coiiail�issioner Zwun indicated that he agreed with Com�nissioner Johnson with regard to option o��e becausc it is �.vvay from residential areas. He also noted that option two may interfere with I�rew Brighior�'s proposal to build residentzal and seniar housing in the area. Chair ;tevenson indicated he was not in favor of either one. Commissioner Scotch indicated she was not in favor of either one. She then said thai she fee2s the proposed area is too large. ; �/Iourrds Vievv �iann�� Coar�a�aissia�a JuI� 169 20a3 IZega�lar IVieeting Page 5 �� Commissiozier Johnson asked how other cities do this. Directar Ericson indicated that most cities have it as part of their cammercial district arid only Hopkins has an overlay disfi-ict. Commissioner Johnson questioned why there is not a pawnshop already in New Bri�liton if fihey are nat doing something like this. Director Ericson indicated thai some cit�ies prohibit pawnsho�s ,but that is against the la�v and opens the City up to Iegal action. Commissioner Hegland indicated he would lilce to lcnow a littie nlore about this averlay district befare mal�ing a decision because it may not be any more ,defendal�Ie thazi the appraach of siinply not allowing a pawnshop. Director Ericson indicated that Staff could get an opinian froi�i the City Aita�ney and pull case law but the problem is anything can be challen�ed"aiid the�e is always a level of risk and no attorney vcrould counsel as to the speetrum of rislc. Co�runissioner Zwirn asked the status of tlie Mounds;View Square pawnshop. . ,' �, Director Ericson indicated therc has besn na charige as far as fie has heard. He then said that the � City has until September to cor��e up with lataguage for tlz� 4rdinance but could extend that another ye�r if the City feels it i�eecis more time to re�earcll tl�e matter. James Nelson oi2242 La�1�t�ei�t indicated he caine for the addition discussion but would iike to speak on this �natter as we1L He t�en said that when you allow a pawnshop a certain type of business owner nci�s thosc and it seems they are of lower class and it s�arts a blight in the area and soon the whole thing looks nin dow�i and low class. He further asked the City to be very careful where thc pavvnsha� is allo��ved io iocate ta prohibit this type of problem. Co�ssioner Song suggestecl ra'€sing the fees as high as possible to ensure that only those that inteiicl ta run a seriaus business and can affoxd to do so apply. D�ectar Ericson indica;fecl that Council has recommended that the license fee he elevated to $1 Q,000 and that may b'e high enough to de#er those that are not as serious or those that do not have the funds to run an abave-board facility. Commissioner Hegland questioned why the attempt to govern where pawnsho�s are located has grown into otli�r adult uses. Director Ericson indicated that was the direction from Council. � i`�Io�nds `Tflew PTamnfn� Corr��ssion J�ly 16, 2003 Regular I'VleetBng Page 6 Director Ericson indicated that back in 1996 the City went through a similar process for adult uses and that was included in the 5taff report. He then said that seven years later ihe City has nat had any requests for adult uses and that may be because of the strict licensing requirement�"an.d it may malce it easier to locate here if the overlay district comes in. He further co�ui�ented`that he is concerned with what might happen if a red light district is creaied but perhaps others'do not mind that. Chair Stevenson indicated he did not feel it made sense to lui�p �in adult use"s when tvos� �are already addressed in the Code. He then said he would like to.;leave that out and adclress ��here to zone or vvhere an overlay dist�ict for a pawnshop sl�ould ba located. Cornrnissioner Johnson indicated the only way he would want ta lun�p. adult uses into the overlay district is if it made things more restrictive than the current C;ode. Director Ericson indicated that the owner of the proposed pawns: district but he has received no update from him on the �a�viishap �pposed to an overlay Commissioner Zwirn asked whether ihere was a:l�g�l r•easoz� to tie the adult uses to the pawnshop discussion. Director Erieson indicated that a Council,Iulember had aslced tliat the Planning Commission consider adult uses that may not be acceptable to, the average;resident at the same time as the pawnshops are heing discussed Chair Stevenson commented'that at one meetin� t�e �oinmission restricted the space to allow a pawnshop.�io'4,400 square feet and: now the City is iallcing about an area that is several acres. Commissioner Hegland indicatcd that ihe City couid no longer lunit it to one pawnshop with that large area. Director Ericson indicated that Mounds..View Square is approximately seven acres and the both overlaydistricts are inuch larger, ctor Ericson inc from the pawn, �mething tha� is he would get fe ie would raft a recommendatian for the Council separating out adult i talce a second loolc at the proposed overlay district and scale it bacic .ble but not overly permissible for how much space the�e is. He also from the City Attorney. '�onunissioner. Scotch said that she feels 4,000 sc�uaxe feet is tao much and she vvould prefer to restrict it to 20Q0 or even 1flOQ square feet and not wo�-ry about the overlay districts. Director Ericson indicated that Council is opposed to the location in Mounds View Square regardless of the size so the Coinmission needs to determine an overlay location. ; �I��ds Vie�v Pl��nirag Co��i��ion � i�eg�lar 1Vieeti�g 60 1�Te�t Plat�nang C'omr��ss�� Niee�ing: August 6, 2003 7o Adjoternrr►e�t to Agencia 5essaon There being no further husiness before the Planning ComT meeting a� 8:08 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to Respec#iully subinitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Birector Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSaver Off Site Secreta�ial, Inc. ;_=1 July 16, 2003 Page 7 Stevenson;aciioumed the � . � � � � - �j � � � � � S I I �! C� <.� C� �i r ► 1�TEWS � YNFORMATION FOit �iTIZEtV �LANN ERS �i: �;,•: PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL / N.UMBER 51 / SUMMER 2003 ��l ��1Ti�3��'��T��3 e C0� � : ;�: _ � i : �� I Perspedives ofi dealing �'' with bcuhyar-d etephants. ��$�� Uidyou�Fiear `' :� � whai��Ijzrst snid? ��. �� : . _ - ,�� ''' t�l�rtrt�� C's IW is forWafer .. � X isforX-rated � �Yu.fqrYoufh: 1= Z fs for Zoning ��'1�1F51� ' ��e ��r : Znntr�gfor adutt enteitctinmcfi�t bttsinesses. : �c, `�� ,t�� 14'1'�� ' '��_�ld1�� t1��IC ��c[��o� Ptartnirtg dcpnrtments set '; f oot'in the online world. �: �; '�� ` `�� i'��i� ��Cf@V� ° AC�tll�'� Ho�siilg Uncier'standirlg a ' b:�oniln� rceiv s.egmenf of the.�tat�sin� marhet , �: . i•, .. � i': � i, I _; 1 `:` .:. s � � :, � `' ( .° I .;, . . f: i' �: _. :. FROM THE EDITOR - ' � � �� ,�_ ,'� � �t � � � �� " S � � � � ' It doesn't take �� s�� ,�.,t,� �;;,. longbefore most �� '�� "` �'a�.;`� :'` new planning ` � � ', �s� �� 1 `i;L�;4 � � ti �.,1 1t� commissioners ��~��(1 confrant their � ¢�-- ' first "NIMBY" situation. Oftentimes, it involves angry residents appearing before the commis- sion, upset about a devetapment or projeet that they Eeel threatens their neighbor- hood oz property. It can be di�ficult eo stay calm in the chaxged atmosphere oF the meeting room, when residents face off against the project applicant. Name-cailing, heated accusa- tions, and loud e�ressions of discontent are not uncommon. It can be wise to keep in mind Dragnet's Sgt. Friday (Jack Webb) calmly �eaeing: "Jusi the fae€s, ma'am, just the ,Cs.,, Inside, yau'll find some intereseing perspeetives on dealing with NIMBY and related situations. Our thanks to rhe many individuals who responded to Chzistine Robbins' article (on the facing page) for allowing us to pxint excerpts from their comments (on pages 4 and 5}. As an aside, you can also receive and coznment on ini- tial drafts of artides submitted for publica- tion in t�e PCJ — to sign up, just go to our PlannexsWeb site: wwwplannersweb.com/ updates.html This issue oE the PCJ also marks the conclusion of Larry Gerckens' "Planning ABC's" series. I hope you've found it infor- mative and enjoyable to read. We will soon be pubiishing an attractive cornpi- lation of aII 26 letters in the series, from Aueomobiles to Zoning. I encourage you to take advantage of our special pre-reiease pricing, as set out in the � insert sheet. � m o � Wayne M. 5enville, Editor i FEATURES e�! Nose for 6�IWt�Ys by Chzis RoUbi�u with ndditioiial perspectives fi om c�cross the coti{ntry Most planning commissioners have sat thzough stormy meetings, with angry residents confronting project appiicants. Legitima[e concerns are oEten miYed with irrational fears. Planner (and pianning commissioner) Chris Robbins offers some insights into how [o deal with NIMBY situations. List¢n! by Iteiie Watso�i A short primer on che skill of active listening. ' 'fa� ti�e interrnet io Build Pu�lic �a�tieipa�ion by David Essex Planning departments in communities large and small are increasingly using e-mail, Web sites, and other "electronic" approaches to reach out to the public. Journalist and plan- ning board member David Essex highlights several effective uses of the Internet, and offers [ips on building and maintaining Web sites. = The i�!¢w "�.ctiv¢ Acialt" F#oeasing by Wayne A. Lemmon Marketed as "a common sense alterna[ive for single-family home otivnership for those over 55 years of age" providing "maintenance free living" "close to family and friends" with activities "Erom billiards to crafts to surfing the net" "all right at your doorstep.° That's part of the pitch Eor "active aduit" communi- ties, a rapidly growing segment of the housing market. An overview from real estate market economist Wayne Lemmon. DEPARTMENTS � P��[ti11�1$ ��'S Planning historian Larry Gerckens conciudes his alphabetic review oE planning topics with: Water, X-rated Uses, Youth, and Zoning. Illustratio�ls by Paul Hoffman. �lannie�g Law Prim�r: ��ning Adul4 Entertainrn¢�i �casir�ess¢s by Terence R. Boga, Esq. Aetomey Terence Boga reviews the basic legal pzinciples involved in zoning for adult busi- nesses. P L A N N 1 N G C O M M 1 S S I O N E R S ,� � • Champlain Planning Press, Inc. P.O. Bax 4295, Burlington, VT 05�F06 Tei: 802-86FF-9083 a Pax: 802-862-1882 E-mail: inFoCia plannersweb.com plannersweb.com : �.; Editor Editorial Wayne M. Senville Advisory Boatd Buriington, Vea-mrnu Larry Frey, AICP Bradenton, Fiorida Office Manager Elizabeth M. Krumhok Bttrlingtori, Vermont Assistant Editor Lee A. Krohn, AICP Manchester, Vermont Wayne Lemmon Somers, New Yorh Larry Pflueget Chris[opher Leo Clearwater, Ftorida W'tnnipeg, Mn�iitoba PGJ Columnises �ng Leonard, AICP Lompoc, Califorttia Elaine Cogan Porflnnd, Or-ego�t Ross Molcloif 503-225-0192 Sale�n, New Hantpsliire Michael Chand�er C�ristine B. Mueller Blnchsbazrg, Virginia Lnwrrncebu�g, Indiana 540-23J-9406 irv Schiffma❑ C. Giegory Dale, AICP -Chico, California Cintittnaki, Ohio 513-272-5533 Bryan Stumpf, AICP lndianapolis, Indit[nn Coyer Iilustration $arbara Sweet Paul Hoffman Hyde Parh; New Yorh Greenfield, Mnssaihasetts . Ttene Watson Design ' Keiow�tn, $,C, Ned Corbett Lindsley Williams ' Ferrisburglt, Verenont Washiixgtan, D.C. Subscription lnformation Published 4 times/year. Stai�dard Rate: $55/yenr, Adclition� at subscriptions mni[ed to the same adc�ress: �10 each/yenr ISSN 1058-Sb05. Postmaster nnd Subscrtbers: Senc address chn�iges to Pianning Commissiwiers Jo�irnnl, P.O Box 4295, Eur(ington, VT 0540b. Editorial Policy Artides and columns contained in the Journat ila �za necessnrily re�ect the viewa oJ tke Journal. The )oi�inal i copyright pratected by Chnmpiai�i Planrting Press 2003 Porpennission to reproduce or dist�ibute any partion of th Jounial, contnct the Eclitor. This publicntio�i is desigited t� provide acciirate and ntGthor-itntive information on the siab ject matter covered. It is sold with the understnnding tha tl�e publislier is not engaged in rencieri�tg Iegnl, aceountin, or other p�ofessionc�l services. 7f (egal or other eepert ctssi_< tnnce is required, the serviees of a tompetent professionc should be sought. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SU2viMER 20�3 i ,�^T'�� ; f� `on't worry if �ou are missing yotzr favorite science-fiction show to conduct a public hearing at the Planning Commission. You may be htcky enough ta see shape-shiFters in real life. If you are consictering a land use �hange that will affec[ a residential neighborhood, perfectly normal, rational people will grow fangs and acquire the abiliry to spit fire. Changes in the neigh- borhood spark a primitive reaction in defense of hotne and family. As a plan- ning commissioner, you need to keep your cool when confronted by angry neighbors, and recognize the difference between legitimate concerns and irra- tional fears. You need a nose for NIMBYs. Here are some poant§ to remember: l. NINIBYism (Not In My Bccch Xc�rd) is h� ;:-�'n �2aftire, but sometimes yoz� need to � :;ove it. The most common neigh- boi-iiood concerns are: "Don't increase traffic past my house. The children witl be a[ risk." "Don't allow smaller lots or smaller homes in my neighborhood. My property value could decline." "I was told that this street would never go through, this land would never be devel- oped, etc. How can you betray these prornises?" Concerned citizens are right to be alert to neighborhood threats, but NTMBYs carry ic to an e�tteme, exagger- ating the threats or refusing to accept �IosSarya NIMBY: Not in my back yard LULU: Locally ttnwanted land use NOPE: Not on planet earth , G�OMBY: Get oizt of my back yard NIM�Y: Not in trty elecrion year �ANA: Build absolutiely nothing , c�rhere near.anything FEATURE by Chris Robbins something that's a noxmal part of com- munity life. Perhaps they are beside themselves because they moved to their current Iocation to escape development that is now inexorably following [hem. Perhaps they are secretly panicking at the idea of outsiders in their territory, whether it be "those people" moving in down the block, or motorists driving past their hames to get to anatlier destination. Your job is to look out for the whole community: townhouse and apartment dwellers as well as single famiiy resi- dents, and people Iiving on through streets as well as those who want to live on dead-ends and force the traffic on[o other streets. Ask c�uestzons or have staff find the information you need to evalu- ate the concerns. Is [he traffic going to be greater than the standards for the street? Is the proposed land use so noxio�s that ie would redu�e property values, or is it simply something different from what`s there? Were the "promises" made by a city representa[ive or by a realtor? If the concerns don't hold up, don't feel guiity about voting in favor oE the project. 2. NIMBYs can have their positive side. No one eise is so highly motivated to do research into the issues and the his- tory of the area. Sometimes in their quest to stop a project, people will uncover informatian rhat does help your decision-malcing, for example: a previous owner put a �ovenant on the land that restricts its use, or the project wa�ld damage a unique environmental resour�e. Sometimes there's an alterna- tive that triakes more sense. If these con- cerns have substance, respond to chem; don't treat a groject as a"done deal." 3. Address concerns in a realistic way. The usual outcome of contentious pro- jects is that the objections are addressed through conditions or modifications to the project. This may not satisfy the opponents, but it shows respect for their concerns. You should insist on an enforceable way to ensure that the condi- tions or modifications are actually put into place. �oo often a bone is tossed to the concerned citizens, only to be pulled away again as soon as the project is under way. 4. Don't tet your own emotions get the better of you. It's easy to feei sorry for [he beleaguered neighbars and do something that's not in the interest of ehe communz- ty as a whole. It's also easy to react the other way and dig in your heels in response to annoying and pushy people, just to show them yau can't be bullied. Try to separate the persor�alieies fronrz the substance of what they're saying. With a good nose, you will be able to tell when people cease rrzaking legztimate points and slide into NIMBYistxt. Make a note of the good points, and ignore the rest. � Chris Robbins has bee�t ��az3 � a member of the Noa•th- � � field, Nliilnesota (po�uta- r �,'��'� tion, 17,000) P�anning � � �' �� t _, Coinmission Jar' the past � :� � ., �;� fottv yenrs. .She is nn envi- �� _ �� < ronmental planne7� who has �--"�``��%; _ worhect for coilsulting �� JY' firrns and non-piofits in tJte ; T -� pasf. Chrts is cetrr�endy an enviro�7menteil planning interrt for the City of Mtttnetonha, � si�bw�b of Minneapolis. PLA[VIV[IVG COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SUMMER Z003 ) �..v.. . tL � � i � � �� "The raost 'tmportant point in dealing with '�IBYs is to took at the big picture and v�ihaC's in the best interest of the community as a whole. It aIl boils down to appointing and electing `leaders.' Toa oEten NIMBYs get their way when it wasn't in the best interest of the whole just because people without conviction are making the decision." —Maureen France, City Commissioner, City of DeLar3d, Flo�•idn � :i f }' "Some[imes NIMBYs are the citizen's first exposure to planning and zoning. While Che best time to be first involved would have been back when the community plan was being developed, NtMBY situations can nevertheless be viewed as an opportunity for citizen involvement. Quite often, interested citizens will s[ay involved after the issue invalving the NIMBY goes away. If [hey are reasonabie people, an aCtempt should be made to `,nzit these interested citizens into the :;'stem. Also, bear in mind that planners don't have a monopoiy on common sense. We should at Ieas[ make an effort to listen to those citizens who take the titne to appear before us." — Tim Anderson, �ICP, Principal Pinnner, Regton 2 P�anning Commissfor�, Jachso�l, Michigan "Some of our most dedicated and educat- ��5 �6`Q �O� ed planning commission tnembers and activists became involved originally because of neighborhood issues. One thing about having something in your hackyard 'zs [hat it forces you to become well versed on alt sides of the issues. You get to see how your government really operates. Einste'tn once stated tha[ `In the middle oE difficulry lies oppor[unity.' i lil.e to fihink that NIMBYs have ultimately led to improved govern- mental processes for citizens in my county." — Chris Mz�eller, Dearborn Counry, Indiana "An old timer in the ways oE Iocal politics once oEfered tne some simple advice: `I want my enemies right next to me and my friends in the audience.' Sometimes, when time permits, a challenge to the NIMBYs to become involved in the process ean help. Once involved they sometimes are able to see things Erom a wider perspective. Not something that can be done every [ime, but occasionally it works." — James �. Gr.i�nat, AICP Planning Director, Sanford, Mctine . - ,. "As a County Commissioner I faced a lot of NI?vlBYism. What I've found most impor- tant is that the process For including public opinion must be fair and consistent with past golicy. You'll find that people witl accept a disagreement in the end, but if they feel like it was shoved down Cl�eir throats, it will be a disaster." — Sta[e Representative Bill Hinhle, CIe Elt�m, Wcuhington � "I've been in planning for 33 years, includ- ing a few years as a glanning commissioner. The media has a tendency to call a11 N1ivI8Ys `environmentalists.' My experience has been that many NIMBYs are people who do not wish to see any form oE change in their imrnediate environment, especially if the change represents a threat to their proper- ty's value or to their personai `qualiCy of life.' They use environmental arguments ,�,:: to support their primary opposiCion to a particular project, but I would hardly consider them environmentalists. The reai environmentalists are chose citizens who appear before public bodies to debate issues related to community-wide planning policies." — Pn�t1 Wach, ATCP Sc�n Luis Obispo, Cntifarnia l�gitir�ate Co�cera�s v. N1M��s�a "My hackgraund is as a non-profit aEford- able housing project eoordinator and cux- rently as a �hild care facilities development consultant In affordable housing circles there has been a move to avoid using the NiMBX phrase. It is instantly accusatory and tends to put people on the defensive rather than opening up the door to real communicaYion. My second thought is that there should be a dis[inction made between neighbors who have legitimate concerns related to traffic, parking, drainage, ete. and those wh.o are basically objecting to `those kinds oE people' moving in next door, For people Not in ttty back ynrd Locnlly unwanted 2anc2 use Not on ptanet earth PLANNiNG COMMiSSiONERS JOURNAL / NUivIBER 51 / SUi�iNfER 2003 ��°�� with tegitimate concerns the task then becomes a balancing act to look at both 'immediate local negacive impacts of a pro- ject and the greater community good of r- :�ding the housing or sezvices ChaC will uild a stronger more sustainable com- ntuiilC�? There is oFten a very strong contingene of neighborhood opposition that very trans- parently is simply opposed to the particular population that will be living in the pro- posed project. In pubiic hearings rhat are addressing these kinds of projects it is important that some house rules are out- lined early on that make it clear that legiti- mate concerns about impacts will be the focus of the meeting and that derogatory language or statements about the kind of peaple who wi11 be living in the project will not be talerated. Agazn this is an education- al process that is challenging our often still strong belief that neighborhoods have the right to be exclusionary." — Davic� Foster, Planning Commissioner, Santa Cruz, California "NIMBYism is a serious problem as r' ��nities seek to allow infill , :_:_-`;;,�:;�ment in or near established neighborhoods. Protesters wili often speak in favor of infilt as a desirable planning practice but, for a host of reasons, not in their neighborhood. A legicimate reason for opposing infill is that the neigliborhood infrastructure is insuffi�ient to handle additional growth. The proposed area may be Iacking curbs, gutters and sidewalks, have drainage prob- lems, existing traffi� �ongestion, chopped up streeLs, and so on. As a trade-off for increasing the density under less than favorable conditions, the municipality sk�ould be prepared to give some[hing back to the neighborhood such as upgraded infrastructure, additional street erees, tnore intense code enforcement, or the imposi- tion of stringent design review and land- scaping requirements for the new housing. A less legitima[e reason Eor infill NI?VfBY- ism is the assertion ihat the neighbors were given an express ar implied promise by planners or council tnembers that their existing zoning would not be revised and there would be no changes to their present living environment. Increasing the density in such neighborhoods is often viewed as nothing less than treason. But one council cannot tie the hands of another and local governments have neither a legal nor ethi- cal obligation to uphold expectations of continued low density zoning. In implementing public policy, planners and council members must take into account changing demographics, values and needs. Indeed, the underlying justifica- tions for infill devetopment, such as the avoidance of sprawl and the provision of affordable housing, are real and, ot�e migh[ say, ethical concerns that override any express or implied pramise that existing zoning standards wilt be forever main- tained. ° — Irv Schiffman, Professor of Political Science, CaIifornia State Utziversity - Chico Fr PIanning Commissioner, City of Chico. .o. 3i1� �r`e�r �Oft,�K �l��i' "I'm sure you've all heard of the phenome- non oE NIMBYism — Not Tn My Back Yard ism. Every time a new buiiding is proposed absolutely anywhere in l�merica, you can guaran[ee that somebody or some group, will file a lawsuit against it. Nobody wants anything new. Well, sure. Every new thit�g we've gotten over the last 50 years has made our lives worse: the new honsing development down the road, the new strip mall, the highway improvements that turn a.�: two-lane road into a sis-laner, the corporate office that looks like the mother ship from a UFO movie. The new schod that loolcs like an insecticide factory. The new motel Yhat looks like a medium securiry prison. The new mall with a parking lot the size of Rhode Island. We don't want anymore of this. And isn't it understandable? Loak at the misery these things have produced. Its perfectly reasonable — given our experience over the past ha!£-cetaEUry. You see the guys with the yellow hard-hat out in the cow- pasture and, by reflex, you reach for the phone and call your lawyer.° —James Howard Kunsder, a��thor of The Geography of Nowhere [the above is excerpted, with perrrtission, from an ac�dress dettvered by Kiinstter, availnbte nt: <www.hiinstter.cotn/spch_FL AIA.html>. Get oa�t of my hack yarci Not in my e?ection yeat� BiiiIct n1�soleitel� nothing a�iywhere near anything PLANNING COIvIM1S510NERS JO[fRiVAL / NUMBER 51 / SUMMER 2003 ��:�� 'i `.`,! �E817f'lili� �OIYIPYIISSlOIl�fS ,�UPl3d� o4Y$IC�¢S OP1 ��ISI1] Edilar's Nole: PCJ rendets cnn dou�nIoad li:ese artides nt so citmge tlir'ough Septetn�er 30, 'L003 by goii:g to: miv}eplannersireb. comhiimb)t!i hril Dealirig Wi11G ilte Fem af Nlulti-Pmriily Hut�siug by Rny 2iiny PCJ #23, Sunnncr 199b Wliy �nulti fnnzily lioiaing ��injeds nfler� �roroke a lwstile response frmu ac�u'by residwi[s, artd wa}�s af dcaling tiridi d�is. F_rceipls from tlie m'ticic: TUe "�io Apartmencs ln ivty Sack Yard" a[timde of most sin- gle-family neighbothoods is an cxpmssion oC fear. No� a feac of the unlmown, but a Eear o[ the lcnown-a Eear people have that they will lose concroI o��er their em�ironmen[. Lil:ely yaur communiq� has at leas[ one place [hat people can poin[ to aad say "that might happen l�ere, next to me!" lt is iiot hard to finct examples of multi-fainil}' projects thlt have devaIued surrouading housmg �nd created centers ot crime. Worse still, masc communities can �ind exis[ing neighborhoods zoned [or multi-[amily where this zoning has ruutted in neighborhood decline, even if there are no apartments. Tl�e answer Lo this fear is to unders[and it - and to give peo- ple reason to believe they need not (ear. As planners, we musi [ake conaete actions to change the conditions thac have ted to p�oUlems �vith mulii-Eamily ltottsing. ... Planners can begin to take steps to Coster positive and suc- cessful multi-Camil}' develop- ments-and m improve the condition of existing probtem- plagued projects. I'his is the best way to overcome peoples' PeaLs abuut multi-�amily housing, Here nre some su�alegies your planning or cantnuntty devel- opment deparimen[ miglit con- sider pursuing. 1. Scrutinize yuur graw[h areas. The best time to crea[e siies [ur apartments is be[ore an area is surrounded by single- f�mily developmenL Fur esam- ple, cot�sider requiring, throuoh your planned residential devel- opment (PRD) or comparable regulations, new projeccs �o indudc viable apartmen� sites, This provides the opportunity io creare some pusitive esamptes of ho�v nml[i-Eainily can mesh with ❑carby single-iamily huusing- while avoiding later NIN[BY bai- des. 2. Evaivate yuur zon'sng stan- clards. Review yuur zoning stan- dards eo see what is required Eor nmhi-family projects. Haw strong are the landscaping requiremencs? How liberal are the height and seibacks stan- dards adjacent to lowee densit}' develupment?... W1ry Not I�t Our Bnck Ynrrl? bp �Yfidmel Allen Pq #45, bVinter 2002 How Ylmu�ers nnd housing fr cauvuwii�y seimice providers cnir i�iore effcuivcly addliss ruigh- borheod rou�en�s. Exte�pts fia�ri dic cu2icle: V��liether drawn froan reason or Gom emotion, communiry opposition re[lects neighbors' concems that eheir lives H211 changc for the worse. When the proposed housing or social service pro��der is unknawn Co a cummunity, it is easier to assume the worst. �Vi[lt grea� speed, the mantra uC oppo- sition �o a LULU spreads in the communi�y: "It cvilf reduce our property values. It will increase crime. it �vill erode the quality of the neighborhood." Thcre is p3enty oF empirical evidence to the con[rary. But because these concems are oCien raised in aiT emotionai context, mcre presentation of sudi research ��rilt be ineffective in Rue3ling the concerns. As a con- sequence, housSng aud sernice advocates ha��e begun to adopi deliUerace communiiy engage- ment su�ategies. As a local planning commis- sioner, you can lielp your com- muni[y lianuooize ihe housing and scrvice needs ot your �vhole comnmaity n�ith the specific objections oC neigli6urhood opponents. Wtiile tl�ere is f]D 'bne size fi�s all" apptoach, experts agree on a le�v 6asics: Familiarize yourselE K�iih, and par�icipa[e in, yourjurisdiction's Consolidated Plaa prucess. Pay special at[ention [o [he findings concerning hausing and sen�ce needs and re��ew whe�her tliese needs wilt be Cunded. Take a closer look a[ researdi on ihe e[fects of afEordable hous- ing, group homes, and commu- niry services on neighborhoods, and malce ihis available to providers and exiscing residenks. N1uch oF tf�is research is naail- able at c�vwe�.bet[ercammuni- ties.org�. Main[ain an open door policy with providers so tliey will feel crnnFor[able coming to you or ptanning staEE to give you a "heads up" about proposed housing or service programs. Whether they are siiing by right or requesting zoning retieC, your openness is lilcety to engender a coltabotative process rather tltan a mntentious one. Woric with providers [o con- duct communiq� education aboat the tocal needs for a[ford- able housing and services belore you need to worlc at a particul�r site. ... Iielp evaluate w4�etber a pro- posal is appropriate Cor the com- muniry. Whetlier it involves a homeless shelter, housing Eor poor people, or housing for pea- ple �vith disabilities, ils design and scale slioutd be well inte- grated into die community, with access to transportation, jobs, and community services. Is Yom Coemiuu�ity Being Lronded Gy NIMBIs? Gy L-iafne Cogan PCJ #23, Summrr 199b LViiys oJdenlirig prouctivcly ieidi puieniinl N11vIt31'si4�ntious. Erceipts,(�oin dte m'[ic1c: Trio��e decisively to defuse 6ccion, gossip, and innucndo. Be aware of issues that may inllame yuur particular mm- muniq� and talce the initiatine' to provide �he Cacts Eranlcly and clearly beioee the ugly rumors get around. Why is tlte plan- ning boanl considering multi- (amily housing? Is theGe realiy a need? Just who are "those people" who will live there? Wha[ will the development toolc lilce? In most cases, wlien the Cacts are ]cno��n, peuple tvill find ihai the likely inhabitants are not ehe cerrible creamres Yhey may have envisioned, but Criends and neighbors more Iike themseh�es �3-ho cannot a[Iord or do not wunt single residences. Fe�us a6out �+�hat the project will toolc liice can be aflxyed by good rendeiings or sicetches. ihis assumes, of course, that y�uu ha��e a support�zblc project. Knu�� the opposiuun. Wlto are ihe leaders? Whai are their concerns? Are [hey the tradi- tiunssl naysaye�s ro all planning or peuple opposed jus� io thie project': By knowing �vho they are and ��ha[ they want you can seek possible areas oF mutual agreemea[ and isolate tite Cew isst�es on which there are truly opposi[e vie�vs. Be Irank and open at all times. Many good projects go down in blazing de{eat because Ihe proponents are so [tight- ened oC [lie opposition that they fall into the trap of hdd- ing closed-door meetings or malcing "secreP' deals. As a planning commission, ii is especiaEly inappropriate to engage in such behind-�he- scenes maneuvering. PLANNING CObik�llSSiONERS JOU2NAL / NV3vIBER 51 / SUkiMER 1003 `i i :j hink of a time when you were talking to soineone who wasn't listening to you. How did you feel? Were you angry a:rd fnis[ra[ed? What did you chinlc of the person who refused to [al:e 8ie [inle to liscen to you? Did you diin!< he �vas arrogan[, rude, or uncaring? Listening u�ell ro anothez person (aften rcFerred io as "active listening") is t[ie found�tion o�good communication. It is an especially impor[ant skSll for pl;anners and planning 6oard members ti�at offers a 4vay to help understaa�d the varieq� of ideas and opinions often encounrered. Listening �e�ef( sends tlie person you are tall<ing to a incssage, "1 care about what you have to say." N[alcing an effort [o understand someone shows respect for [iteir [houghts, and for [hem as an individunl. When [rying ro listen and uz�derstand so�neone it is iinpor[ant to be in an open and noia judgmeiz[al fra�ne of mind. Lis tening to soineo»e means not arguiitg about their ideas or espousing pour o�`rn. Ihat isii'[ Co say that }'onr ideas aren'[ important or [ha[ you shouldn't have an opportunity� Fo voice tliem, btii listenino weii means putting }�oicr own tlioughts on die sl�elf (For a time) and mn�entrat- inb all oF j�our energy oa understanding someone else, I[ isn't necessary m agree with them, Uut it is important Co be accepting and �pproa�hable. THE SICILL OF LISrENIIVG Fortunately, listcning is a skill that can be learned. You can choose to lis[en well. The next [in�e }�ou have a conversa- tion with saineone [ry the �oUowing: 1_ Ivlentully Fuais. Decide thatyou are going to lisren and unders�and. Duri l �hinlz abou� ��our o�vn opinions or ideas Cor now. lf }'ou are busy when someone eomes ro tallc to you, malce an appoint- ment ior a time when you won't be dis- tracted. Give your undivided attention to �EATURE f rr - L�� Ileirc 4Untsoi2 the person speaking to you. 2. Physicall�� Fonas. Face the uiher person. If you are si[ting, uncrass your anns and lean slightly for��ard. Continu- ous eye contacr can be distracting to soine, so }rou might look at their Face instead oF directly into their e}�es. Also, try to avoid negntive bod}� language. 3. Say iiothir�g rvhile ttie person is spealziizg. Jus� listen and try to under- stand them. 4. Wheia iJte perso�i is f�inished tallz- ing, repent ba<k [o tlicnt ivlznt��ou hcnizl. Paraphrase so that �rou are composing your o�vn seiitences instead oF parroting badc theirs. Paraphrasiiig 1vi11 lielp you think about the meaning ol what was said. "So ��ou feel tha�...° "Wlsat you are saying is..." "Your dtoughts are..." 5. Ask iJyou liemrl tfiern cm red[}�. "Did 1 ge� th�t right?° "(s that conect?" G Ctnr'Jy )'oi�r cuidrrstcuiciing oJthcir ideas tisirig open-cnded qieestivirs. Don't use "why" questions. "Why" is a d��l- lenging question d7at requires soineane to justiEy their ideas. Your goal is to hear, not challenge. Use questions such as; "1 aan noc ckear aUout }�onr thoughts on..." or, ° Wlien y-ou said ... did you mean...?" 7. Don't sto� aisi��g yutu tistenilig shiiis m�tii die persor: you cire tali:ing to is sntis- fiecL You may think you kno�� what [hey mean, butonly they c1n tell you iPyou realL}' understand them. 8. 51�oto yotu i��spccL Tal.e [he Iime to consider tlie ideas of the person you are tallcing ro before you respond. Is there something to be learned? Shuuld you rethinlc some o! your ideas aud opinions? SUD�it�iING UP: Listcniiig ivell is a way oC [izinlzing and behaving when havino a conversaiio�i. Being a good lisrei�er is not a slcill most of us �re born with. Ho�vever, it is some- �hing we cazx tearn to get better a[. bVhe[her we really lis[en to — and learn from — what others ha��e ro say 'ss a choice that each of us m�l<es. � Ilenc R�ntsmi is n rc�is- lurd Landreayc Archiuct �� in Cnnadn mid n icgisYC�rd �� Profcssinnal Planncr in °;'_ �" : botfi tiic U.S. mid Cmmda ��.� ��•,>:".; Shc has �vorf:cct on projau rnngiug fron� can(nrhrn- sivc mid neigfiborhood iriastcr ptans, to �o�:ing bl'Inu�s nud dcsign gutdcli��cs. hfrr prcrrous arti- dcs Jor [hr PCJ ircrc: '?Sn In(raduc(ion to Dcsign Guidclinc.r" (PCJ �-F!) and "An Inhnd�iction io Urbmi Dcsisfi" (PCJft93)_ ��ry�� ''�f �� `' s ' � x � 6y Lnirrerice C. Geicl:ens, AICP u�itli i11«stratioits by Paad Hoffman L�rny Gcrckcns, A7CP is natiainl histm-imi for the Amerienn fnslilute nf Cei�tificd P�nimers, fomidcr nf The Sncirry fo� fLrtcrlmn City f� Regional Plannii�g Hie'tory, nud cntn'iuts piafezsor nt Tfie Ofiio Statr Universily. PLAiJNLNG COMtvI[SS70NER5 JOURNAL / NUkIBCR 51 / SUMNIGR 2003 .� t � _ � ' rior €o the l7SOs, water was provided to residences in America b}� onsite wells or by wa[er sel}ers wl�o went door-to-door deliveri�g water hom nearby rivers or springs. AEthougl� Bethlelieeu, Peiinsyiti�ani.i can lay claim to tlie Firs� pumped and piped w�i�cr syste�u in _ ,t A�nerica (1754), it 4vas nol untii 1801 that = ' i'hiladelpl�ia compieted tlie Grst major �`'S ;�. . � � com�nunity-wide n�aeerxrorl:s. �:;;'. Philadelp6ia consuucted its s}'s- cC3:.. tem largeiy in response to dev�asta[in e idemics in u..� 1793 and 1798. in (act, � °m�'n'"�� epidemics (coupled '�" � �� with the need to jr e� �.�� contral fires in dense urban centers), precipi- " ° ` � � 0 � B taeed the develop ;� � - ment oC many muni- cipaiwatersystems. �.�``�''�'k��.iti':�;i.',�=:� Un�il ciie 19di century, ind'tvidual residential cesspools '�C9�::.. ..- ' -" � ; .y. � - -", :�i and the pail system €or remov�l oC "=�"' a�sihs, wnste from riv � its were the re- �"E"""" �� P ? P P ��y�:� don�inant means for waste collection , -��.�-� and removal. The intraducYion of the ��ater i; closet ancl piped water supply resulted in over- , - ilowing priva[e cesSpouIs. This motiva[ed con- struction o( communiry-wide collection systems to ��U cari�� a�vay se��nge - to rivers and streams. Un[ormnate- ly�, ttiis remedy ofien shifted dze pollut�nts to tlie ��ater inialces oF communi�ies downstream. Solutions einerged in the develop�nent o( filtration sys�enis. The first slow sand filte�s for sewage cvere initiaced in Poughlceepsie, New Yorlc in 1870. Tlie next step for�vard, die intermittent filtia- tiun o[ sewa�e on sand 6eds (permitting air [o enter initia[- ing hiologica3 ac[ion and pro- ducing a clear and odorless eEt7uent), was firsi used in a mtmicipal system in Reading, Pennsyh�ania in I908. B}' tiVorld bVar l, ruosf of the l�raest cities in A�nerica l�ad water fil- tration sj�stems, chemical water treatinent faczlities, and setivage fil�ration plan[s. Neverdieless, until 19�F0 more than half of America's communities failed to treat their sewaoe in any tvay belore dvmping ii into a river or strearu. Comtminities rend to gro�v upri��er from thc location oE their originai secvage outfalL Tlie down tic�er Iocation of r;' se�vage outFalls generally attracts un�esirable ueigl�bors "=` such as garbage dwnps, Ceed lots, and hea�y indus- trial uses. bVi[h sewer systeins being gra��it}'-dii- ven, "be[ter reside�ices" sought seu�er-seraed . <.:`;' : high ground upstreain to avoid sewage �`:: odors and undesirabfe nearUy uses. , UnFortunately, [he spread,uf ' � development upri��er, tt�ith its � pS resulti�to rui�oEE and inierfer- ence with local aquifer n:, c�iG ��y�i;�;' '_�, recharge areas, posed a i ,fi,� - �hreat [o e�ater sup- e ° plies. As a resEilt, u - CllleS SOU Ilt ��: � { �S�+�w $ ? i: � a�� , -:re.,._ wa te [ `� sourres ofren � ' "_ a coasiderable ° �- "a H ilistance a�vay. Be- '��t ,�s � rn�een 1905 and 191�, for example, New York � ,:.- _°�=�''^°'� City bicilt l�uge reservoirs in �;;f_.:._; .:xr.al ,_ :i,�, k.; . cs� the Catslcill Nlountains, some i srr- �00 miles lo the nortlz. Aro�uid the ..> �°=-, :. �'° :,�u^ +.� same tiine, Los Angele5 under[oulc [he � r�.�• �;;��;h;:, enonnuus Owens Valtey Project, cazq�ing :,'::'.� �:� s�.�;� -, warer through a 240-mile aqttedncc. The �"'� Owens Valley project also reflected tlie truism �� diat wlioever controls the «�ater supply oE a region 't�', con[rols i�s potentiat Cor gro4��th. � Since mosE early citp centers were located along water- �vays, (looding was a regular threat. Large-scale regional flood prevention served as z primnry motivation Eor regional planning itt Anieiica. t1t tl�e local level, mairy modem subdi«sion control ordinances include requirements For Ihe retencion and slow release o! storm waters in new developments (often through dry basins or ponds on site). Thfs ltas minimized flood damage co neighboring and downstream properties. Federal and state clean ivater laws have helped enswe [he supply oE clean and safe drinlcing water. One �vay has been through the protection and preservation oE wedands and aquifer recharge areas, an approacli ttiat has also provid- ed valuable reCuges For migraF ing wacerfowl. I1tc ning�tificei�t Fnir�notmt Wniei Arori�s irt Pl�iladel�ltia, yuilf �enveeu 7812 ni�A IS22, stiA grnces tlir ScliiiyUiill Rii�ec PLANNING COMMfSSLOPFERS JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SUMiv[ER 2003 � i r � � � �, 6� � � � � � ., � -� � - >„ here are a number oi land uses that, althocagh legat, are ahnost universally considered to be poor neighbots. These incl�de sex-related busi- �c.� nesses (such as "adult" book stores, "exotic" dance '�,�' � �.5�5��: studius, and "strip tease" tl�eaters), as wett as "�y�',' uses ranging from se�vage treatment plants and garbage dumps to Ceed lots and poul- �• [r}' farms. ln recent years die acron}'�n �, '-�! "LULUs" has caught on to descr�be F�� a� 4n'� � a r � [hese "Locall}' Un��an[ed Land ��jl�� '- "� � �� Fi��r u,. r r.,. Uses." ,,�r t i:3 Local governments ?� ' `� L have been especially ,� ��a j':� active in catibating Cr,�F��. �,3 1�� i ses busmesses. �i � �4� �� r+�'f ;�i � 4Uhile the U.S. c'�e� �,� i`; Suprelne ° ",�, Cour[ has held � � -� � �� - . � thatsex business- a es, sucl� as adult book - � - ;itr �:: stores, cannot be totalky escluded [rom a community, ` "� the Court has teft municipali- I;-i� "" ties free to tightly regul�te their loca[ion. Mos[ conununi[ies have re- ` ;' sponded b�� providing a limited numUer ' `,��"'� � -�' of zoning districts wi[hin which adult busi- nesses can be sited (�hough almost always as condi�ion�l uses). Adult businesses are in��a�iably prohibited fronz tocating ti��iti�in specified distances of schools, churches, parks, and other places of public assemU3y. ln addition, zoning ordinances oCten inclLtde con- ditions such as screening the use and its parl<ing facili[y [rom s�iew From surroundina properties and public thorough�ares. Editoe's Note: fue ma� on dte r�cgulntion af srxbusinesses, see 7eience R. Bogn's "Zoning Adult Eirtertniiii>ientBusiricsses,"oii page I2 a�this issi�c. Early American land use contrnls oEteft [ocused on what might be considered the "�-rated" land uses of their clay: fat trying plants, tar boiling facilities, dead aneinal disposat lots, slaugh[er houses, garbage du�nps, and indiistrial production Eacilities. Tl�e principal issue was the locatim� of these uses in reiation to resi- dential areas and places of puhIic congrega[iou. Ihe most com- man local ga��ernment response �vas to isolate all such uses, allowing [he�n only in limi�ed geographic areas, identiEied as "induslcial" zones. ]nterestingty, however, eady 20t1i century "model" zoning orditiances d4d nat protiibSt affices, retail sales, or even residential uses, Gom locating wiThiu industrial zones. The justification for tliis, in theory, �vas thai if the o�c+ners and occu- pants didn't inind ha�•ing "X-rated" uses for neighbors, the}� should not be harred Gom locating in sudi zones. As the 20th cen- tury wore on, ho��e��ei', zoning codes increasingly caine to pmhi6- it business ancl residence uses in industriaI zones. ln Iieu o(zoned isola�ion, pro�eciion Erom the negative e(Cects oC such uses can be accomplished through use of "performance" cuntrols (or standards?. Such controls invoh�e seCting measurable masimum standards for periineter inipacts, such as light, sound, smell, '' e sigla�, ��ibra�ion, and traFfic. [vlany uses uow S a altowed onl}' in indusuial zones l�ave c�irtu- ally no negati`�e impacts on surrounding � sL o ;1 . uses (or have impacts that could well �y t,J Lie addressed dirough good site �! design and bulfers). 1'et mosl � � ' -� cuinmunities siill �dhere �� to the principle oE zoned � - isolation fonnula[ecL � �, �� A ahnost a centui�� ,��_ Public ` discussion o[ - /,? wl�ere LULUs :�:�;-, �::'' are to Ue located inevitahly brings out S hordes of Nltv(BYs es- pousing "Not In b[y Bacic Yard!" Yet, many of [he uses "' generatiug NINIBY opposition are � ��i -,5��. essential to �he conimunit3c These �?;:,F tnclucle garbage and trash disposal, as we11 as sewage treahnent Cacilities. NINBY- .�:.��:�'� �� ism is most mmmOnly follo�ti�ed by P10Tisin, "Pui It Over Tl�ere" � S.1'I i'f FI' S (in HIS yard), I'�l.�nt Im��roscii {'entilalii�; the "tliere" com- �9�tig' ��:9.C3Ef��1^. inonly being in other communities or in or near lower-income neigh- i`.;: � borhoods. Some have �}� � � ;�;�-d suggested (undoubtedly � �� ''�• as a hypuihet[cat [arttu- ', ��l� i> 5 �?� �, s}'�) that iC each residen- �t �y��',� �il��'�� tial neighborhood had '�' }�d JS�jl�� ' to trea[ and dis ose its �v� i � � ��'i - ��;�rd�k!', "'' � i own was[e within its �1,!;�;,��Jj;;4 _ f;� o4vn geographic confines, �ve K�o{ild ver}' quicicly �IIP ABOVE n,ny be see« nt a,zr St�r�, � nnd I<is 6eliered m hc the best S�nvt 5facli{ne . i�� :�.,r. have eEfective recycling, •rn. t��o,va�e �s ��w r��m n�a�� a�n�,:; � haud. e ll r so rce conservation � This m�y r iify d�ai ��e Lnvc ud•.d ai ol' S, �1riC�enViCORIIlen[a� i0- Sniliif<��uti.�lnchincyabootan��y.ur,nn�l�venrc P ;s.sea u�� a�.ra e�� ,� �k ,�.,,�e,�,� �� i�.:�:�1 [ection ra rams. , °,�r,rw,�„n��r..�,��o.e��r� ��• ��m- P S �ei�.,� .� `-;i. r`t��i��,.�;�,r�i�:��i�,��. An cnrlier crn: tvhcn sntu� �nnd�incs ircrr jordeaning 5ehcat, nnt disYlnying obscenc yicftucs. Burlin��on Agricultvrai lf-nrrl�nne., mrr. PIGtLC6 S Augusi ^_9.I3.ID. PLAI+iN2NG COMivIl5510NL-RS JOURNAL / NL}bfBER 71 ! SUNI�IER 2003 a ,� 1 � ~ �'a�� ' oncerns for the health and safety of children were cen[ral components of ideal urban structure tl�eories oF the elrly twentiedi cen[ui�c Ebenezer Huti��rcl's Garden City, proino[ed i�i his boolc Tui��miaig ci Peatejul Pndi [n Reni R�fonn (189y), consisted of sis "neighborl�ood units" buund- ed by througl�-vatfGc streets, each with a cetitral elementary scliooi Iocated just a few bLocks &�om �he furQtest resi- dence. Forest Hills Gardens, Long Island, Necv York (1910+) ��- � ws. L t �...;' �v�s the [irst tlmerican ... tes[ of lhis scl�ooi-child- � ��,`�ti Cocused neig%Uor- t�,��ii}�; ` l,00d idea. Sec N ` -��F� �� .;, is Jor Ycighbor= hood. " � ;;.3.,,'.�`` _'�. 7he culture ' � o shocl: oI Worid � bVar ( 6rought on not ° only the wild excesses of the jazz Age of the 1920s, Uut also a lieightened percep- tion oE yauth as the promise and salv�tion of tfie Euaue. [n the pfanned neighborhood de��elopments oE Lhe 1920s, elementary schools �c�ere centrally lucated within easy walking distance of their stutlent popula[ion. The 1920s was �lso tlie first decade to feel the se��ere nega�ive impace af tlxe au[amobile, with thou- sands of schoot-age children being killed by motoriscs.' ]ii respunse, there �vas a movement to reduce or eliininate all through-tra(fic in new suUurban developmeuts. At Rldbunt (Fair Lawn, New Jersey) this einphasis on chilcl safet}' �esulted in tl�e [otal separation a( vehicular and pedesaian patlnvays. I-Iem ele- mentar��-schoul-age cliildreu could rvatic irom home to scliool throuoi7 cenler-blocic parks �a-�,��,�E�� wit6out �vall<ing along or across a streel. 1he educational and recre- ationnl needs uf ol�ler children were pro��ided for in [he I9ZOs 1 Wliilc thc m�mhcr uf milcs trarcicd in motor vehicics was about l0 timcs lo�vcr ;n [he micl-19?Os thmn tuday, lhe nnnual dca�h ratc pervc6ickc milc Uav- eled!\RvlT) �vas viueh higher (ay>pros- inz:�tcly lE per lU0 milliun VIvIT in 19?5, comparcd to L7 � cr i0U million YlvlT in 1991). Frum. "�io�or-Vehicic Sa(ety: d 20th Ccn�uq� Pubtic Heal�h z1cliie��einin��.. h1414VR Fy99: i8:369- 37�+ (Ceniers for Disease Control). � in �he siti��g oE iarge, arcliitectnrallr in�pressive, central high sctiools and tl�eir organized-sports [ieids. iliese sdioois becarue integral components uf town and city cencers. Hig(�-scl�ool-age cliildren thus liad after-school access (either b}' foot or by electric [rolley car or �=:�' rubber-tzred bus systenis) [u dotit�ntu�vn or "Ivtain Stree[," where d2e cetail sho�s, [he- aters, and otlier pIaces of amusement were lacaced. 4Vith tlte exptnsive unplam2ed perimeter subiuUan spraH�I of _w_� ' the 1950s and the decades �„� a that [ollowed, concern � ��'t� �or Che liie patterns of t'}�'f'�� ,. si,��:� ° eLemehtary-schoot f and liigl� school ,,;� � - - ° age chitdren _ o - o became less et�ident. SaCe o local walk-in ele- mentary schools, no longer viable �vith the - loN-er de�sities resuiting Irom the advent o[ large-lot resi- dential zoning (as wel! as reduced famity size), u�ere abandoned in favor of more far-Qung locations. New liigh- school (acilicies x•ere often located on large ,�� Eracls of open Space at the periineter of the com- niunity, often accessible ont}' by school bus or automobile. Tlie resuit was co isolate older children from access to coi:imunity-�vide (acilities and events except b}' p��en[al, privaEe au[o, "Sasi' ser�nce. Fhere are signs of a re��ersal in ihis decades long trend, as proponents of "New Urbanisni' and "Smart Grow�h" nd��occtte for higher densil}' residential areas, permitting reclamation of the walk-in local ele�nentary school, and inereased provision of rAVE w s transit seiaice, enabiing older students lo access central areas of tl�e communit}' with- out need [or their own c�r. Ihe gro��ing nuznber o( "safe routes to school" pro- gr�ms alsu highlight a re- nev,�ed interest in enabtino yuung people to walk or bilce m schoal. I l�ese programs ere not ouly designed to provide health and safety benefits, but to Ue�ter connect cliitdren �vith their coinmuni�ies and with the natural em�ironment. Archiiecl��rnlly impicssivc, ccrit��nll�� locatcrlltigll SLFlUUIS 4YCIL' C017?AIU71 GCfmc Worfd Yl�u' II— ns iu F�il'hnvcli, cLfnssadncsetts. PLANNING CONItv115510vERS JOURNAL / NU�IBER 51 / SUd1IvIER 2003 �'4;` � :�. - �h ?'7� � � � a '=a ! he first modern American public land use zoning restriction was enacced in San Francisco in 18fi! ro cons[rain the location o€ obnosious uses. Los Angeles, in 1909, applied land use controls to an iminense area it had amie:ced, sparking a series oF ]��vsuits tliat culminated in the U.S. �^'� Supreme Courts 1915 ri�ling in Hnd4�he[l: ¢ Sebastian. The Court upheld the "'""'"'�' Cit}''s proliihition of brid<yards in a � residentially zoned district, , despite ihe fact Ehat the brickyard in quesiion pre- da�ed the restdencill development. Wltile Cali- , {ornia cities ex- � ptored latnd � i d use controls, in ihe East the focus � was on cautroi of _�s building height, bu11<, and ��ards. ac[iuns co limit the ' heigh� of 6uildings and to vary these heigtits 6p zones taken in . Evlasslchusetts were iound ro be con- stitational by the Supreme Court in � bUc1d� v. Avase}' in 14U9. �his was followed tl�ree years IaEer hy the Court's cleari}� implied approval oF building set�ack mntrols in Eitbnrik v 8iclunond. [n die early decades of !he 20th century, New York Cit�r ��as faced with construction of tall biiildings thac cut o[f light and air to [he streets belo�v and to si�rroimding build- ings. It also esperienced an invasion of manuCacturing uses into azeas [liat were predominantly residential and business in cliarac- ter, ln response, in 1916, New Yorlc en.icted the first "comprehen- sive zoning code." It utilized the three geographically� zoned elcn�ents that the U,S. S�c�reme Court pre��iously acted ou (build- ing heiglit, setbacl<s and 1�ards, and land use) and cumbined them in a single urdinance chat included the entire area ofjuris- � cliction. I his combinatian oC Fac ,�-�-� �<— tors still defiues "comprehensire � _ '� zuning." � � ��,,''� tvlost cmumunities hesitated �" !' m Follow New Yurlc's lead in � �' �� adopting compret�ensive zoning because the circumstances of the Hndnchecle case induded an immediate threat ro pi�blic health as well as the iand use zoning issue. bVould the Caurc have � appro>>ed the Los Angeles zoning i£ the Uridcyard in question had not also been a direci d�reat to tl�e health of neigl�bors? [n 19Z6, in Euclid r. Arnbler, a c�se wi�ltuui a direct health threat issue, die Supreme Court supporied comprehensiee zoning, including the creation oi single-famil}• �esidential districts. bVitl� the Supreine Court's ruling, comprehensive � zoning spread across America, and , single-[a��iily-onl}� districts became the preCerred zoning for new resi- dential flevedoptnent. � Spatial segrega£ion of uses over ever-increasing distances Uecame � major cl�aracteris- a [ic of American 9 � A � zoning.Ihis often resulLed in rings uC in- � 1� . 3 � creasingly low den- sity 5ingle-(amily resi- Q� dential zones as one moved ounvard from the city center, along rvith �viciely separated retail - and emplo}�nent areas. This pattern yielded physical and social isola[ion by income, inability to support �vallc-in eletnentar}• sclioals, and immense infrastrnc- ture costs. ln the past decade {as noted in "Y" is for Youth) a mitnter-cutrent has emerged. Tiie "Netiv Urbanism° � and "Smart Growth° mo��ements have sough[ to prumute infill and mixed use deveiopment. ]nstead of serving [o segregate and isol�te land uses, zoning codes are being redesigned ro%ster deveiopment o� neighborhoods ot mixed lund uses and varied 1'tfe styles and income, ofreii at liigher densities. Also of note, a sort of "parailel nni��erse" of lund use controls that predate go��ernmeucal land use controls has expanded in the form of private covenancs and �� restrictions applied [o properties �� 1��'�� in uxost new developments. 4Vl�at ,�'° �,� , ��'� these rutes proliibit is already o[ a� �� greater conseqt�et�ce to many � i��'i� 1� � Americans than �vhat is sel out in f: �`r�� I f�: dte lo�al zoning ordizzance.' I / r.��-!F .,`,' ,, �`�t,-„^ -: � .r i I i _,^---'�� l �-a: ��.,-r �'1 i � i � �-�� ,"�� ;�� };� , . � � � '3 �., � Brith pinnts nndym�ls ircrc n��tong thr tucs cai�t�uflcd by e<u'7y 1m�d usc rcgufalions. Pholo of br'id; Ylant iic L{ �limniaa. Uregon, (al:cn iri 1912. Copyrialit Yandul! Cawtty Historirnf Soriely; itpriutcd �ridi ycnnissimi. 1 ln 1998, :here �eere somc 20i,000 pri� rate aeighburhoad assoeiatio�is, witli almost -}2 milliun inhabi�ants — nuirty 1� perccnc of dic L' S pppitlat�on. Oret h:tlf uf ne�v huusing in the 50 larges� metro areas is pnrt oI � priva�c associaiion. Ca�u- m�uilty Associn�ion Fac[Look, 1)49 (Ale,ea�zdria, VA: Cowmunity Associnuons insiiiutc). PL.�NNING COtvIIvfISSiONERS JOU2N�1L / NUMSL-R 51 / SUIv1MER 3003 � i��i4 1'LANNING LAW PRIMER � ♦ e by Tet•ence R. BoQa, Esq. dult entertainment business- es present one of the most diffi- cult land use problems for cities. These enterprises enjoy �onsiderable Iatitude to operate — despite their contri- bution to community blight — because the courts have deemed non-obscene sexually e�plicit entertainnnent to be constitutionally protected speech. In order to maximize regulatory a�tthority and mitigate the negative irnpacts of su�h uses, three strategies should be followed. 1. Narrowly I)efine the �Ise Many people use the term "adult enter€ainment business" to refer to any commercial establishment ehat custom- arily excludes minors. Some municipali- ties have codified this broad definition in their zoning ordinance, including busi- - -n.esses ranging from adult bookstores `� theaters to massage parlors and adult ` _anning salons. A city should more narrowly define what constitutes an adult entertainment business. Bear in mind that the constitu- tional protection £or "speech" applies only to what is deemed "expressive" activity. This primarily encompasses movie exhibitions and book and video sates, and, to a lesser degree, erotic dan�- ing performanees. Enterprises engaged in protected speech generaily have to be afforded spe- cial treatment. For example, there must be a streamlined review process with objeetive approval criteria when a permit is required for adult movie theaters or bookstores. This means chat munzcz�ali- ties must act quicker and can exexcise less discretion vv�th xespect to these types of eammercial establishments. One con- sequence of a broad adult entertainment business definition may be that regulaco- � authority is unnecessarily hindered as �dult uses that do not involve protect- :i speech, silch as massage parlors and adult tanning salons. 2. Compile "Secorxda�ey Effects" 5tadies Ordinarily, the courts wilI "strictly scrutinize" a govez-ximen[ regulatzon that targets speech on the basis of content. This scrutiny is almost always fatal for the regulation. Fortunately, the SL�preme Court has developed what is known as the "sec- trine in Alameda Boohs, Inc. u City af Los Angeles, J.22 S.Ct. 1728, with Justice Kennedy observing thar. `The Los Ange- les Ciry Council knows the streets af Los Angeles beCter than we do. It is entitled to rely on that knowledge; and if its infer- ences appear reasonable, we should not say there is no basis for its conclusion." ondary effects" doctrine to grovide a less 3. Allow a"Reasonable Opportunity" rigorous test for evaluating adult enter- tainment business regulations. In order to quaiify, an ordinance must be adopted for the purpose of curbing the adverse secondary effects o� the speech, not for the purpose of regulating the speech itself. Adverse secondary effects can include inereased crime and the reduo- tion of properry values. Before enacting an adult entertain- ment business ordinance, a municipaliry should compile studies to support a shawing that the regulations are intend- ed to mitigate secondary effects. The Supreme Coure, in its 198b decision in Renton u Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, ruied that municipaiities can rety on other �ommunities' experiences as long as the evzdence is reasonably believed to be relevant. That case involved a �hallenge to a provision in Renton, Washington's zon- ing ordinance prohibiting adult motion picture e�eatexs from Iocating within 1,000 feet of any residential zone, single or multi-family dwelling, churckt, park, or school. Renton had relied on the expe- riences of other cities in assessing the adverse impacts oE such adult businesses. As the Supreme Court concluded: "the First Amendment does r�ot require a city, before enaeting such an ordinance, to �onduct new studies or produce evi- dence independent of that already gener- ated by other ci.ties, so Iong as whatever evidence the city relies upon is reasan- ably believed to be relevant to the prob- lem that the city addresses.° In May �OOZ, the Supreme Court reafEirmed its "seco�dary effects" doc- �or Opeeation Most municipalities probably would exclude ati adult entertainment business- es if permitted to do so. Uniess a cominu- nzty is entireiy residential, howevex, a complete ban is unlikely to be valid. The key question is how many sites have to be made available for such uses? Unfortunately, there is no bright line answer, Instead, the Supreme Court in its Renton decision established the following standard: "the First Amendment requires only that [cities] refrain from effectively denying [proprietors] a reasonable opparcunity to open and operate an adult [entertainment business]." When establishing location restric- tions a ciry should take into considera- tion the factors that have been deemed important by the courts in its jurisdic- tion. Some courts insist that there be available sites served by infrastructure. Others demand that there be a genuine possibility af availability, and will dis- count any properties that are subject to long-term ieases. Almost all cour�s evalu- ate the cumutative effect of the restric- tions in order to determine how many adult entertainment businesses can be operated simultaneously. � Terence R. Bogct is n �.= shttreholc�er i�i the taw fi��rn ��` �? *� Richarcis, Watson fa Ger- �� shon anc� worhs iii their �.� -� -� � , z ,: r Los Angeles office. His ? � prnctice ernpllnsizes Fi7st �" � Amendment law. He is atso ciry atton�ey for t�ae City of Westict]ze ViIinge, CA. � PLANN1i�1G CONtMt5SI0iVER5 JOURNAt / NUMSER 51 / SU�tMER 2003 r ! ��=`;: �h¢ ��'��Y� d97 ,'o �� by �aedea�ch S. Lane III ' ` �ng the Supreme Court's Re�iton d�_ <�z�, courts have looked at whether a municipality's zoning unfairly restricts the nuznber oF aduIt buszuesses that can iii Eact operate wi[hin the municipality. In 1994, the City oE Charlotte, North Carolina passed Ordinance No. 3782, the 1n[ent oFwhlch was "to establish reasonable regulations to prevent a concentration of adult establishments within che City oC Charlotte and to separate adult estabtishments €rom... sensitive uses[.]" Over the nextseveralyears, the City jousted �vith various adult businesses over ehe specific provisions of the ordinance. The most recent challenge was filed in 2000 by an adult bookstore, Queen City V�deo & News, which claims that Charlotte's ordinance is unconstitutional. In defending the ordinance, Charlotte City Attorney Bob Hagerr��nn has raised a novel argument. Nocing the rise oE the Internet since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Re�iton, as �:;:; ;; well as the populariry of adult ma[erials online, Hagemann suggests that the Web now consti- tutes a"reasonable alternative avenue of com- munica[ion" within the meaning of RenLoit. Specifically, he argues that when the court is looking at the abiliry of adult businesses to locate wichin the City oE Charlotte, the court. should take into consideration the fact tizat such businesses can operate in cyberspace often more easily and less expensively than in traditional "bricic aud moi�tar" locations. Closely related to this issue is a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for d2e l lth Circuit which held tha[ the City of Tampa, Florida, cot�ld not shut down the so- called "Voyeur l�orm," a house equipped with inore than 20 cameras to broadcast the clothed and unclothed activities of irs feinale residents across the Internet. The Court agreed with the business that because it did not offer adult en[ertainmenC to members oF the public (i.e., ctrstomers actually entering onto the Voyenr Borm property), il was not an adnit use busi- ness within the meaning of the Tampa zoning ordinance. What this suggests is that adult businesses may be ab�e to operate in virtually any zone in a municipality, so long as they con- duc� their business online. In the City of Charlotte's motion for sum- mary judgmene, Atcorney Hageznann conceded �hat it would probably noc be constitutional for a municipality to pass a regulation that eliminated all physical locations For adult busi- nesses; the fact thac adult businesses flourish online is not sufficient justification to baz them com�letety within a city's borders. What the City was arguing instead was that the existence and populariry of the Internet can be used to suppart a more rest�icrive zoning ordinance. The Court denied the City's motion for summary judgment, and also rejected an ef£ort by Queen Ciry Video � News to bar any testimony about the viabiiiry of the Ineernet as an alternative avenue of cocnmunication. The case is currently set for a bench trial in [he U.S. District Court in Charlotte this Fall. For more informatior�, contact Charlotte City A[torney Bob Hagemann at: <rhagemann@ci. charlo tte.nc.us>. Frederick S. Larte III is tiie ni�tiior of "Obscene Profits: Enfreprene��rs of Por�lograpliy in the Cyber� Age" ai�d "The Na7ied Employee: How Tecii- itology Is Contprot7xisi�xg Worhplace Privctcy" (nvailnble tli�•otiigli Amnzo�i.com). PLANNING CONiMISSIONERS JOURNAL SPECIAL RE1'RiNT COLLECTIONS � � � ,� ; � �. � �/ � � � � �� /� � � ,� `"�`� � �� ,,3 , ! �; ,�. �- � � z �.a ..� x .s F � � � � T ° � �,�_;_� � ��. � � b. _..__ � � u �.� M. �s � , � : � ,; Short articles on basic planning Iaw topics written by experienced land use lawyers. Covering: spot zoning, due process, zoning variances, property rights, PUDs, speciai per- mits, land use findings, the role of the lawyer, and more. Availc�ble to PCJ si�I�scribers foi� $ 18.90 Catl our office at: `� Planne�cs�leb � �� A coIlection of Greg Dale's "Ethics 6� the Planning Cornmission" columns frorn the past tezz years. It includes articles on conflicts of interest, ex-parte contacts, bias, accepting gifts, site visits, and many other concerns. Avcai2able to PCJ si:bscribers for $ 12.60 1-888-475-3328 (tolt free), or� order fYOm r��. _f_ ; .: i �r. :•� ; � �� r :_ :r= � �� =r; �s�c Plan ° � 'I'�o� PCJ articles focusing on basic plan- ning tools, including preparing the comprehensive plan, zoning basics, developing capital improvement programs, essentials of subdivision �� ia�eEdty a �7t�s�r f nni. regularion, the use of maps and citizen surveys, and more. Available to PCJ subscribers for $ 17.55 PLANNIiVG CON[M15510N ERS JOURN AL / NUMBER 51 / SUMMER Z003 FEATURE r i' • � • � • � • �, � � � :,._,he Internet and its user- fr�endly bro�vsing technology, the World Wide Web, changed everyday life in the 1990s. I�Tow, with the advent of "e-government," public offi- cials are investing serious resources in hopes of exploiting the Web's ubiquity to automate interaction with citizens, cut costs, and iinprove service. Washington state residents, for example, can apply online for boating permits. "E-filing" of taxes is increasingly common, and even online voting is being cautiously intro- duced. But as a communication channel for land-use planning, the Web has generally been the provi.nce of well-heeled locales, especialiy lazger states, cities, and coun- ties. This is stazting eo change, thanks in nart to the rise of computer software and ice companies that are focused on needs of local govern�sents — and are willing to 'tnvest in smaller, less iucrative markets. Now the Web is within the reach of most communities, especially those with realistic expectations and a by Dnvid Essex few weil-chosen strategies. The "soft" benefits can be closer, richer relationships with constituents, and increased participation by people who would otherwise rarely xnake the trek to a public hearing. There are sub- stantial cost savings in the printing and labor that can be avoided by making informatio� available at little or no �ost online. A well-organized online informa- tion system ean help build institutional memories zn organizations notorious for rapid turnover in both volunteers and staff. But more importantly, the new communieation channels may help to further democratize a process that has often been dominated by highly motivat- ed special-interest groups. ��. . u _. .:,r; .'�`` �t°` ' .�:: � ' vAX�,v,� � ,� � • ;.:�:� `. na1 :�:;uu ' "�w M_:r- �: ;' �: ': `.. '!;:;r . ��.`� � �'**��, -.-Yr� i''`^n : - � �i�'. so t '2:: :�=. � ... : _ �=:�ir^��yQ}�..� -:.. :. .; , �,,%,. _ ,�.-�::;. � �-�: ''*:��:5o��c :�:,�__,. ��,; �: :. —.;: �';.:.:�� . ..:�:� : .��..;..,:-_.�:.� � �`�:r�_�o„ .,�:. �:� � �`�:.... ��u: � ``� : � . ,; . , � : : ... : : _ . ��:��;�.,. � q�::"��;�: � ;;�: ��"� ::; ,.r±l�p,�1[uw�i:'Nurd�:,:. ,:� ,— _ z=.:4..::�. �...�..��..,. �;:i=:....,..r��`-='"'.�_:�-:i"Y� �� ; • ��. . ,�:�*��.: �.� �� , .�t�� ...�:�,,, , �'�� y � � �--i4Execati�reSummaiy� -_ "�-1iCOmmunityDesign . �.. � .,... ..... I I '. , ..: . `- �. . : -� -.. . � � � :�-lltntrodu.:lion �HI�N twaler•nronmenthOpenSpacz I I . I 1 �.�akFO1'eYtOYd 'ilflarks7a0.ecfaa40n ij '�wtalanpraces� . .blGreanways � ii - �-roiCOmmunik��Vatues&hlission ��-il'HistoricPreseriaklon .-.-�9I Background Oa[a & Planninq Assumpfions M1.Ecroaomic Oevelopmeni �� JlShapingtheFUtur. -� '�al]�farmatjo�:Te�:hnology��.�' , � ' y� Poitrait bf B�aclSShurg Tom ow, 2048 �_ ij Ubl ty SorVice. . .. .. . Ho�ne page for 8ie Blnchsbiug, Virgir2ia, Compreherisive Plarz. NETWdRK1NG WITH THE �'iJBLIC It is important Eo understand the dis- tinction between the Internet and the Web. The former is the de- centralized network of millions o£ intercon- nected computers that had been a medium mostly for acadernics axzd governrrzent re- searchers ur�til the early 1.990s, when easy to use, colorful browsers such as Net- scape and TnCernet Explorer, and docu- ments hyperlinked on Web "pages," became widely avaiiable, and then multiplied exponentially. Technically, tiiere are other commta- nication channels that run over the pub- lic Internet and have little to do with the . �.,: Web, per se — notably e-mail, Internet telephany, and newsgroups, which pro- vide time-independent discussions car- ried out in e-mail. It doesn'[ change the fact that in today's world, the firsi mandatory step in ereating an online presence for your planning departmenc or pragram is to set up a Web site, or have a page (or pages) on the site of a host organization, typicalty your munici- pality. The site will function not onty as your "portal" to �velcome the public, but as the outward face of the central PC servers and the sophisticated necworking and application software you need to manage content and communications. Most small cities and towns can afford the following options, which typi- cally are avaiIabie on basic Web sites or vvith special application software that costs only a few dollars a month: e E-mail, Visitors who click on a high- lighted Iink on the page are taken direct- ly to a form with the address of a generai departmental e-mail box already filled in. They can type a message in a window, add their e-mail address, and send — often w'tthout ever leaving the site. Other links can go directly to the personal mail- boxes of staif. � Feedback forms. Similar to e-mail, they're usually geared to a tiinely topic that the planning department wants input on. a Polls and surveys. These pop-up farms look szmilar to those used for door-to- door, teiephane, and mail surveys. Res�its can be tabulated in the depart- ment's regular database (often Microsoft Access) or in a special database that comes with the Web software. Some sites also provide quick, unscienCific polls PLANNING COMMISStONERS ]OURNAL / NU[vtBER 51 / SUMMER 2003 s > >'�.^. .S ) where people can ��;'�.. " voice their opinion �� a� y and see an instant �� ,�� ..:��'��;��. _ running total of `'� res� - also a com- ""° "'" . . �`L9.4'.�A�JB 'tC � mi in on main- � �.:: � �: stz-eazn Web portals �� such as MSN.com. �° � ��s� �. . � _ �. � �': • E-mail newsletters. $ : � Xou can ask visitors if � ehey wanc to be �� : informed of general ��,,,� news or highiights on ��'�� '`� � � topics of special interest. Newsletters can be sent as plain text in the main body of the e-mail, or as rich text that lootcs almost like a Web page in newer e-rnail packages ehat sup- port the latest multimedia formats. As an alternative, constituents can be asked to click on a linlc inside the e-mail that then loads their Web browser, talring them direedy to the newsletter on your site, The Abilene, Texas, Comprehensive Plan Site aiIows for• easy dotivnload- ing of docuntents � "Notify Me" options. Visitors who click r.his linlc are asking ro be notified or '�ded in brief e-mails about im�._: � ant events such as upcoming l�earings. • Documents, Most sites make planning documents, such as ordinances, maps, minutes, and master plans, available in popular iormats for viewing online or, depending on the organization's policy, for dowziloading on the visitor's own PC. • Discrxssion Groups. Residents can toss around ideas and argue hot issues by typing comments into a dedicated "space" on the site (also sometimes called a bulletin board or chat room). Planning officials can � �� join in; somet�mes thep must to � l � maintain order and correct fac- � tual errors. (On the mainstream ; � Web, owners of very active dis- cussion groups assign real mod- � � erators to keep order.) Experts �� say many planners forego dis- ��' cus�=--+ groups because they're � co :ed that potentially Iibe�.; u� statements and misin- , fnrma [ion wi] l open them to tegal liability, or at the least create nega- tive publicity. 5teps must also be taken to ensure that any Web mechanism advertised as part of the formal pubiic- input process meets legal requirements — typically by requiring participants to identify themselves. "BLEEDING-EDGE" INiERACTIVITY: GIS A�1D STREAMING �!IDEO With mare money comes the latest technology, and for the mast part, that means new, gee-whiz ways to interac[ with audiences. But the lack of New Yark-size budgets isn't the only thing keeping next-generation features off the sites of small lacaliries. In many cases, tI�e technology simply hasn't evolved to the paint where every horne PC user can tap a rich, multimedia pipeline to the plannii�g department. Take geographic information sys- [ems (GIS), the interactive layered maps and databases [hat axe taking Iand-use cnnfinued on page 16 Ittter��et iiisC�zaction at u Se«[tle ser�ior cente;: ,::,: ._:.. ,. .. _ . Editot's Noie: `�h� "Di��#a� �l��d�°' One of the most important issues fac'sng com- munities providing oniine govemment ser- vices is how to ensure access by all segments of the community, including lower-income citizens and seniors. The concern is fo avoid a "digitaT divide" between citizens with access to (and kno�whow about) che online world, anct those wiEhout. "Commnnity netv✓orks" are one r�sponse These ne[works are typically partnerships ;�S° between local govemments,. schools, libraries, chambers of commerce, and other organiza- tions, designed to provide onIine access and: . training. Richard Lowenberg, Fxecutive Direc- tor of the Davis, CA, Communiry Network, notes that comtnuniry networks are especially important for rurat. communities, "since they provide a means of aggregating demand." This; for example, allows For more beneficial arrangements with Internec seevi.ce providers, as well as for.the developmezzt of shared use facilitaes. Some localiues,,sueh as SeaCtle, have drawn on cable tetevisian franchise fees to help suppare online access by resideiits. In Seattle,: free Iriternet access terminaLs can be found in 22 branch libraries and 21 other . pubtic buildings. According to David Keyes Commnnity Technology Pianner:in Seattle's Department of Information Techno�og}; the ' City also has a growing networiz qf neiglibox hood "community technology centers.° Under - [I�e guzdaz�ce oE a citizens advisory board, the - ,Ciry proyides matching funds that. have . - allowed these centers to open in low-income hausing projecfs, in senior citizen centers, ' and in the offices of other non-profit'commu nity service providers. Community technolo gy cen[ers not only provide for access, but aLso train residents in ehe use of computers - and how to access online resources. For more infonmation, go to the Web sites : of the Association for Communzry Network ing <wvwr,afcn.ozg> azid the Community Technology Centers' Network <www ctcnet.org>. Bath offer a �vealth oE . resonrces. Also definitely woreh a visit are the Web pages of Seattie's Cammunity Technology Program <www.ciryofseattle.net/tech/> . (including their excellent Information Tech- nology indicators report,.available for down- Iaading) and the bavis Communiry Network <w�,vw.dcn:org>. You can also.reach David Keyes at: <david.keyes@sea[tle.gov>, and i2ichard Lowenberg at: <zl@dcn:org>. PLANNING COLVIMISStONERS JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SUMIvIER 2003. '�._;.;,.`;`.;::; - �� ` S�f�� 11! �9 5 Tap t�se 9nternet... °o� continued fi-om page 15 � l.ocal officials and technology ' experts wi th experience planning, and government generally, by building ar�d maintaining effective Web . storm. Although some jurisdictions `.ites offer the following advice for plan- make their GIS maps available to the .iers: general public over the Web, most home � Market your site — Promotion can start PCs and browser software can't efficient as simply as adding the site's Web address ly handle the electronic files, which are to tax bills or sticking it on trash recepta- many tlmes larger and more complex cles. than the average Web page. Whats m Design a site that is easy for the public more, the "bandwzdth" of the pipeline to move axouz�d in, which usuallp means _ between the Web site's servers and the following the "three-dick rule": no page �onsunter's PC is often too "narrow" to should take more thau three n�ouse clicics ` handle GIS. eo reacli. Until the digital divide shrinks and a Look for software that makes it easy far high-speed broadband networking non-technical staff to publish standard becomes mare widely available, espe- offiee dacuments to the site. Odierwise, it cially in rural areas, the GTS experience will be taa cime-consuming to keep timely will be almost intolerably slow on the informaaon up on the site. Web. �his is changing, however, as com- • IZeep information fresh. `°IFyour site's panies such as computer-aided design not current, forget about it — people will (CAD) vendor Autodesk Inc. and others not come back," warns Kisn 1'atrick Kobza, •. telease software that creates Gi5 files CEO of Web software vendor Neighbor- express�y to run oz� Web browsers. hood America. "The idea is Eo create a Live video — even tlle "streaming" communiry of interest, and you won't have ` jrind that can be fed in bursts over the communiry of interest if you don t have narrow dial-up pipelines of the Internet urrency." For example, if you're going to �e posting meeting nocices; agendas; and —�ay not be feasible for most localities ininutes, it is essential that you keep thezn because of the complexity of setting up a up-to-date. live, Web-connected video feed. But ' some city halls make videos available e Budgee adequate resources. In order to have a usefui site, with fresh informaiion .' ��stead in digitized files thaE wor�r some- : you'li need, to atlocate sufficient staff hme what likes videotapes far replay an pop- and budget dol€ars. Deve(op a realistic ular, downloadable-for-free programs game plan for your Web site, �rrith ade- such as Windows Media Player and quate resources, before you Iaunch the site RealOne Player. VENDORS, ASSOCIATIONS -- PROMOTE AFFORDABILITX . A small handful of companies have sprung up to make it easy for govern- ' - ments with modest budgets to set up and maintain rich, interactive Web sites. Neighborhood America Inc. (Naples, FL), for example, says it has outfitted 70 � localities nationally w'tth its Public Communications Systetn. The company � built the Imagine NY Web site that was used to manage public communications . -- .• for the contest to design the fotrner site ,. of the Woxld Trade Center: <wwwima ,.. , ._. �. " . . ginenewyork.org> According to compa- :. ny president and CEO Kim Patrick Kobza, another customer, M��regzon.�rg, • PLANN�NG 'COtvitvilSSIOIVERS �+,r;,�l'd'a41� I �� : � ;� P ;��` ��s �. �� J i .. . ?r � , ti � �� }� �� fIt , } �. ) . � e � � _' � � � ��;..� ,�;:.� � :� �: �� . _ ;; '` '_ 17zis cot72ma�tiity tedz center; irt Bi.�r�li��gtori, Uennonr's "Oic� North End," ofjers cornp�tter nnd Iiiteniet trniiling. a comprehensive planning site for seven central Florida counties and nine other public and private organizatzons, says it saved $85,0�0 on printing, shipping, and labor. CivicPlus (Manhattan, KS), gears its Web system to small municipalities, counties, and chambers of commerce, according to CEO Ward Morgan. The typical small city can have a site for a $800 setup cast, pius $50 a month thereafter. "We eliminate ehe need for a Web master," says Morgan. We}� site devetopment firms, as well as architec- tural and other design consultanes, are another common source of assistance. Other steps are being taken to help small municipalities afford not only the costs of designing and setting up Web sites, but the more oneraus demands of keeping their content current. Banding Cogether for economies of scale and group purchasing through regional planning commissions and otber associ- ations zs one promising solution. The National Association of Counties, for example, partnered with the National League of Cities and IBM Corp. to create Totally Web Government, a suite of e- government programs that are run ar►d maintained on centrally loeated servexs, saving customers the k�assles of buying their o��n equipment and soft��are. JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SUtv1MER 2003 � Around two-dozen counties have used ,it, says Nancy Irish, pxogram manager of the association's Einancial services center. Vox Po�uL� :,ome observers even claim ehat a well-designed planning Web site, espe- cially one bolstered wzth ehe data and visu�t information of GIS, can bring civiliey and rationality to public dis- caurse, serving as a sort of virtual medi- ator in contentious land-use projects. "The Internet can enable fuller, more informed participation in planning deci- sions by citizens and public officials alike," wri€es Jonathan Cohen, AIA, owner of the Jonathan Cohen &T Associ- ates architectural firm in Berkeley, CA, in his book, Comm�mication and Design with the Internet (W.W. Norton � Co., 2000). Cohen cites the Web site of the Blacksburg (VA) Z046 Comprehensive Pian, and its popular sister site, the Blacksburg Electronic Village (BEV), as models of how to use the Web to involve and inform the public. < �'�e Biacksburg sites actually com- nt existing processes by helping citizens to better pregare for traditianal pubtic hearings, asserts Darren Coffey, a Blacksburg town planner. "They're try- ing very hard ta ground thezr arguments in Che Cown's planning document," Cof- fey says. "The�re not just saying `nat irt my backyard."' Despite its technical cache, the Web might best be treated as just another communicaeion tool, "You can't use the Web in isolation," Cohen cautions. "It has to be part of a larger participation strategy. It doesn't substitute for the other things you do." ♦ Dnvid Essex of Antrim, New Hampshire, is a fi�ee- ~� � lance writer and former � � newspn�er reporter spetiat- p '��` izittg in tttformntton technoI- � �'- � ,� � ogy. He is aIso one of ttie ��x '� �<� z'� r�� Tvwn of Aittrim's two �•epre- £ s� se��fatives on the Southwest '�� p� ��' P�Q1171I71g C01"Yq71L5510ri. ES52X5 IJYCVi0ll5 or tYie Ptnnning Cornmissianers Jo��niat, "i ��r�h Like a Reporter," ttppenred in PCJ #47, Sztmmer 2002. �an�a�' t��i#�1� � �le'° P�le� Ig �� 5 Perhaps one of the best exarnples of how small cities and counties can build a viable e-governmen[ and planning presence on the Web is Ivlanhattan, K5, a small ciry of 44,831 and ceneer of a tri-county region of 108,999 people. Calling itself the "Litde Apple," Manhattan — despite modest resources — seexns to have much of the chutzpah of its Northeast taazrzesake when it comes to teiling its story on the Web. Besides running its main site <ww�,v.ci.manhattan.ks.us>, the city partners with Riley Counry on a site dedicated to the Manhattan i7rban Area Comprehensive Plan Update. It provides maps, plan documents, newslettezs, e-mail routed direcely to staff and the advisory committee, a community forum, a feedbaclt Eorm, and a special link to the cit}�s InTouch software for requesting e-mail n.otification of important events. � .��rt�,�rr��.(�iu��N'=�� _��`"•.`,x �kh] w ;i>j � a 1 j � � ..�:-.�;��. r�.�,�'- ,� - saimuuog. i�xr. Cl:.t...u� I cl: . e r6TI.WaLVFD. EI'FM] ... raooN'rs��'f.oNiieFLLt.� � ManNananOrbanMeaCompmhansivePlancommenls �. �� ._ . F°mmll.l� awrani.�va�•,riwasastseo��e ��, WALAfAR'f Id1 � GeoR �oyle '. 2002-12-1713A1:58 ' T soorlaHOn PI n fnaldl � �.� Richard ealay .: �0�212-i� 12A2:12 ' • Aneersana a oeveioomartf4z � TimMusch � 2062-�2as �.a2:oa � p e AuricWivre! Lartds @1 �� PI ning Tnem � 2002-12-19 72 19:02 ' K177�Ge�awarAreal6) - ' ��. PbnningTearn 2u02-f2-191211:69 _.. _.. ._ . D t met FlaodPron Ar sf31 PlmrungTeem 2062-i0.Q50849.'afi. U52A Comd (1} . . .-� . -.-' �'�pryl clTeam 2002-07-0817 5925 � ---- -- ' Land Usxs aio�a+ha K78 Coe�idor (21 -' GMnntng Teazn ' 2002-0&t3 19:52:47 � , e�q{�c,�l_o�. . ... .'''Bi00emPSay ".�2001-7410tl8d324�� Farum Eist � Ne�vladcj VroW Threeds E Sosrch � �� , �. Blilletin Board on the Manhattan, Knnsas, Cotnprehensive PIan Web Site Eric Catcell, assiseant directoz for plan- ning, says he likes the ease with which the . system, deveioped by VPl Technoiogies, a.. Manhaetan-based Web software vendor, lets staff quickty canvert existing Microsoft Office documents for publishing on the site. Another usefui featare is simultaneous posting of ineeting notices on the ciry's cable-TV access channeL Nearly 200 peopie have signed up to receive notices of the Planning Board's meetings, and 141 asked to get e-mail on the comprehensive plan. Cat- tell says the e-znails aze efEective in keeping die public inEormed. And since the site is "self serve," it has led to a reduccion in phone calis requesting information. Since January, the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce has used CivicPlus for a sepa- ra[e site with a somewhat unusual feature: a searchable database of available properties. Local realtors who have been issued elec- tronic idenrities and passwords can post properties themselves, though chamber staff checks the information before publish- ing it, according to economic developmen[ director Stacy ICohlmeier. She soon hopes to save on phone time and mailing expens- es by roucing through the site special notifi- . cations and oeher information targeiing high-value investors. "A lot of the things we want to send to this group of people are things we want to put an our Web site," Kohlmeiez says. .�;? If all this weren't enough, Riley County runs still another glanning-related site (<www.gis,cico.org>), which provides inter- active GIS maps. COl'�f'�t�IC11�9�� O� ��t¢�¢5� Visit these sites ta see some exciting examples of how local officials are using the Web to broaden public pazticipa- tion and make land-use planning a richer, more user-friendly experience. Abite�ie {TX) Compiehensive Plan <www. abilenecar�lpplan.com /abilene_comp> Biachsburg (VA) 2046 Comprehens'tve Plnr1 <<,wv w.blacicsburg.gov/comp_plan> Biachsbati�Electrot�ic Viiiage <w�n,v be�net> City of Santc� Monicn Comm�nication Center ' <http://pen, ci.santa-monica.ea.us/ communicarion> - Imngine NY. <wwFV.imaginenewyork.org> Imngine Manatee <www.imaginemanatee. org> Lenexa (K5} Comprehensive Ptc�n <www.ci.lenexa.ks.us/plannin�/compplan> Manhaftan (KS) Econorriic Development <ww-w manhattaned.org> Ivia��hattan (KS) Ur1�nn Area Coinyrehensive Plan Updnte <t,vwv�� manhattanareaplan. com> Myregion.org (Centrnl Plaridn) <ww�v myregion.org> Neighbo�•hooc� Knawledge Los A�lgeles <htep://nkla sppsr.ucla.eda> PLANNING COMMISSiONERS JOURNAL _/ NUMB�R.51 / SUMMER 2003 � ;: �_,,�t_: . FEATURE / ' � � , �r i � � ' „ �':Y.'' •��. �:ousing developments taxget- e� for the age-55-and-over slice of the demographic pie are going upscale. How will your comxnunity respond to the new o�portunities anci challenges these projects bring to the planning process? THE NEW UPSCALE SENIORS In the late 1940s, America was feeling good. The soldiers and sailors had returned from war, and were finding old and new sweethearfs. Wartirne industry was converting to a vast domeseic produc- tion machine. And without too much fur- ther ado, the baby boom v��as launched. The new Boomer generation would grow up with tetevision, desktop computers, and rapidly expanding new suburbs. They °��ould pioneer new inventions, new ways i daing business, and whole new indus- _,;: `' �r�es, with increased career advancement and higher Ievels of earnings for the great tnajoti.ty. And now, the oldest mernbers of this generaeion are reaching a very special age – 55 years old. � �.ry Lwin� f�r Activcrldu/fe ``� x o czr o rr �1. � , , ,r�n active adult condo ��qssitchusetts nity at the c�'os.sroads of Nearby. ,. • near che intersecdon of I-495 ;md I-95 • abutting theTPC GolfCourse � ane mile from culxural events �� g�e Tweeter Center � two milea from Wheaton Cdlege > 45 m�nutes to Boston, Wi�rcester and Providence ,..yet apa�t. • comiec[ed to die Great Woods Conseivation Area • miles oF�valking u��S � individua3 viccory gvrdens by Wayne A. Lemmon Age 55 has become special in the plan- ning profession and homebuilding indus- try. This is a thresholcl age that has been broadly adopted as defining "acrive adult" living. Households in this age bracket are typically not yet oid enough to retire, but are usua2ly beyond the demands of child- raising, Housing that is specifically target- ed to age-55 and older is not expected to accommodate school-age children, which, in turn, has important impiicat'rons for planning gublic facilities and municipal budgets. BuC what is particularly different about this generation is its economic stature. Overall, the Boomer generation has amassed an unprecedented tevel of per- sonal affluence.� In addition to incomes, assets have aIso been growing. For the last seven years, the housing market has been very strong, and in some markets in just the past four years, home values have appreciated by a third or more. If an older household has been in the same house for a ior►g tizne, they aiso may have lit[le or ao remaining mortgage debt, PttYeing these faetors together, we see an interesting picture. We have mature per- sons who are still in genera(Iy good health and have active iz£estyles. Their houses often command a high price on tl�e mazket, with iittle debt eo pay o£f. Moreover, with children no Iong"er at home, tltere are frequently empty �edrooms. For many, the upkeep on the house has also become a burden or simply a nuisance wiCh which they no Ionger andvver want to deal. Will these G1tgnTBRO�K in Norton...for tl3ose discerrvng actrve a u who appteciate fine cundominivm desi�ms ��•i$i fsrse-floor moster suices and actached garxges. . '�[onF�s or[N AuLV tz —4 m r�c�n �aoN[ �3ov,000' ° So6-Z8?-c7oo nuu:ra� r•i�on� •riie. Nom�u: i-+�ss �� « n�, n«. �aus a��,��>. �� ThOrndilce Development ��hy on nb�ilt. .{ c.mtmi�mcnl ��.1�^�I��•• c�min�i��iilc. FRl1\tTHEti()VCIS�.I-iYiVw4:�i:lU.Lelronllc..l7311'fur `t_M�raf_tlmJ:w��+t�.dlwm�hul&ry?:�'�^'� Y1.9 mrl�v. Aig7�con It.� IH1N (ur 1.� nJ'V„ L.fll, �h+ioii. � Canon Sa�iny II,nA. 'pn�rrmhjm in R�'O . .. �—~` a 3r5 ss households continue to live where they are, or might they prefer soinething else? NEW HOUSING FOR ACTFVE ADULTS Many of the country's homebuilders are betting on tkte "something else." Until fairly recently, the only choices available to most mature households were to stay in-place; to find an apartment or small condo soznewhere in their community; or to move to a retirement cotnmunity, often zn the "Sunbelt." Long-distance moves came with some drawbacks, however. Children and grandchildren would be far away and might only be seen once a year instead of once a week. And, in general, the "retiren�ent communities" attracted a much older profile, age 70 and up, which was not really appealing to pre-retirees aged 60 and under. This picture has changed dramatically in recent years. Across the country, what has been termed "active adult" houszng is now being offered to empty-nest house- holds priar to retirement. Homebuildexs have begun offering a whole new menu of plans and styles designed to appeal to the new, upscale mature market. The appeal is to the pre-retiree or semi-retiree. House plans and communiry ptans emphasize active recreation and enter[ainment, but also feature dens and computer hook-ups. Master bedroom suztes occupy a major porTion of the ground f�oor, but upstairs bedrooms are provided for visiting chil- dren, grandchildren, and other guests. And above all, the homes re#lect the style and higher income of many in the Baby Boom generation. In addition to the house, the commu- nity as a whole is designed to be attractive 1 U.S. Censas Bureau data documents the rapid income growda Cor households headed by per- sons aged 5� to 64, in part re(]ecting the bah}� boomers now en[eriag that age braclzet. Using adjusted 2001 dollars, the mean income Eor dtis group has increased from $4i,741 in 1970, to $47,82�F in 1980, $54,448 in 1990, and $63,952 in 2000. Zhis represents an increase oF 53% (again, in adjusted dollars) over this 30 year period, and e 17% increase in just the most recent ten year period. U.S, Censns Bureau, I-listorical Income Tables - Househo2ds. Table H-10. PLANNING COMM1SS10NER5 JOURNAL / NUIvIBER 51 / SUIv1IvIER 2003 i. A�chitect�u�aI details nnd enhanced Innc�scapirtg contribute to a�i �pscate imnge for what ts stiti n mocierately sized house, ctosely spaced ta its neiglibo3: This retaNve(y small "raer�ia roar�" is tn �luce of tlie ln�ger "family roam" found in other new hous- iiig. Buf note the wixe cabinet, the granite colui- tertop wet-bar, and marbie farepiace. The dini�lg room may comma�id the centrnl iocation in the house with a cathedrat loft ceiiing. Entertniiling family and guests is often [he focal activity iii active adz�lt housing. IYtts cotrtrnttttify fit�iiities bttildittg is e�l3ottt 55,040 sc�ttctl•e feet it2 size, ni�d incltsdes an indoor poo1, n ballroom with a catering hifdien, ancI mnr�y sperial puipose rooms for exercise, hobbies, nncl meetings. for the active adult market. While this �F��n zncludes the kind of nature walk !. and enhanced landscaping also . : =rd in many family-oriented communi- ties, two other factors come into play for mature market develop- ments. One is the "com- muniry amenities" pack- age. Family-oriented com- munities may o�fer sume eoe lots and an outdoor swimming pool. Larger adutt-oriented communi.- ties, however, frequently offer very laxge, full fea- tured community facilities. The other key factor for the mature market is erea[ing a Iow mainte- nance or maintenance-free environment. This is often achieved by establishing the community as a condominium, rather than by seliing houses on fee-simple lots. Even if the homes axe single-family de- tached structures, it is the condominium associatian that is responsible far mowing ' the lawns, plowing the snow, and even maintaining the exteriors o£ the individual units. Each home has a delineated exteri- or area of "restricted use" whic�i looks and feels like a typical yard area for a detached home. Because of ehe maintenance impli- cations, condominium ownership format for detached houses can be very attractive tor ac�ive adult communit�es. Active adult communities have been nmbraced by jurisdictions a�ross [he cc�untry as a"good" form of residential cC�velopment. In some localiaes, develop- ers know that adult communities are the orily kind of development for which they can get approvaIs. The reasons for this are ehree-fold: I. Upsca7e ad�,�It hoitsing is very attrac- tive fiscally for the ma�nicipality. Privare communities of this type add no new enrollrnent to schools. The upscale price positioning adds to the tax base and annu- al tax revenues, but demands very little of the town treasury, particularly if street maintenance (and, in some locali[ies, even water and sewer services) are provid- ed by the private community, 2. Sociatty, families are nbte to stay together if there is an attractive alternative to grandma and grancipa moving out of the area. Long-time community leaders remain with the communiry. Of course, there can always be too much of a good thing. Localities that have weighted their demographics towards older age groups can, in the long term, create a constituen- cy that may not identify with schools or social need agendas. 3. 1'he typicai active adult devetopment featieres re7atively smnit lots or, 'tn eondo- minium situations, closely spaced PLANNING COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL / NIJMBER 51 ! SUMMLR 2003 �:��,�:'r� continued o�t pnRe20 ihe 3d¢w "Ae�kiv¢ �.duii" �o�as��g continued from page 19 dwelling units. Compared to tradi[ional single-family detached subdivisions, ,active adult communities leave more open ' pace for a given number of dwellings. ISSUES FOR PLANNERS Active adult communities are not sim- ply subdivisions with homes owned by empey nesters. They are in fact a different foxm of development that carries some imporeant implications and issues for planners and land use regulators: Age-�testricted vs. Eige-Oriented Age-restrzcted communities require irnposition of a restriction on the deed record for the property (or in the condo- minium declaration or articles of incorpo- ration) that the home can only be sold to a household meeting the stated age require- ment. Age-oriented communities do nat have such restrictions and, in theory, homes can be sold or resold ta anyone. However, developments with the design and planning features (including small common-area yards) associated with •,active adults are not likely to attraet fami- _ �es with children. - - -' Age-oriented communities are tl�us relying on ihe market response to their design to achieve their xnatuxe market ori- en[ation. Some municipalities, however, want these communities to adhere to spe- cific a ge restrictions. Interestin gl y, most developers do not like age restrictions. They woutd rather not prevent a viable prospect (such as a 52-year-oId childless couple) irom buying their product. Mare- over, they believe that the features of the developrrcent wiil be effective in focusing the market on 55-and-overs. Also, some po[ential buyers may be concerned as to the resale potential of their house if they can't seil it to anyone who can pay the price. IDetached Condominiu�$� vs. Subdivisi�aas Developing a community of detached homes as condominiums can require some mental adjustments on the part of bath buyers and local governments. [omebuyers may readily embrace the idea of handing off their lawn mowing and maintenance to the conclo association, but �zay have to come to grips with not having a back yard in which to plant a vegetable garden or do what they please. Simiiarly, while local governments may embrace not having to plow the new streets or extend new sewer lines, they may feel uneasy about the condo- minium association functioning in ways that resemble a separate community govemment.Z REGULATORY ROADBLOCKS For the E�iscal reasons noted earlier, active adutt coramunities can be quite attractive eo upscale, low-density subur- ban jurisdictions. However, these are fre- quently the very same jurisdictions that have implemented minimum lot size res[rictions or other zoning regulations that prevent higher densiry developmene. There is a presumption behind such regu- lations that higher density equaEes to lower values. Sircce active adule communi- t i e s a r e t y p i c a l i y h i g h e r d e n s i t y / h i g h e r value propositions, they may be at odds with restrictive zoning. For example, setback and minimum Iot size reqr�iremenrs can prevent the type of active adult housing described in this article. in addition to the maintenance benefits for homeowners, one reason developers have used the condominium £orm of development (instead of setling individual houses on fee simple lots) is eo circumvent rnunicipal setback and znini- 2 While it is beyond the scope of this article to discuss [he growing impacts oE private community associa- tions, one should note their rapidly increasing num- bers, ln 1970, under 3% oE U.S. housing units were pat[ of a community association {including condo- miniums, cooperatives, and pla�ned communities). By 1998, [his had Fnashroomed to nearly 15°,b oF all housing units. Condominiums represent over 30% of community associations. Comtnunity Association Fact- book (Commvnity Associations Insti[caEe 1999). mum lot size requirernents. In some areas, however, this creates further problems as regulations designed around multifamily condominium bail.dings fit poorly when applied to single family detached hotnes.3 In other areas, these developn�enks make use oE "plan�3ed unit clevelopment" or "planned residentiat development" pro- visions of the local zoning ordinance, which a11ow znore flexibility in site layout and design, and also permit ehe clustering of housing units on certain portions of the site. Just as often, however, communiries that have [avored large lot development have resisted cluster-style zoning. Si1MMTNG UP: Demographic trends underlie an increasing demand for "active adule" housing des'tgned to meet the needs of mature, chilctless households, age SS and older. This can be a very attractive form of development for local eommunities. It is, however, a specialized type of housing with a unique combi�aation a[ opportuni- ties and constraints. Local zoning lativs, site planning standards, and approval pro- cedures may have to be updated if your comtnunity is to participate in this new wave of housing developnnent. � Wayne Lemn�ort is a reai � w,� �J .�, �; `. estute mnrhe[ e�oiiomist with � � � .oi� � . . .,;. 5. a degree in architectuie frozn �� Cornell Untversity, nnd '�r = R d`� � �� . urban planning from the City �� Coliege of New Yorh. He is � ya; �,�� DirectoroJ�Nlar�heCResearcJ� ,� ;�,'��"°°`-- � �. �.. � for Bnher Reside�itinl, a lccrge E homebuilder oper-ating fro»i tRe Piiiladetphia to the Hat-tford metropoIitan areas. Lelnmm� is nlso « member of tlie PCJ's Edrtorint Ac�visory Board, and autho�•ec� "Tiie AiTti-Sprawl Maiitra" in PCJ #37 {wnter 2000), 3 ln some cases, dimensional requirements contained in local zoning or subdivision regulations, which may apply to individual lots, do not apply to condominium developments. Same localities also have specific regtt- ]ations applicable to condominium developments, such as parking and bedroom count standards, that appiy poorl}' to single-Family rletached archi[ecture. • • �� '�� .�.�z.' r,::. �;�.Y�-.�� o�urn� ; ,� �� --;.� � �-�_ � �� r�, � �� PLANNI[�tG COMMISSIONERS JOURNAL / NUMBER 51 / SUM[vIER 2003 �� 1 1. 2. 1VI0 S � PL G CO SSIOIi� S�ptember 3, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. Call to Order Roll Call �� ° _ , ::. :'; f:� ;C��- . . :�., �_ , ` '�, ;1= •�:, 3. Approve Minutes: July lb, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Commenis on Items Not on the Agenda . - �� i , . . � . ' � �.. . i � _ �'�.. .: � � � � : � ` �, r � i i , '� i ��, i� � � A �` _ � 5. Spec�a� PIar��ing Case SI'-11�-03 Consider Resalution 736-03 Recommending Rezoning of All Parcels within the PF, Public Facility, Zoning District. 6. Spec�al Pia�nin� Case SP-114-03 Consider Resolution 737, a Resolution Recommending Revisions to Draft Ordinance 711 Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops in the City of Mounds View 7. : 1. ;. � ► - .._ i �=- • � ', � � ' ��. L. .i� . . , . -_ . . .� : , � . • + r " ,� ,., �_ �� _ ��r.` - ( i � �1.'1 ! 1� i ". • i. � Next Plannu�g Commission Meeiing: September 17, 2003 Adjoi�rnment to Agenda Session AGE�� E��I�N Review Minutes: August 20, 2d03 2. 5taff Reports: 3. Chairperson and Plannii�g Cominissioners' Reports N:�Data\Crrovps\ComdevlPlanning Cozeunission�PC Agendas�2003\09-03-03 PC Agenda.doc Itern No: 5 �Iteefin� D��e: September 3. 2003 iype of ��s�ness: Commiss_ion Business r ,. Nr: � , ; � ; . � ��; Mounds View Planning Corr�mission F�-��; James Ericson, Community Deveiopment Director It�rr� TitlelSubjec�o Discussion and Consideration of Rezo�ing Actians Associated with the Public �acilities Zoning Districts. Special Planning Case SP-1 �8-03 Ir�trocl�cfiion: At the Planning Commission's last meeting on August 20, 2003, SfiafF inade a presentafiion regarding the parcels zoned PF—Public Facilities—within the City and requested feedback from �he Commission coi�cerning a suggestion to rezone all PF parceis to a more appropriate designation. Counting the Golf Course as one parcei, there are seventeen "PF " zoned properiies in the City. The impetus for this review originated with a repori given by the City Attorney to the City Council on July 14, 2003 regarding the [Viounds View's PF Zoning District and recommended that the City s�ro�igly consider revising fhe district`s purpose and to rezone some or all properties within the PF district to another district more logicall� suited. (The City Atfiorney's � let#er and other materials were provided in your August 20t packet.) The Ciiy Gouncil, -;:;:;:_`; respanding to the Ci�y A�torney's report, directed s#a#f to bring this issue ta the Planning Commission for review and it requesfed fhafi �he Commission draft a proposed ordinance for the Council's considerafiion. � . The Planning Commission generally supported the proposed revisions in fight of �he Ci#y Attorney's recommendation and the Cify Council's direction. �ne question was raised however concerning the necessity ofi such a rezoning action; especially since there are city- owned parcels NOT zoned PF. {The City owns multiple residential properties which are zoned residential, and in one case, commercial.) The City Attorney was aske� about this and the paraphrased response is as follows: The evidence of cify-owned propertres is furfher reason to change from a PF designafion, in thai all city-owned properfy is "supposed" fo be zoned PF, according to our Code. Seciion 9 9 9�.01 of the Code staies fhat "The purpose of ihe PF, Public Facilifies Drs�rict is fo provide for larrd areas, waferways and wafer areas owned, cont�olle�, re�crlaf�d, usec� or pr°oposed io be use� by the Cr�y. (Emphasis added.) Thus, by not rezoning properfies controlled by fhe City to PF, ihe City is ac�rng contrary fo ifs own Code. The underlying issue is fhaf praperty should be zoned based upon the "use" ra�her fhan who owns if. The following is a lisi ofi uses on parcels pres�ntly zoned PF: City parks, wells & pump hauses, City Nali, ihe water treatmenf facilities, the water tower, The �ridges Golg Course and the Community Center. PF Rezoning Report September 3, 2003 Page 2 The Commission enay recall tha� the zoning map presented for review on August 2Q had proposed the goif course be rezoned commercial. While that is still a possibili#y, it seems more apprapriate to rezone the golf course to lndustrial #o match fhe surrounding land uses. (The Zoning i1�ap attached to fihis report i°eflec�s the change io industrial.) Tha Commission wiil also recall that it was indicated no text amendments would be neces�ary as golf courses were a permitted use within the Commercial districts. Upon further review it was revealed that nof to be the case. Thus a text amendment will be required and a draft ordinance is atfiached for the Commission's review. � • i The Cornp Plan Future Land Use Map {attached) designates the parcels currently zoned PF as a mix of different classifications. Parks are designaied as iVaFural Open Space (OSN), Passive Open Space (OSP) or Oufdoor Sport and Recreation (SRO). City wells are designated Utility (UTL} while City Hall and the Public Works garage are designated Insfiitutional (IN}. The Community Center is guided as Indoor Sport and Recreation {SR1} and the site of the former water tower in fihe Mustang Drive industria! park is designated Heavy Indusirial (HI), probably in anticipation of a reuse by one of the adjoining business on Musfiang Drive. _;: :� This is important because the City's Zoning il�aps need to be consistent with (or, not -= inconsistent with) the Cifiy's Future Land Use Map. To aid in evaluating whether a praperty with a certain zoning designation is consistent wifih �he future iniended use, a table is ir�cluded �n the Comprehensive Pian which addresses compatibility. The compatibility tabie, attached to this report for your review, indicates that the only compatible zoning districts fior OSN and SRO properties (p�rklands and the goif course) are CRP and PF. lncompatibility issu�s arise with the other parcels as well. Thus, if #h� City rezones the parcels currentiy zaned PF to other district designations� the City's Future Land Use Map would need to be amended as well. Assuming this is the case, the following table represents the necessary changes resulfing for the rezoning action: Land Uses City Parks City Wells City Hall Cammunity C�nter Golf Course Pubiic Works Garage Curreng FLU Map Desi nation SRO, OSN, OSP Ufiility lnstitu#ional SRI SRO lnstitutional ..i • � �.^ � • Y��. � ,. , , No changes '� Industrial (LI) " Office (OFC} Cammunity Commercia! {CC) Industrial {Ll} indus4rial (LE) * Whi1e no change is needed io the FLU Map, the compatibiNty table lis#ed on Page 40 wifl need to be amended to add R-1 as a compatib{e zoning district for SRO, SR1, OSN and OSP designations. PF Rezoning Fteport September 3, 2003 Page 3 .> �� + • Examine #he documentation provided and discuss fhe proposed ordinances and comp plan amendments before taking action on attached resolution 736-03. �Q� C�(�'c,C,�csn.- James Ericson Community Development Director Afitachments: 1. Nlap of Proposed Rezoned PF parcels 2, Comp Pian Future Land Use Map 3. Comp Plan / Zoning Compatibility Tabfe 4. Draft Ordinance — Text Amendmenf 5. Resoiution 736-03 '�j City of Mounds View — Comprehensive Plan �. - � . , ., ,, .. . , . �; r �- Comprehensive Plan Land Use SFD: Single-Family, Detached A: Single-Family, Attached ': Manufactured Housing Park Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Regional Commercial Highway Commercial Office �-PUD: Mixed Use Planned Unit Light Industrial Heavy Industrial InstitutionaI SRO: Sport/Recreational; Outdoor SRI: SportlRecreation; Indoar OSN: Open Space; Naturai nCP• (�nen Sr,ace: Passive Distric#s R-l: Single-Family Residentiai PUD� Planned Unit Develo ment R�1: Single-Famity Residential R-2: Single and Two Family Residential R-3: Medium Density Residential PUD: Planned Unit Development R-5: Mobile Home R-3: Medium Density Residential R-4: High Density Residential PUD: Pianned Unit Development R-O: Residential Office R-5: Mobile Home B-1 Neighborhood Business PUD: Planned Unif Development R-O: Residential Office B-2: Lirnited Business B-3: Highway Business PUD: Planned Unit Development R-O: Residential Office B-4: Regional Business PUD, Planned Unit Develo ment B-3: Highway Business B-4: Regional Business PUD: Planned Unit Deveio ment B-2: Limited Business B-3: Highway Business B-4: Regional Business R-O: Residential Office PUD: Planned Unit Development t FUD: Planned Unit Develo ment I-1: Industrial PUD: Planned Unit Develo ment I-1: Industrial PUD: Planned Unit Develo ment R-1: Single-Faraily Residential R-4: High Density Residential PF: Public Facilities P�'; Public Facilities CRP: Conservancy, Recreation, and Preservation _. _ = � ; �i . at: _� �. �� d ��±■_� ..� �� C� �_ �j ■S � �1� ��s� ■■ ■ � �■�� .■ ■�'_ � � �. ■ �'i .� SOURCES: Ciry of Mounds View Ramsey Counry Plan3igh[, LLC June, 2001 I Inch = 750 feet � ` �"'�� 1 �`r: :�'-'+'� ' � �. �� = �_ ��M��C� �� M��/�71' �� Q� ��/ � ��, � �� f�� N�� ■ �r� � �r � �� cs := :::: =s�. =� :_ �s :� s: �� rLU r��a r� � �w �� wi �iG + _� �� i ii � C�� r� �� w� -� �s i� ;w .� =�=��s:::C�� w �� ri FuhrreLandUSeDeslgnatlon Acres % SFD-Sin9leFamilyDe�ached I.13069 42.88 SFA� Single FamilyAttached 93.40 3.54 Mf � Mulliple Famlly 93.92 3b6 � MH - Mobile Home Paik 0.00 0.00 NC - Neighborhood Commeraal 344 0.13 CC � Cnmmunily Comme�cial 23.10 0.88 CC-PUD - Communlly Commercial PUD 5J6 0.20 RC � Regional Cammeival 0.00 0.00 � RGPUD�RegionalCommeicialPUD 3584 1.36 � HC � Highway Convenience 14.17 0.54 _ OFC - Office 3.6G OJ4 �� MU � Mixed Use PUD 27.33 1.04 GC�UNT_Y_BD J, City of Mounds Vie�v Comp�eldnsive Plen MepSanes ;�^ >.,uU1r�i '�.� tc�;;: , ... , Figure 6 Future Land Use � � �� .�� :�! :��Illli` ' � : : CII illllll� G�:�': ��m� �� i� �C �==�� , �� :� ■�� ■ ��m�� ■s �� ■ �� ! 1 11{IIIIIIIII • cr.r.n ■ �� i�� /�� ii�� f� �+ � �i . �� , ii �� n�1i {ui f� •:: �� 1tl�/t! f11111iY�11�1111 GG'= :�'_ �1� ° :6 6 `�'�r��:�r � �i��,�ii�� '■� :�■� _' � _ A �.l1 � ��'� IIi�Yllllli��ll� _ _ �►-w •,�--_=°-- -- ii - i ui_ . 11�� :� :� �II�NI � � IliilY111 ?: ��. /1111111 �� II�ilYi111 ii i� :: �� :� :� i: :i .. �� :: ii FuWreLantlUseDeslgnatlon Acres % LI � Lighl Industnal 109.77 A.16 Ll-PUO � Ligh1 Induslrial PUD 59.12 22A � HI-Heavylndusliial 57.63 2.19 IN - Insti�ulional 90.30 3.42 SRO - Outdoor Sporl/Rec I16.1 I 4.40 SRI � Indom SpoiVRoc�eation q 67 O.IB �� OSN-NaluralOpenSpate 54A6 2.07 �' OSF - Passive Open Space 86.74 329 � ROW � Right-of-Way 572 98 21.73 � RR - Railway 0.00 0.00 �" UTL � Ulilily 5 �9 0.21 Wa�e�Mlellands 48.15 1.83 layout Name: 6 FLU LAYOUT(A) Pro�ecl �aation: n:ldatalglslcompplanlPROJECTS/COMPPLAN.APR � 1 . , ��. - ,✓;�}, I � • ` , _� ) 750 0 750 I500 Feel �1 � ORDINANCE NO. 7xx CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 111SES N THE I 1n ZON NG DISTR CTING CODE PERTAINING TO PERMITTED U THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1: Section 1116.02 of the Moundfo lows Zoning Code is hereby amended with the proposed additions und= d to read as Section 1116.02: PERMITTED USES: The following are permitted uses in an I-1 District: Golf Course SECTION 2. This Ordinance becomes effective thirty (30) days after its publication in the official City newspaper. First read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this day of , 2003. Read and passed by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this day of , 2003. Jerry Linke, Mayor ATTEST: Kurt Ulrich, Clerk / Administrator (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney ,_ ,-_--_ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _____ ____ - ,__ : _. . __ _ _ . _,.:_ . ,� � _ _ _ ._ _ _ __ _ ! t MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 736-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A COMPREHENSIVE REZONING OF PARCELS ZONED PF AND A TEXT AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 1116 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO PERMITTED USES IN THE I-1 ZONING DISTRICT; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. SP-118-03 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has become aware of a situation concerning parcels zoned Public Facilities (PF) which is necessitating a comprehensive rezoning action; and, WHEREAS, only parcels owned by the City of Mounds View are zoned Public Facilities, as stated in Section 1118.02; Public Facilities Permitted Uses; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1118.02, no parcels not owned by the City of Mounds View may be zoned PF; and, WHEREAS, it has been brought to the City's attention that the City's current practice of zoning parcels based on land ownership relative to the PF Zoning district is not consistent with conventional zoning practices; and, WHEREAS, the City Attorney has suggested that the City rezone City-owned parcels based upon the land use present on the particular parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Planning Commission recommends rezoning city-owned parcels to zoning designations consistent with the land use present on the parcel as follows and as shown on the attached Exhibit A: Land Uses City Parks City Wells City Hall Community Center Golf Course Public Works Garage Water Tower, Reservoir Old Water Tower Site Current Zonin PF PF PF PF PF PF PF PF Proposed Zoning R-1, Single Family Residential I-1, Industrial B-3, Highway Business Commercial B-3, Highway Business Commercial I-1, Industrial I-1, Industrial I-1, Industrial I-1, Industrial NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends adoption of an ordinance to amend Chapter 1116 of the Mounds View Zoning Code to add "Golf Course" as a permitted use. _ . � �: ��.. � z� ._ � _ _ . . _.� . �_ ; . . _ ___ ___ __ _ _ ____ . _ __ _ __ _ _ .� Ordinance 736-03 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends adoption of a Comprehensive Plan amendment to update the Future Land Use (FLU) Map to be consistent with the recommended rezoning actions as herein indicated. 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 3rd day of September, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) N:\Data\Groups\ComdevlSpecial Projects\SP-118-03 (PF Rezoning)\736-03, PF Revisions.doc . _�, . . . - f ,� ; ; � _ � _ _ , �. � - � � ;.. w� - , . . . � of Mour�ds I/iew Staff R, To: From: Item Title/Subject: Introduction: Item No: 6 Meeting Date: September 3, 2003 Type of Business: Action Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Community Development Director Discuss Modifications to Proposed Ordinance 711, an Ordinance Relating to the Zoning of Pawnshops The City Council has asked the Planning Commission to recommend a geographic location for an overlay zone within which pawnshops could be located. The underlying zoning would remain unchanged. The Council also asked the Commission to consider additional uses to include within the overlay (such as adult uses, tattoo and piercing shops, massage parlors, etc. ) Discussion: At the Commission's last meeting, the proposed overlay north of Highway 10 was chosen as being the more appropriate of the two overlay proposed, limited however to the three parcels at the southwest corner of Coral Sea Street and County Road J. Additionally, the Commission by unanimous consent felt it would not be in the City's best interest to include other uses within the proposed overlay. Recommendation: Review and consider the attached resolution, Resolution 737-03, recommending the area north of Highway 10 (identified in Exhibit A) as the pawn overlay district and recommending that no other uses be included within the overlay other than Pawnshops. �a-�-�,� C'�(�-i-C.�o-�- James Ericson Community Development Director -��-�. ; - .. ' I MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 737-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE CREATING A PAWN OVERLAY DISTRICT NORTH OF HIGHWAY 10; SPECIAL PLANNING CASE SP-114-03 WHEREAS, The City of Mounds View has no zoning regulations or requirements pertaining to Pawnshops; and, WHEREAS, The City Council has directed the Planning Commission to review the issue of overlay zoning as it would pertain to Pawnshops; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the poteniial geographical areas potentially suitable for an overlay district with the intent of maintaining adequate separation from residential and educational facilities as well as other potentially sensitive land uses; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the possibility of including other land uses, such as "adult " uses, tattoo and piercing shops, massage parlors, etc., within the proposed overlay zoning district. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby recommends adoption of an ordinance establishing a Pawn Overlay District north of Highway 10 at the southwest corner of Coral Sea Street and County Road J as identified in Exhibit A. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends that no other uses be included within the Pawn Overlay District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Mounds View Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this Resolution to the City Council prior to the approval of the minutes. Adopted this 3rd day of September, 2003 Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) - � , �.:_ . ,�. __.� .�: _ _ _ __ - �., _ �. . __ � � « _ � __ ��_ _ ._ ,___ ___ __ EXHIBIT A. Pawn Overlay District -� � � ._ � � �, I f'�1 � `'� - - - - - - � � .� _ _ _. r ri I � �•� �. t � _ c ��-:-� �a ��i t r �x- - � . � �� ,4( � k I �^ � � Overlav District Parcels: 3 Total Area: 9.2 acres Underlying Zoning: Industrial � r � �� .w � ar�a �► .9 � ��e ►� tr � ' � � r�,+ e5o► I � �� I �M�67 bi�!- - - - �pi � �� yt �NY - 17�PA �� - � _ tMb. — — _.. �e� l�ias�:_.— :-' -': ' � {. F,� 'FY�I rb:� �1�7 �. t�1F �3� ��7 rxt, F�;ta h' ,,RI!6q '�i �. . ` @Sr9 ��'� �� ._ _ _ y y � '.gp "r � �� L ,� I ��k� E �� -: � ��4 � ��:1l� ��'�17�� F'�' � - �"� r+ `'�„ t ¢� �� !!�!! :-_:�.;. . C`�:� _._ . . .: ____'—". . ��. ___" ` Y L°' � �"--� L'-'-�_.___ . ___ — ' . � . s� � u �J � � cS� 7 �' i s > � c,� n s � � �`� � � O � C/� � � � � 1� � � • � � O N �, s � . r.j � !� � O • �j v • � O � `�J .� � � F-�� V�i I � � � ,� �p '� ;tS ~ cC 'f"" � O % '� � F, � �; p y w bp � � w y � � � U . V 'O cV +� � � y ; d � t�6 � ++ hq � +-' „a�0 b � N O � � � � � � � � U ca CL� �in � p � N � N' b '� i-+ �;.� 'CS O ��i, '°4 � O f.], G �.N., O,� R' ca cn '"Q m N�� p� m'�bD ai �� Z <n A. o m c�a t4 N� �+� � Q, +''�J p� a� O�� O� � v`�i ,� � W o�.� � G P. c�a '0�0 a� .� � U � n D � � v� � � ¢� � ,,; ,-G ,� U � o �, N a� .-. � � F, H^ F, �.'. v� bq �, ',�, cv •-" o �3 � e ° � °o � � °' � ' � a a p '' ' 5 � � � � • `� ` � � 3 0 •� �. �� a '� � �'� b�;��•�°a ��`�,�°a,o��°�'Oa a � �.�a�r°,orn�l ��•�°,-��Na�@��a�.�q mp '� a� 'b w v� � �' a� ,� '� • v��i [� � p, `d � • � v�i � y v +� � � � � � � ~ a�i � a� �' °J v, `O �, aUi G �n 'J � c�v � b m '� m �' '� � � a�i " o � � �''° � � '� o � :� P.'.� a �.s��'�, b�aa � ��U i� ��3.�00 � � � � +� p .� � b � � ``. ,� a� a� ; ,.� � � '� .� �a .c@i .c � ~ ,H a o �'' ° •'J � � '� �' � o � W ,� � � �' � cc ° � 'v m � � � o � � a o b � o o � ai �o � � � � a� � v� � ° �' orc � �... • � o ci-�. V �" � � � '� t�• . � p N vi p • V � ''�J � � � c�i� c�n -f, O '�'' � }' � �op � � � � R' b 'S2 U cn � O � � � N ^ ''C � O r, � O � � p � U uj � , � U "d � � � cn .� `n ' � `n � a � �+-� � ti'° � � � � N � °J ai � �" � o � � � � � � O .b � � � � O ca. y�„ O w � O � � � ' F., w � � � ca O � ca O N , � ,� '� � � � ,.0 � "R � �U � ai � � '� '�,s�� '' �a �,� 3 � o�� 'o� �w � � � c� 't1 � � � +-�' • � a� � � �n � '-a . C . � a� � N 'b � +� � °� � °� � � � m � a �' v � � a a � c�a c0 A � 'a��°; �•��,�0�5��~�'� `� � '� � � o o � o a' � v� o o � 'rn a� � � � � c�'v �C � v� v� �,-Q .� � .� H!�+ P+ m�+"s� � o aNi `.',�' �' � .� � � � � � � � `° o � s� °� � `" ��p��,�.c'� �'3�� q��o a� p.a°��bg'ti Nroa°' � ��,ra�a=.� � �•G�.°��° o Q, ��,q � � �v" °:�''� p 'oA � O W� V U i�+ � .b H� b N � O� U r. � � � O O � ro ro U � �j � � ,� `° " `° �`" � o � � v •� � � � �� a� �,� °•��^ � ��Q ��y�'o o ��•�W ��.� � ❑ � �, � o G � �a � •on m � � ;n o �3 a.� ti a� �j � � co a� v � 7� m� p^ a� t, U S�. T: ��.�„ � p �'�;, � ia :� � c�i� N�.S".. �n Q' Q O�� n •d P.' Q' � O A" b�.0 +�+ � O U vi �� p O � m � F. ``" � � � �' a� � p � V] U „ � � � •� � +� °� '��+ 'O � ,--� �'" v N ca a�.� Q c�". � � '�oo °� vi •� P. � � � � F � � � a � '� .�.� c� � N � � O .� � m � � ��°, 0 3� p'°� � � � ��,s,� �.� � � o � �°' � �U � a �.�..._.c� o pro'�� °�' ro a� ��,v� c�n .� Q ° � °' +� ,n .x � � .n � � v a�i '� � (A • .-i H � `�/�,! � t� b .,-�-i � H � N p�'"j .rn [].' � �' � � O q -�+ p H � � cv � .� a � 'd O '^' • r-+ - Q•° o � a cv P� ia �cQ-' '� a' m� U� �� o��.o��,.� �_� C� ��a��•�.��°U�� ;b `'�—' � � ;� � . o � ,� o � •n � � �i � � 0 r„� 4-. �� uA m c� C�� G H F. � � � � O � p � p � � q c� p � `V 4+ .� �, �, ,�.` o� �a ��,��o ��, �� s W� ��_� a� o o�� p.,°' o a � � � �, U � �,��b � �,� �.� ��o� �i-� S� q " � � � �a c�. �, �, .�, � a .n � . O p � N � � O � �� N � � � � `� '� p� � � c+�i ,� C j �' � � � �; � W �U .a��E"�� c�3 � � � � `" � � .� w, � �' � �b �� a � a� � � =-_ . � � � . ____= _ _ _ _� __ . � _ �.. � ��Y=� �- _ .. �. PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSE� COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting Augast 20, 2003 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 7:02 p.m., August 20, 2003. 2. Roll Call. Members Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Scotch, Hegland, Song, and Johnson Members Absent: Miller and Zwirn (excused) Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson Index to Minutes: Planning Case VR03-006 Location: 2214 — 2222 Highway 10 Planning Case VR03-007 (CANCELLED) Location: 3001 County Road H2 Special Planning Case SP-118-03 Consider Changes to the PF Zoning District to Correct Zoning Inconsistencies Special Planning Case SP-114-03 Discuss and Consider Ordinances Relating to the Zoning and Regulation of Pawnshops in the City of Mounds View Discussion of Possible Amendments to the Zoning Code 3. Approve Minutes. a. July 2, 2003 Page 2 3 3 5 8 . � v ., _ _ _ , _ ,. .�.. ._._____.z �- --_�-s' � -- - --- -- - .� • _, r .:._:"-�- - -_ _ _ . Mounds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 MOTION/SECOND: Johnson /Scotch. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for July 2, 2003, as Presented. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda. None. Se Consideration of Resolution 735-03 Approving a Variance to Allow an Increase in Wall Signage. VR03-006. Community Development Director Ericson explained the applicant's request and indicated that Mr. Kopas of Abbey Carpet planned to have his business open at the site by September 1, 2003. He noted the Sign Code called for building mounted signage not to exceed 100 square feet per building occupant; however, the Abbey Carpet building, referred to as the Highway 10 Business Center, had three frontages with County Highway 10 visibility. Director Ericson stated Mr. Kopas would be installing a 96-square-foot sign above his entrance on the front of the building but would also lilce to install his existing signage from the New Brighton location, which had an area of 50 square feet. He added signage had been installed for 3 Seasons and 4 Sunrooms on the front elevation and they proposed adding signage to the south building elevation in an amount not to exceed the 50 squaxe feet proposed by Mr. Kopas. Director Ericson noted there had been similar requests granted by the Planning Commission and City Council. He cited Budget Liquor, Mario's Video and Minnesota Fabrics as examples. He stated the considerations to grant variances were quite rigid and referred to the seven criteria to be reviewed for variance consideration. Director Ericson explained the overall intent was to establish a hardship and to aslc if the applicant caused the need for the variance. He indicated all the criteria for variance consideration appeared to be satisfied. He added the staff position was the request was not unreasonable or excessive and was the minimum that would alleviate the hardship. Director Ericson stated the Commission could take one of the following actions: approve the variance as requested, deny the requested variance or table the request. The Commission could move to table if additional information or further discussion was needed. It was noted that John Kopas of Abbey Carpet and Ozzie(?) Osborn(?) of 3 Seasons and 4 Sunrooms were in attendance. It was also noted that notices were sent to properties within 150 feet of the building. ; . Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. r€� . _ �. ;�� _ . ,. �.� August 20, 2003 Page 3 Commissioner Johnson noted the major businesses seemed to be requesting variances and wondered if the codes should be revisited. He stated the only variances given were to the bigger, nicer businesses and he wanted to lceep it that way. He did not see a problem giving the vanance. Chair Stevenson indicated the request was not unusual considering the multiple, high traffic fronts. He added he did not want to see the Sign Code changed. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Chair Stevenson asked for a recommendation from the Commission. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson /Hegland. To Approve Resolution 735-03, a Resolution Approving a Variance for 100 Square Feet of Additional Exterior Building Signage at 2214-2222 County Highway 10. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. Mr. Kopas thanlced the Planning Commission. He noted the Boy Scouts would be moving into the center spot in the building, which would be a showpiece for them. He also stated the Commission would be invited to the Open House. 6. Consideration of Resolution Approving a Variance to Allow Two Curb-Cut Accesses. VR03-007. (CANCELLED) Community Development Director Ericson indicated it was determined a variance was not needed for the two curb cuts. He explained the Code stated that curb cuts not in compliance with the Code may be allowed to remain as long as they were not deemed a public hazard. He added site inspections revealed no apparent hazard or danger associated with the two curb cuts, both of which access Spring Lake Road, and visibility and spacing on Spring Lake Road was sufficient. Community Developrnent Director Ericson stated the scheduled public hearing had been cancelled, the Planning Application had been voided and the fee was refunded to the applicant. 7. Consider Changes to the PF Zoning District to Correct Zoning Inconsistenciesa Special Planning Case SP-118-03. Community Development Director Ericson indicated on July 14, 2003, the City Attorney addressed the Council regarding the Mounds View PF Zoning District and recommended the City strongly consider revising the district's purpose and rezone some or all properties within the PF district to another district more logically suited. He presented copies of the City Attorney's : _: . _ • ��, n, ::,� _ . --�- .::�. .:-.�� , : -_-• -�.; r.`.�s ��.-;. =.J . - : . —___„ _ � . f•�.�i._:,. Mounds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 July 14, 2003, letter, his correspondence to the City Council, Chapter 1118 of the Mounds View Zoning Code and the City's "Facility Guide" for review. Director Ericson stated Council had directed staff to bring this issue to the Planning Cornmission for review and requested the Commission draft a proposed ordinance for the Council's consideration. Director Ericson indicated the City Attorney's response was perhaps the City was zoning improperly, as the zoning should be related to land use and not property ownership. He added the City Attorney felt this revision would make the City's zoning code more consistent with conventional zoning concepts. Director Ericson presented a map showing the PF zones within the City. He noted the uses present within the City's PF district were the following: city parks, wells and pump houses, City Hall, water treatment plant, water tower, The Bridges Golf Course and Community Center. Director Ericson discussed how these properties would be zoned if the City followed the example of other cities. He indicated the Planning Commission should discuss appropriate zoning for these parcels and the target was to eliminate the PF Zoning District. Director Ericson reviewed the "Facility Guide" map with the Commission. Commissioner Hegland asked where the PF zoning designation originated. Director Ericson responded it was implemented at some point after the 1970s. He explained each city came up with its own designations, with many of the labels being similar and others being unique to the community. He added other communities had the PF zoning designation and the City probably borrowed it from another zoning code. Commissioner Hegland questioned why the designation was a problem. He stated he felt PF (public facilities) would cover any property owned by the City and by definition it would be scattered around the City to serve the public. He added he did not understand the legal problem because the land use was to serve the public. Director Ericson replied he was not sure there was a legal problem. He added the Supreme Court had thought it was backward to zone the property according to ownership instead of the nature of its use. He indicated the drive was consistency with conventional zoning. Commissioner Hegland stated he felt the PF zoning designation was nature of use, as the nature of use was to serve the public. Discussion ensued regarding properties owned by the City that were not in PF Zoning District. Chair Stevenson asked how other communities designated parlcs and public facilities. _ �-: � Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting August 20, 2003 Page 5 Director Ericson responded they were designated according to the surrounding area. Director Ericson explained this issue was before the Planning Commission for its feedbacic and consideration. He added he had not provided a resolution and could draft one for the next meeting. Commissioner Scotch noted this issue had surfaced based on the Supreme Court decision relating to the Eller Media's request for billboards from MnDOT. She added more detail regarding the decision could be obtained by reviewing the case. Commissioner Johnson stated the decision was made because the PF zoning derived from City ownership, as there was no designation of use. Commissioner Hegland stated the PF zoning indicated City ownership based on the comprehensive plan defining their properties as public facilities. Discussion followed regarding properties the City uses but does not own. Director Ericson indicated he would collect and prepare further information regarding City properties, review the ultimate goal and present the pros and cons for revision at the next meeting. Chair Stevenson asked Director Ericson to advise the Commission regarding public facility designations in other communities. He stated he would be interested to learn if there was additional identification of these properties in their codes. Director Ericson stated he would present any findings at the next rneeting. 8. Discuss and Consider Ordinances Relating to the Zoning and Regulation of Pawnshops in the City of Mounds View. Special Planning Case SP-114-03, Community Development Director Ericson indicated the City Council had asked the Planning Commission to comment on the overlay issue as to which of the two proposed areas would be more appropriate and which properties should be included in the overlay. He added Council also asked for a response regarding the proposal to include multiple "unwanted" land uses within the overlay. He stated the Commission should address these two issues in light of the legal opinions that had been offered and prepare a response (in the form of a resolution) to the City Council. Director Ericson noted, to assist the Commission with the potential overlay boundaries, he had revised the original overlay maps to reflect a smaller overlay area with fewer parcels. He stated the Commission would need to determine if the area and parcel availability would satisfy the "reasonableness" test. y�y . . . . . . , a.. t�i . �—_ . . . . �,..v:.. _: ��._......�.�_---'•'•.w C__-ce,..; : _ ,.- _ ' .-' � _ r � � ' •°: ._ -''.: _"e -�: n� eL �`_''-.: . . s . . -- ' l'-:��. � •-"' Mounds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 6 Director Ericson noted two proposed overlay districts had been discussed at the last Commission meeting and the Commission had questions and concerns that the size of the area was too large. He explained the City Attorney indicated it would probably not be defensible to create the overlay district using only the golf course, as such an action could be deemed arbitrary and capricious. Director Ericson also briefly examined what other cities were doing regarding this issue. He also questioned whether the City would be open to litigation if they limited the number of pawnshops allowed or included other land uses in such an overlay district. Director Ericson explained there was no threshold area; however, the City must be reasonable. He added he was not aware of documentation warranting an outright ban of pawnshops that would not meet a challenge. Director Ericson indicated there probably would be negative ramifications to setting up a multiple-use overlay district, as it could be viewed as irrational and not in the public interest. He added cities like New York City had eliminated their "red-light" districts. Director Ericson noted he had taken a second look at the proposed overlay districts after the last Commission meeting and had revised them into smaller areas. He discussed the two revised overlay districts, one consisting of 9.2 acres and the other consisting of 16.3 acres. He asked the Commission if this area was sufficient or if it was still too large. Director Ericson stated the Commission needed to decide where the overlay should be, how large it should be and what uses would be allowed within the overlay. He noted he should be able to bring a resolution to the next Comtnission meeting that indicated which area should be in the overlay and the uses allowed in the overlay. Commissioner Johnson asked about the yellow parcel on the map. Director Ericson responded that it represented Mounds View Square, which the Commission originally indicated as a site appropriate for pawnshop use. Commissioner Song stated the City certainly did not want a"red-light" district. Chair Stevenson noted this area was to be strictly pawnshop usage and "red-light" usage was not being discussed. He added he favored overlay option 1 if a choice had to be made. Commissioner Hegland, Commissioner Johnson and Commissioner Scotch agreed with Chair Stevenson. Chair Stevenson stated he was opposed to anything other than industrial in the mobile home area. He added he actually was opposed to an overlay district. Commissioner Hegland indicated the overlay district should not be any larger than the smallest business district in the City. _� _ _ � c_ - I'_ _"_ _ �FT _ � . . ... . __ _x ' " ' .r�_- � �- __ .� .�. �_. _ _ _�..y ____._'__ �-� Mounds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 7 Director Ericson responded he thought that would be a 10,000 square-foot lot, which would be zoned B-1. Commissioner Hegland explained he did not mean one individual district but a business area. Discussion followed regarding the parcel sizes for B-1 through B-4. Commissioner Hegland noted this was going to become the second largest business district in the City. Director Ericson replied the district would be larger than B-1 and B-2 if the position were that the overlay was a district. Commissioner Hegland asked if it made sense to create an overlay for one business that was larger than business districts within the City. Commissioner Johnson added the pawnshop owner rnay fight spending a"ton of money" to build in a location where he could not draw traffic. Chair Stevenson asked if the suggested locations would be considered reasonable or arbitrary and capricious, as the pawnshop business relied heavily on drive-by traffic. He questioned if the City would get into a legal bind by limiting the locations to the corner of a golf course or in an industrial park. Commissioner Johnson felt, according to the City Attorney, the Coinmission was being reasonable, as long as the size was adequate. Director Ericson responded the Courts gave substantial deference to cities to regulate what goes onto a property. He added a judge must rule an action to be arbitrary or capricious for it to be overruled. He explained, if the intent of the City was to segregate this type of use away from residential areas because of issues relating to crime or bringing in the wrong element, that action might be unfounded. He added, however, there were reasons behind the City's actions if it were trying to separate this type of use from churches, daycares, etc. He noted the consideration would be if the City's action was reasonable for the pawnshop or if the City was making it hard for the pawnshop to operate. He stated the zoning needed to be for the common good of the community. Chair Stevenson asked how much of the 9.2 acres was occupied. Director Ericson replied 100% in terms of buildings; however, he was not sure how much was open and could be leased. Cominissioner Johnson asked if the City should zone for 2,500 feet between adult businesses instead of 1,000 feet. _ _ .: . � . � 3i -, , , - - --- � u.. . - .4 s . ._....__ . �-.>�:� ,. .. . _. . _�_ _ r : = , � . _. r`.i-. �i M � � . � _-_ _ � ,.� _ _ _ _. �_ `:.-_ , n Mounds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 8 Director Ericson responded he could get one business on the 9.2-acre option and possibly two businesses on the 16.3-acre option. He indicated he would do some research regarding this issue to bring back to the Commission for information and discussion. Chair Stevenson asked if the City had revised where pawnshops were allowed. Director Ericson responded pawnshops were currently not allowed. Chair Stevenson asked if the Commission was agreeing with the 9.2-acre option. Commissioner Hegland stated he felt it was too much space. Director Ericson indicated he would bring back a resolution stating the Commission's position, along with its recommendation for no other uses. Chair Stevenson aslced if the Commission was still in line limiting this to 4,000 square feet. Director Ericson responded that ordinance had not been recommended for any change, only the zoning one. David Przetycki, a resident of Mounds View, came forward and asked who owned the 9.2 acres. He stated he was opposed to an overlay district whether or not he was opening up a pawnshop. He felt this was a place to open up businesses and, if someone came before the City with another undesirable business, it would have to allow that business as well. He noted he did not want to see a"red-light" district in Mounds View. He aslced what would happen if the residents did not want an overlay zone. Director Ericson stated the property owners and/or adjoining property owners notified of the action and they could come before the Council with their concerns adjoining city would also be notified, as they could be imtated by the decision. 9. Review Possible Amendments to the Zoning Code. did need to be . He added the Community Development Director Ericson noted Council had identified possible amendments to the City Code, which were being presented to the Planning Commission for comment and possible action. He indicated the possible amendments were as follows: Amend the City Code to increase the minimum square footage requirements for a single- family home. Director Ericson noted a one-story home currently was required to have at least 960 square feet of first floor area and a two-story home would need a minimum first-floor area of 780 square feet. He added these areas did not include basements or upper stories. He asked the Commission to discuss if the area requirements should be increased to prohibit smaller homes. r° °� .-. ____ � ____ _ � � :� _ � � � �� _ � _ Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting August 20, 2003 Page 9 2. Amend the City Code to support and encourage life-cycle housing and upper-end condominiums. Director Ericson noted there were a multitude of options that could be employed to encourage the development of life-cycle housing and upper-end condominiums. He indicated one option recently adopted was to eliminate the CUP requirement from townhomes and other options might include density bonuses, fee reductions, local tax rebates, etc. He added another idea would be to allow detached townhomes (single-family detached dwellings with minimal setbacics on individually platted lots surrounded by common areas). 3. Amend the City Code to restrict or prohibit fast-food drive-thrus. Director Ericson stated this could be done by requiring a CUP for drive-thrus, so the Commission and Council would have an opportunity to review the concept prior to allowing the development. He added, while an outright ban was possible, he was not sure that course of action would be advisable. 4. Amend Zoning Code with regard to permitted uses. Director Ericson noted this concerned the structure of the Zoning Code and how permitted uses were identified. He provided a copy of Chapter 1113 of the Zoning Code relating to the B-2, Limited Business District, which he indicated exemplified the City's unwieldy zoning scheme. He explained uses were explicitly identified in each district and, if the use was not listed, it was not allowed. He felt, while there was some beneiit to having articulated lists of uses, the problems tended to outweigh the benefits and the difficulty magnified with each passing year as new uses and technologies entered the commercial marketplace while outdated and outmoded uses fell by the wayside. Regarding item 1, Chair Stevenson asked when the City had last involced the square footage noted by Director Ericson. Director Ericson responded the City had not had to deal with this issue, as small homes were not being presented. He noted building permits had been for larger homes. He stated the square footage could be increased, however, if it was determined such an action would encourage larger, upper-end homes. Commissioners Hegland and Johnson did not see this as a credible issue. The Commission agreed item 1 should not be amended. Regarding item 2, Commissioner Johnson indicated he thought the City had already made changes to support and encourage the type of housing it wanted. He asked what land was available for building this type of housing. Commissioner Hegland stated he thought the City's intent was to eliminate high-density building, as it had more than its share already. � � � _ _ y. : _�_: . < : : . . _ ��-. - � . . ----- - - -=_-- � :. _ -..�:�.: � . ._ . .; �� :_--_ --�== °--- - -- - -'----'- -- •-= -- '• - - � �� Monnds View Planning Commission August 20, 2003 , Regular Meeting Page 10 Chair Stevenson noted the City wanted to encourage the development of upper-end condominiums, which would not be rental property. He cited an example of a completed upper- end condominium in the City. He added the City needed to be cautious, however, as it did not want to be blindsided by having to deal with issues that were not intended. He stated the City should proceed to study it further, as it did want to encourage redevelopment of upper-end housing. Commissioner Scotch asked about increasing the square footage in the upper-end condominiums. Commissioner Hegland responded square footage would need to be increased to avoid additional high-density problems. Director Ericson cited developments completed in Fridley and New Brighton, which had high density but nice outcomes. Commissioner Scotch stated the City should have something going on for redevelopinent and suggested it look at what other cities had done to encourage this. Regarding item 3, there was discussion about the new drive-thrus in the City. Director Ericson asked if the Planning Commission saw this as an issue. Chair Stevenson noted he did not think more restrictions should be placed on businesses coming into the City. Director Ericson indicated some of the sit-down restaurants were offering drive-thru service, and he felt the Commission should not restrict those businesses. Commissioner Hegland noted the only concern he had was that the businesses would need to deal with the traffic issues on their property, as he did not see the City amending its Code to change the number of exits, spaces, roadways, etc. He added he did not think that would be a big issue, however. The Commission agreed they were not interested in amending the Code listed in item 3. Regarding item 4, Director Ericson indicated, if the Planning Commission wished to address this issue, it would need to do some research and ask for assistance in accomplishing the task. He noted money had been budgeted for zoning code reviewal. Commissioner Hegland asked if redoing the list was cost effective. He added the discussion was really about the cost of trying to cover every contingency versus dealing with issues as they arose. Director Ericson responded there was language in the Zoning Code that said if a business was not listed it was not allowed. He noted the Code could be revised to indicate what was generally .:: N : . _ _ - , , ___ - _ _ _ - ._._ ,� : ----_ _ _____ _ _ ..... __ _ � .0 _� . _ __ _ : . ,_�_._._ —. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting August 20, 2003 Page 11 sought when looking at Code B-2, for example. He added examples of businesses could be listed; however, the Code should not be limited to the list. He stated the Zoning Code could be reduced in half by not listing every use. He felt amending the structure of the Zoning Code would be preferable to the present Code, as the City would be able to determine similarities of uses not listed. Director Ericson added the current process was cumbersome if a business was not listed and the wordage was not accurate. It was agreed further research would be done regarding item 4. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: September 3, 2003 10. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Marjorie R. Jenkins TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. � �� ) : :. . _ ..� �._ __ i -�- : � , f : � . �____ _� �:- _ - _ _ _ :� MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMIVIISSION October 1, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes September 3, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Coinments on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case MI03-003 Review and Recommendation of a Minor Subdivision of Propei�ties Located at 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. Applicants: Tony and Cheryl Hoffman 6. Planning Case MI03-004 Review and Recarnmendation of a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road Applicants: Wendy & Michael Pedginslci Owner: Donald Forslund 7 : 1 2 APPLICANTS: YOUR ATfENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. Next Planning Conunission Meeting: October 15, 2003 Adjoununent to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION Review Muiutes: September 17, 2003 Staff Reports: 3. Chairperson and Planning Cornrnissioners' Reports \\Trout\CommDcv�Planning ConunissionU'C Agendas�2003V 0-01-03 PC Agenda.doc To: Item No: 5 Meeting Date: October 1, 2003 Type of Business: Business of Mounds I/iew Staff R� Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road; Planning Case M103-003 Introduction: Tony & Cheryl Hoffman are property owners of adjacent lots located at 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. The two lots are a combined 1.13 acres and are both improved with single- family dwellings. The proposed subdivision would create one lot in between the two existing lots, taking the south 55 feet from 8419 Groveland and the north 20 feet from 8409 Groveland Road. The new lot would be 75 feet wide and have an area of 15,975 square feet. A minor subdivision is a division of land less than two acres in area in which only one additional lot is created. The lot is zoned R-1, Single Family residential and the minimum lot size is 11,000. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential. The property owners have submitted a survey for the proposed subdivision indicating the two existing lots and the proposed new lot. The new lot is indicated as Parcel B. Discussion: The HofFinans' properties are a combined 49,416 square feet, or, 1.13 acres. As a result of the subdivision, only one additional lot would be created (Parcel B), leaving a 75-foot wide lot to the north (Parcel A) and an 80-foot wide lot to the south (Parcel C). The three lots would conform to all of the City's minimum subdivision requirements. As can be seen from the attached survey, the north lot line of the proposed new lot bisects an existing shed. The applicants will either move the shed to Parcel A so that it maintains all required setbacks or the shed will be removed from the property altogether. Also from the survey, the subdivision would separate the garage at 8419 Groveland Road from the house, which would be nonconforming with the Code in that an accessory building cannot be allowed on a lot without a principal; structure. To address this issue, the applicants have two options with a third option permitted at the City's discretion. The first option would be to demolish the garage upon recording of the survey and deeds. This option would seem wasteful unless the garage is old and in needing or replacement anyway. The second option would involve relocating the garage to the northeast corner of Parcel A so that 8419 Groveland would retain a garage. The drawbacks to this option are potentially twofold--the actual cost to relocate the garage may exceed the value of the garage; and the structural integrity of the building could be compromised in the move, especially if the garage is already deteriorating. The last option that could be considered regarding the garage could be exercised only at the City's discretion, which would be to allow the garage to remain on the property in a nonconforming state for an agreed-upon period of time assuming a new home would be constructed on the lot. If this option is chosen, the Ciiy may want to require a new garage be constructed for Parcel A either before or at the same time Parcel B is improved. - -- - =-- -. _ _ _ _ Park Dedication Requirements. ' - Every subdivision of land is subject to park dedication requirements. Because the subdivision is less than 2 acres in area, the fee is 5% of the land's market value, less the value of the land where the homes sit. Rather than require an appraisal for every subdivision, staff typically uses the assessment valuations available through Ramsey County. The combined land value forthe 1.13 acres is $94,700. On a per-square-foot basis, the value is $1.91. If Parcel B is 15,975 square feet, the proportional value would be $30,512.25. Five percent of that amount, or $1,525.61, is the required dedication fiorthis subdivision. This would need to be submitted as a condition of City subdivision approval. Easements. With every subdivision of land, the City requires that drainage and utility easements be dedicated around the perimeter of the lot. The survey provided by the applicants indicates the presence of perimeter easements around Lot 1, Block 1, Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg's Sunnyside Estates. To remain consistent with our easement policies, the survey will need to be revised to show a five-foot easement on both sides of both proposed split lines. In addition, the following language will need to be added to the survey: "The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicafed to the City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County." Public Notice. While a public hearing is not required for this request, staff did send out letters to neighboring property owners as a courtesy, informing them of the proposed minor subdivision and the anticipated meeting dates. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve Resolution 739-03, a resolution recommending approval of a minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road, with stipulations. �� James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Survey of Subdivision 4. Resolution 739-03 r� o�r o� D�.��ti �`�� P ii ��C�� oA r��YPfs , partne�S��4s COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING APPLICATION 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (763)717-4020 Fax (651) 765-1660 Piease Type or Print Information - Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Informati� Name of Applicant .�G�' � �C�je�/��h��' Telephone �� '° �� Address � �� "`'ve%�'� f1'� Fax f7llrvet c�-s /// e� � `�� -sS l/� E-mail: �//TViced-�,�,�1� �.�.��/rh/� ...�G Interest in Property (check appropriate box) �Owner of Property ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager ❑ Other (explain) ❑ Contract for Deed Owner ❑ Agreement to Purchase App/icants must provide evidence vf interest in property at the time of app/icat%n, and if you are not the owner of the property, you must either provide a/ette� ofpermission from the owner giving consent to the fi/ing of this app/ication or the property owner must sign ihis app/ication for it to be accepted. Property Description/ Proposal /� � � y/� �r�¢� � ✓��/ ��? �f �` ��- Address or General Location Legal Description Property Identification # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning Type of Application ❑ ❑ ❑ � ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ O ❑ ❑ �1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezoning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision - Planned Unit Development (PUD) PUD Amendment Conditional/Interim Use Permit Variance Text Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develop Review/5ite Plan Wetland Alteration Permit Wetland Buffer Permit Other $Z50 $500 $500 $250 $750 $350 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $325 R-1, R-Z $150; all others $325 $150 $125 $125/acre; min $125 max $750 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $200 R-1, R-2 $25; all others $100 Mounds View Planning Applicat,�n Present Use of Properly Property Classification ❑ Abstract ❑ Torrens Description of Proposal (attach additional supporting d cumentation if ne�essa ,ry _ ,P% q-� S/�� cT �-�`�c rP S'/� �S /30�-� wi�e �� Page 2 � f./��"r' �c./�q T� ��-f=P�T Q-��d �'%�� r?di �ei �'� (�C'� -% W / i �vl/ /D T 1 �� J�� K�G `��1 T�.0 fC. 2 � L�c rC'.�J Please Note: Applicants are responsible for all costs incurred associated with the filing, review and processing of this application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon receipt of statement from the City of Mounds View. Fees may include but are not limited to costs for consultants retained by the Ciry, consultant planning services, attomey, and engineer fees. A deposit may also be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and staff time spent in the review, research or preparation of materials associated with this application. The applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs in excess of the initial deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the applicant within 30 days after consideration of the application is completed. Payment of park dedication fees is required with subdivision applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I have read all of the information listed in the Planning Application and fully understand that I am responsible for all costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this application. _ �--��--_ 9� �- �� Applica Date BY MY (OUR) SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY DECLARE THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. Name of Applicant ( Signature of � /o�y �� ,�'��,� Name of Property Owner (typed/printed) �f�`'/'� �1��'^ � ��-« Signature of Properly Owner _ � � /S1'f�--- Address of Owner �yd� c�"r�"�/�� /f � .��'� �.r �i �'k— � �i� ,S-f%/� Phone Number of Owner ��-� ��o ' `� ��1/ E-m a i I ��/T Oc c.�- f,�w--1 ��,� �- ��.�r/� .� c i� **************************************************************************************** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submittal �- �`� 3 Date of Acceptance: �—$- D3 60-day Limit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) I� / D 3 � a� Assigned to: Fees Paid: Account # Check # Receipt # Application: o?S� • Oo ,/a D_3cj�i� �r��(,p l S 5aS Park Dedication: Deposits: Other: Total: t oioz �: ._ . . - �� - � - - _ � _ _ _ � _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ ___ __ _ �_: , . . Zoning Map _�.__�___.._ r __r — . . ..- _� .. _�_ � � � D - -- - - -- � - r � �. _ , --NO� �'� t7 CJ � 49 (�-�� r --- — � � M � � 48<� 8�93 N c°'v 849. 84�° 8490 / ,p 849' �i48' £348� 848=4 8��i9 84F30 —J N $4$" d�1a0 347? 8480 3479 &47' I 8�i62 � Ei��61 . r3�4e;a g�69 847Q – 8474 � � 3465' � .. 8470 I ca � 847f 8�69 �.g,�S� �� 846 ;8453 S45? � 845� 8465 846� 8463 i� �3456 �461 84b`�7 8�F5� - �4� �} �. TH AVE ��[, r r � ' . . . 81�a 8�5� F,45!? 8455 � $45 8440 8441 i 8444 �`��41 t3442 8449 8j�h5 8444 � �i44� $�F:32 � • 8434 8�31 c�436 �� ;�4;;� �q�g 8431 Q 8; 3i 8422 842� 8430 8425 � 13�2n 8432 8424 8425 , 842t o I 8�19 � 8412 � 84Ti f�418 �8423 8426 8400 8 15 � 3402 c� 8401 8`�1� t3419 8�24 8409 $392 ��}Oi 8392 83�31 8406 8407 84 t 8 f} f 5 H4 7 4 �� 8384 � 441 �,., 83J0 �8�gg 8394 84U3 84�8 8��9 3408 397 `o�a � �?378 � 8389 � 8386 8387 8391 3406 8�+Oi�` 8398 ��,,�h 8,379 , $380 8391 � � $338 --`� r 87'`R , 838�3 8385 838I 8382 838r � 373 ��,�' 8365 ' � ^ .,.-, � 83b � 837� 83g; 8372 8371 $368 � 8369 °Q 8355 8370 j 8371 �3�� 8360 �� 363 $351 S�h �365 8354 83�15 , I W 83a9 ! 83&Q �336Q y 8360 �344 835� 83�G 833a � 8350 � 834? 83�� $3� 8��8 834i 3343 8342 8325 ��3v 8339 8334 83a0 8345 8'�'�4 � 8335 3332 g315 e 8330 8.33� 8335 �325 8330 � 83�3 �330 £�33.3 8322 � 83a5 £�320 P315 g32L 8321 .� � _ �3L� P�� z /- �� a300�Q 8285 8317 8315 83�1 8308 Y 831�� . °T 8?7� �300 83�5 8:�12 8297 8298 �30j ��; GRf}V�LAND �� 8265 � �2�,� s2�� gz�o s2s� `.\ PARK � ��,55 � 8'l84 8�85 � � �- `n 8281 825G $261 �,. \ I 82 �i 0 � � 75 �t- ¢ g� �� r t-- 82717 $265 $2�p 8241 ��? � �`+ r. r 8270 Q F3265 --- ARDAi`� - � t. � 8250 � 5255 o a� N o' 82�1$ � o o c� ' :�� v � c� �- �' a� c> ; � � � ; � � u� a� � rn i ;. � � � 82 4 �, cNr� �� a�i ? i �-°• n &250 0. 82�F5 j; -- :.:: -:._ ._: ;:: :. � N cv cti : cv r� !v n N� N N;� tv t�� g2ap p� �8233 8228 82�6 ;;: £3245 g?27 � r 823 8213 82U^ ;! � � 2 �8235 � b210 �217 8 S 38 8L05 � ��i c c� ��819 S 810t � i"`2.,;' 81y1 8192 GG:� £s203 8208 , �3227r�: � i 77 8?UO � '`� N � ' � ` u � `314 ,� �:' � Z C7 812 � 81 B0 $175 t3150 �� °N° N 8200 N � 12881,1�j- i--. : �;148 > ��RY R-2 , �i sa � 6� n -.�, ° t� � «� � 8117 81fi1 �, �� a; i r� cv 4�3 i3 i 58 �' �� m �, ;� 3} 3g � � � °m ro N N C`J (`J (�! N � 001 8 3 � 6 �; I �/�' -�'"'�--- �v ° '. '< . +\��`�, ;:! r; °.` i A141' o�O�Df, �C�t��'3 si32 a127 �. i.: � —� �--� i Photographic Documentation r . �.i • i _ : _. ,_ _ ,� ,�1 � " � , , , .;�• x� �fy. � ., '� �t�;. ,�� L . ..�1 � ��1�:2 '.. ..A� t I: ,. �..; � t�: I i ��.- t�} q�� . � 's��•.�i q . .: 1 '�".. 3 ` �+� ,.. �,, , E< f . �` ' �r e',ii ��.: .a�r .•Y Y �. , . . . .. " . ..I �, }. J. Y� t� r !• .� s' ' , l , S; _ � + tr � W � ``' �. j +� .� G . .. � � � , . �� f• �p� � *N, ..:I` j YL. 'isf�, .1 �� ` ..0 i"� 1 � .-t ��r � '1 � ��st. �; ,�, pu� � �>, x � y �., .r � w [� � '�/L ��; ,. , t 4� �� ` r -;+�`"' s _-"�b4tLY �� , h°�.,�,�. "4�' l� .�..�•. �:Y� ,.I� �l � '�^ � :�i�^�i ,+�. J ; a �.y � �'t'',y� t� '.,�:;; �, �r - r�. 1 < � �'�; t t :. ...,r^ ;� � �t r`F' �?s4 �, � '�q �.,i 3 , � � �,.' t.0 ^} Y: . �{ 7'iw , � . �'� • Li^ _ � �- ,t: AS g l.J� � � . ' _.�y;,��'+t�;• r ';l..r � t " % J �� ► ed � jy. k 1 "'v'__ ,�� '� , "c+� 1� �� :� �',.��_�4_w,_ �v%�.�ii` �i..�"iu� �.^�. �1�4.�i'r'��: _•9 . ., � _ - -.,.�,'r _ .� _ :ti'� From this vantage point, you can see the existing homes at 8419 Groveland Road (left) and 8409 Groveland Road (right). The driveway in between the two homes serves 8419 Groveland, the garage for which is obscured by tree cover. While the lot has many trees, it appears as though there is a clearing in which a new home could be constructed with little or no loss of existing mature trees. A-PDF Scan Op��nizer��iD�,�o; Purchase froKn www.A-�?DF.�p�r,�, t� remove the watermark ^` � c � . . --ro:,ra-- _ , .... 4 i - � --�o'sc-- ._ % � �_....,__._.,... .� r--- i S 1 ,i 03rG � CJ W I Y41 �jy . '`' 1 �� I �D � N ir ..j C/ ip 1 z� �wr 3�,� i�l �"__"'...,"_' � r I _� : a� � I I � I �� > ct j �r N .."""""_..` cr.� CrC '� � �., �� fi� . . � w ; •�� j �. i � >, -.� ' 1 �=; � � � �� a ��J ;�4 ` \ 1 J` w � 1_I �r r h 7 �� :1 j � i � a n � n i v 0 a s� �---�------ --------- � --u6'�r-- .-��-�.,:::r O � ''s (�Y, n ^� ' L � '^i � �; � �i � � � 1 � � � u .� � �, V � t L � �� X /� %J � w � � d � � O[ C�r O >- �I� � N� �.i �'1 ❑ u: r � ❑ O K �� hl .� � u .� � � L 9 >, .� 9 w �' �i � ,�,; � �!t.� :r .r �' -m �,' �' u .x G � C�� F o � �` v� y � r. W w .5 n� x �L � c Q av°.Ci � T� � N a �n V u v N lU G �T. L '� i `w `� ` �• �� . � X i Z ,u �r ,� � � c w .� .G -J C 3 a � i �; :,; i � � � �IL M1. N O o� � � G ! R: � N� p �II"J .i � =r. = 7 G ..i . �; � , O � li.l �:: t� r p �• � 1:' � �" u �«U "-- --.o sc-- I -=; '•-- --tqc�-- __ _ .. - __�------ ..,.�-.. ._ .. _. / _. .. _ _ � _ _ ,,..! ; - . �. r � I. I r � I `,' # � ; . d � .� 7 C' Ui � � I 'C��-� �: � ' Yi,o L�.I "'""_""`0-.._.""""'"'... ' "" ' """""" C�i� I .•___"'"._.._"_'_""...'"""".i'� l'J00 �..._""""......"""'""_'..."„"'""'"" _"_"""'""""'""""""_"""_..___.._.L 64 451 � � I � �i I � � ' � "' ----�--- - -"-'--^---^--'-'._ i g uou�i --•---•-�-----_ " •.r � _ I I � I I � { I I i + � ' i �i - oI � I ` �-I � . � � w � � w ,�t ' _ � � ;� � �r, I :? 'r � 7: � i4 u> J iD r. W I r.� W 2 � � . �`'', �1,`1 I , C Cf, �,J ' '� �� N � ['5 � u ,�y � � a , I � `�� " ., ii � �: � '-„ � �',, � ;:: r , � �.�- I 1 '1 I ,�.8_ ;�� „ ', � ;` ,; r �. �, ' � �. � i i -.; � c' �,� `` � ' � I �' � i � l �— ; � �,� i ` \ ' 'P I � �\ I I_ � i i l y � � � r � � I ' i �� I � I : --•--___�----;--t---------�----- --------J _ -;'�o'st-- I -. . - --�e�na-- i � i--. , 3 ..C.D.GO.f,�Q � � �=i Q N O?l U:1( F� 1.�":1 [l J,`7 u � ��/ 0 M :y R u � U I J � �{ � ,„ � �. ' n. �' � r .�-: !. � Q � r, � _� y lJ c �' y-� � � :y ^ 0. `� — u .� J � o � {1 � h ..r u n W �� ;z � O � �' C� � •',J L. J Ci � u� � ."- c T� � � >, � o ulU q � y'. Y, � � J ,T V M � c F � y 5 " Q K q m V � ._ �.: ''a <i � .�� 9 U� ` ' V .�: V s .. f�. '^ 7 "S .? $ =i;_�'° °'�� 'r U � s; � � �3s� � °a jJ � F •3 � �5 -H � c K L � u •5�. � o � � �'� a � ° - ; B ` u' �� ° � o > i ti � � � 4' � � un � '� � a G n c G s = z'=��'v'� c � n ^+. �' `c�.0 C - -' i. � "a -c' 'E c ' � � .°. O � - � � � K v � � �, D Ci _' G - %� C _ �.`a'C ` ? �'i- ;d �'� � � i a �1 ;; S %• � +. � N . �+ u ' � � �J 'O � ty c1 � F 4 m y V � p N ��":.�N�;=; r_ � :J � Z 5 6 �'.'. �• = w � :: " � � d '+� o J _^ `� � � �X � .. .� W � � u`� �� l � C �i/I (i. � J ; u J - � C �`= � (`� �=1 :i S .� Q � � _ " 7 - ^� _ �`.� ;� 3 p '�" � J V � ^J� � � c � � u :i o, �a �� ,� �; =mv �.� � 6 C. 1 �1 S � t T vs.� �.`; _ � _`. `d! x � � � r�.,NF V � j �4 � f�. 0..^ � . � G - � � :�-1'�i g �; _ �, � ----j«s `' � G r �n f� u ,�. - y n1_' r - 'G� �d r.� ; c ��- '. �• .`,'. � >. � �� q �._ •�e a . ;C ,c,, L �i 1'�. C Y ; � �� 4 J _ Vl �' x 5 n. x, C'J � � I C _ �: _ _ _ _ 4 - �___.: . ..:_:."' �c.._'_' " :.-.,_...�_.. _ -��.._.._ .: .....-..-::� : .. ._ - . _.::. - �.__�, r:�. __>. .. .=a�� . ' "" __._...._. _. _. ._' ' �. . �.�... _ �_ _' _ _ . . . . , . .. , � _ . .. . _ . _ . : . ...:. � ` MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 739-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF 8409 AND 8419 GROVELAND ROAD REQUESTED BY TONY AND CHERYL HOFFMAN; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. M103-003 WHEREAS, Property owners Tony and Cheryl Hoffman have requested approval of a minor subdivision of contiguous lots located at 8419 Groveland Road (Parcel A) and 8409 Groveland Road (Parcel C), properties zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally- described as follows: The South 100 feef of Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg's Sunnyside Estates and, Lot 1, Block 1, Dalberg's Sunnyside Estates, except the South 900 feet thereof. WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the south 55 feet from Parcel A and the north 20 feet from Parcel C to create a 75-foot wide buildable lot (Parcel B) fronting Groveland Road; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicants' requestfora 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 for a minor subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a$1,525.61 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot's market value; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road subject to the following stipulations: 1. The applicants arrange to have the survey revised as follows: a. Title the survey "Certificate of Survey." b. All parcels shall meet the City's minimum width requirement of 75 feet. c. Five foot drainage and utility easement shall be added to either side of both new property lines. d. The following language shall be added: "The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicated to the City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County." � � � � � _ .. . �. .�_� . � _ _ . � � � Resolution 739-03 Page 2 2. The applicants shall arrange to have a Title Commitment or Registered Property Abstract drafted and submitted prior to the approval of the subdivision by the City Council. 3. The applicants shall submit the required $1,525.61 park dedication fee priorto the City approving the deeds for recordation. BE IT FURTHER 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 st day of October, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) item No: 6 Meeting Date: October 1, 2003 Type of Business: Business of Mounds I/iew Staff R To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road; Planning Case M103-004 Introduction: Mike and Wendy Pedginski are applying for a minor subdivision of the lot located at 7886 Sunnyside Road. Mr. Donald Forslund is the owner of the lot and has signed the subdivision application, as have the Pedginskis. The subject property is a corner lat located at the southeast corner of Hillview Road and Sunnyside Road; the home was constructed in 1941. A minor subdivision is a division of land less than two acres in area in which only one additional lot is created. The lot is zoned R-1, Single Family residential and the minimum lot size for an interior lot is 11,000. Corner lots require a minimum of 12,500 square feet. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential. Discussion: The Forslund property is currently 30,576 square feet, or, .7 acres. The proposed subdivision would split off the west 104 feet of the Forslund property to create a new buildable lot fronting Hillview Road. The area of the new lot would be 13,726 square feet leaving 16,750 square feet for the remainder parcel, well in excess of the minimum for a corner lot. Mr. Forslund resides in the existing home and would remain in the home after the subdivision. Both proposed lots satisfy all zoning requirements. The applicants have submitted a Certificate of Survey for the proposed subdivision which identifies the lot to be created as Parcel B and the remainder lot as Parcel A. Park Dedication Requirements. Every subdivision of land is subject to park dedication requirements. Because the subdivision is less than 2 acres in area, the fee is 5% of the land's market value, less the value of the land where the homes sit. Rather than require an appraisal for every subdivision, staff typically uses the assessment valuations available through Ramsey County. The combined land value for the property is $53,200. On a per-square-foot basis, the value is $1.74. If Parcel B is 13,726 square feet, its proportional value would be $23,882. Five percent of that amount, or $1,194, is the required dedication for this subdivision. This would need to be submitted as a condition of City subdivision approval. _ � . . . � �,. _ - L-�-'---'-`" �.. �� --._-- - lz-- . � a-=._�� _"_. I r .� -'--- - � 4.:_ _ ______ __ _ _ Easements. With every subdivision of land, the City requires that drainage and utility easements be dedicated around the perimeter of the lot. The certificate of survey provided by the applicants however does not indicate the presence of existing or proposed easements. The survey will need to be revised to show ten foot front and rear drainage and utility easements and five foot drainage and utility easements on the inside of both side lot lines for Parcel B. In addition, the following language will need to be added to the survey: "The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicated to the City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County." Public Notice. While a public hearing is not required for this request, staff did send out letters to neighboring property owners as a courtesy, informing them of the proposed minor subdivision and the anticipated meeting dates. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve Resolution 740-03, a resolution recommending approval of a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road, with stipulations. �� - James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Survey of Subdivision 4. Resolution 739-03 � Zoning Map �� 1�� r�,�� ,� ufr' � � � C ��j,�r� E�i� 7��:, �� i'�7,��' 7�7� �'', �� 7�3�� 7�5�� ?`��'"> � �;; a, : �,,� �f�� s , _ � 1� :Fy � u'� d- �F / �.t a � t � �f !�� _ __ ___ � �,.��,�,�_ r�� '�:. 1 � � � :� ��vy�.S� � :�' i:�: �C.`1r� .�9,��1 �a,� ,�, l ��. 1��,,,��f � jr � d7" �{�� .3•�.r �,t;f; �. �!� � � ��l�f.�=� ��fi ' r��:5 �t� � � �{�4�,� BOC�� R'��31 ?��`� � ,��t ;��[�'� �'97� ?3t3c;� ;�� 7�� 7��9 i�;�C� ?��`� , ��'"'._' � 1{�� ' �� ;r�;� .' 7�� ' ��;� � 7�� ,��.�� 7c��e �♦ '?� �. ` , 3f1 � u`y �rr� . rr �G�� i��J '`�� r'�� i��t� �-;�.: � �� . ` �4 ` F1 ��5\ .�1� . ��'�n � �^4.. � � � � � � � �� ; F �� 9 i � � � 7�� ' � � i i ! ��Ct � `'��`�' / ? ��?� � . . ��Yt�� r �. �'87� �� 7��- � �� ,,� � '�.�. % ��*"�" +�''{J ^��;�{y� � �'' 7��'i d� . 4?, �_}�i � � f � ��y� �.'� .�y ��_ yy � ��9k. �� I ' � �i �� - �. � = .".. � I"`3 r�'� -r � ^��k� �� ' �,�t , .� �� } � rr'•,;' � I ��y�'ak �, � , t�r' � �,� .�°�;. � �3��. � �� - � � ��, r4'�j� � ; ;f ;��r.; ,�� _*ia �ri� '�i:,,a . �_+(} ��"� t"��,.J 4�'v?r.: �' �'.' .f r�� " � .I�l� �'�� ;„�F., . �,,,� ,�; ;l , ��,� ,,��cr �.'- t3�[1' y. �tC7� � �i� 1 1 ;�'a; �� 'f ��r�s 7� �'g i�'� 7 i �`f 1 �� rr � 7�C�1 cv �� 'r��5 � r ,�� 857 J �� t 1. r r 7F�4,`�t� 7��U � �7�.7� �°'�C`i t � f,7 tl � �' �� 7�� 71�� F� � ��I _ - -- -- - - - - _ � I Photographic Documentation . . , i ., � �___ . . . � y t.� i Y 4 . `�: � ,} . . -t, t. k {+ r s . �f4 '. �'L . .. F .. ., �. )`.u�..� .�.k i `f � i t � 1 !1 +� ; y � � �,.. i -�� 1 � �.'� Y�. t.. .'� L S a ' ,. �r ; t `;� '� � � F (; � tiw � � „�... � ; x i � �.��' . � , �r•t t� r f� r �, , 1 �.`� � 1 `,', 4. -. f r �j:�/ �'�e 1 �`- �: ��i i Y-� 5:.1 � Y'��... a�. � �;� s �7 di ( � �:5 w � �� ' . i �r. ri <l� ��a .: -� � r �il �.� r � ,�� -�, a� ;�,�� i *� r : �r J� d � +� ". � ' ' ,f �� -> *.'.� � ..� i :i- �� . t r � " .I��i i '� � r ti : .. � �' � � � ° � � �' �� ? j7� 'Ya a '�� fy% � � � ° � � � �� ,r �� :Y � �*�t,y ��Y�t �� nl . ��.r P�% . ' �d�'t`��'ti.. � 'l ' . y L � �' . { ..-! �T T,. Y � Ty+ �7S = ` ' 's c c � ' � �J 1 � ! Y ' t � � { �,.y � ' �yv ,-rr ` 1 `.` � �gr �+, i' }��c -"�i�;�� E , ' - n ' t� Yak -� \ � � �� } � � �i y'y ° � `! ' _ S'l ��, � kj� ''' ' �':F �"'c. ` :,r: ,: �.� � t . � �`- I i � t +ii�,: _... . _ , . , _ t' � H ., `�i L�1 . . . .. . - �! F• ° f � d�.� J _ f � . ..�. 3�' '� .,. ' -�Y�. - � 1. Y.��i�y(�.°+�.if� �� A ... '''� r _ y� -�� v .:e .s+,r . 'r � �"'a[' q ��t. 4 "s: ' f%lYp' >�� [�1L,L5 5:,, � , , i,� fi . - , 'c-t 4 .. - ' x�w- , �r �wF hT � :ar'�a�-'.�+�a�`!. �:�.��.�Ri.�'.. .. . - - i- . . " . � . � � . ., ��1 �.. w �-_-.- ' . . � . �' . . . . ;.r,..ar.� :.,...._� ..__.�".�le:F..d:..:::�'L..._Y._...,.._.,.._..__... �._. .._. ...._ ..,......._... ...... _" .. . _.... ....... . _ ... ........ .. ............. _ ..,. _� .. ... �. _...._._..i This is a view looking south at the proposed lot. There are many mature trees in this area and efforts should be made to preserve as many of the mature trees as possible during construction. ) �" � u �,. � * � � � � � * m o � � m* ol � � i z O � Z Z > O — — � e�, ; 82 i. � �X � C 1 �v�� hJ P=132.D . M=132.00 � FI� � . µ O �" � V ^ C� N N ` \ d� f I 33 I � � I I � � I i i i � i i i � � � i � ti i ti O p � L A � tw ,- - - > �„ �r O ° SU � � � -� y� � � rn � m C� _ ' ' � � � - � � � � ° °, � [ m `1 ' ' � � � � , � 'A = � � �-v � � n � "' W � i ti �A � � � � � � '" �' Ci. C�D ` � �+ R. �C C `. � '' II v � � `t � II u �, ro �-�, o � N N � n� � C/1 O 3 f° f�1� �„ C,� � � V) ''1 o � --' � � p '� o �p c � N � � � � o --------67.6-------- ic� � m O � r� �m a�� w... � 4l � a ;„N � �, � N� �\\ � i y\9.o.�U EnsnHC u �y a _ x \ .�9.0�` 2 STORY °� V � ln � o ��, � � is.3. u i�a�sE o � }� ° � = G � x L- `�� µ � _ � �7�.0 �� . �i�.n to.5 ' ',7 C j2 1��i O µ � w _' ' � p � � �&� V � � G V l� `1 � � � N � Qr 0 � 'U \ J l = D � � x ' N ~ .� ° -0 t�J � � ; ro � ' � � "�r" � � � F� a � /� � �a � m O l N �' � � � N � I . . m F Z g , i a � ° ^ a ; � " 9b "� � o �� s p F i ;'�s 33 °_ S. , y � _ 9 � F�.r � N ' � 1..1 " � = M=131.93 � (� `� ` P=t32.0 � o n � :� =` W u �a � �- o � �,. rn ; rn � ,+ q o � � � ,S UNNYSIDE ROAD a o� o �y�NA"O n�� -° o°� o o° o p a � O m �^ u (� V7 � O z�I � I^ � n 3 O^ f� '� ° v C 2� �� O F m ^� m �D O � a'o c, N o � �� o m� �� y 4a. � � ti T� w`�'• � ' �'��si,�m 300 �o°, 4� 3� K ,� ° o�m o ;c n o ��o a z y m J" � " m� �oo o�,� oc� 3 � � �a� �� y � m � 'a, r 'p � �p `O �. `S. p O ; � n m A � � � �*1 �? t.^ o �� o o a � � A O Z o O v� Q cn -� 'p c z °_ m `1 N � -� o �'o � n � v "' A 3 l�� m r�,� y m rt �°, v Z y X o � o0o z z N � "o� �a N m � G � � � ~ � `'� n ° o ^ D � r�- � o � �" Z �. m u�i H O � A �� _� Z in .m�. c m�e k fA*1 ��'1 N �- � @� ro � �� p� Z ° „°1 ^ <i 2 � E O y � i i, m � < � o e � O O Q G� n`� X � O �iO -O � o ro',� d n � o rn Z Y o� � F n a O 7 D � p 2 +r O o n+ n iv�. 1a �� r �y� � o� g m� � Z -1Z_' o a ° m o'° w o 3 � "' A ro � o 0 � � � � - .� d" � � V � � J I �^ �i 1 � � � MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 740-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MINOR SUBDIVISION OF 7886 SUNNYSIDE ROAD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE NO. M103-004 WHEREAS, Applicants Mike and Wendy Pedginski, on behalf of property owner Donald Forslund, have requested approval of a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally-described as follows: Lot 104, Spring Lake Park Hill View Ramsey County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the applicants propose to subdivide the west 104 feet from the subject property to create new buildable lot fronting Hillview Road; and, WHEREAS, the applicants have submitted a Certificate of Survey for the proposed minor subdivision indicating the new lot as Parcel B and the remainder lot as Parcel A; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicants' 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 for a minor subdivision is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 1204.04, Subd. 4, the subdivision is subject to a$1,194 park dedication fee which is equivalent to 5% of the new lot's market value; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road subject to the following stipulations: 1. The applicants arrange to have the survey revised as follows: a. Five and ten foot drainage and utility easements shall be added to Parcel B b. The following language shall be added: "The proposed drainage and utility easement areas as shown herein shall be publicly dedicated to the City of Mounds View by a separate document recorded with Ramsey County." 2. The applicants shall arrange to have a Title Commitment or Registered Property Abstract drafted and submitted prior to the approval of the subdivision by the City Cauncil. 3. The applicants shall submit the required $1,194 park dedication fee priorto the City approving the deeds for recordation. _ _ _ . .: _ __: . .. , Resolution 740-03 Page 2 BE IT FURTHER 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 st day of October, 2003. ATTEST: (SEAL) ( ' Gary Stevenson, Chairperson James Ericson Community Development Director ___ _ __ _ _ _ ___._. . .� �_ � �� . _ _ . _ : � PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA IZegular Meeting September 17, 2003 Mounds View City Hall 2401 H[ighway 10, Mounds View, IVIN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., September 17, 2003. 2> Roll Call Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Miller, Scotch, Hegland, and Zwirn. JoYuison and Song (excused) Con-imunity Development Director Ericson Index to Minutes Planning Case VR03-00� Consider Request for a Front-Yard Setback Variance Location: 2434 Hillview Road Applicant: Rebecca and Lance Bainville 3. Approve Minutes Page 2 a. August 20, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Hegland. To Approve the Planning Comrnission Minutes for August 20, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. !_--- _______ _ --- --- - _ _ � -- ' �_�:.� �._ . � ;. .. ., �� _. � _ �,.y _ -- -. � s- - '- Mounds View Planning Commission September 17, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Consider Request for a Front-Yard Setbacic Variance at 2434 Hillview'Road Conununity Development Director Ericson indicated that this case is a request from the property owner for a reduced front yard setback for a roof extension over the decic. He then indicated that the City's Code allows for a two-foot roof extension into the setbacic so this request is for a four- foot variance to allow for the six-foot roof extension. Director Ericson indicated that Staff does not feel that the decic and roof extension impede visibility and noted that a decic can extend to within two feet of the property line. Director Ericson indicated that Staff did some searching and the City has approved similar variances in the past and noted there is one on Quincy with very similar circumstances. He then commented that, with every variance application, the Commission is charged with reviewing the criteria and establishing a hardship. Director Ericson reviewed the hardship criteria with the Commission and indicated that Staff feels that a hardship can be justified in this case and recommends approval of the variance. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Cormilissioner Miller indicated the applicants applied for a permit for the decic extension and aslced whether they had applied for a permit for the roof extension. Director Ericson indicated it is the same permit both items are included. Commissioner Hegland aslced whether the other roof extensions approved were all for non- enclosed structures. Director Ericson indicated that they are. Commissioner Zwirn indicated that this seems to have already been constructed prior to requesting the variance. Director Ericson indicated that some construction started and there was an issue with an opening in the roof leaving the home open to potential water damage from rains so the applicaalt contacted Staff and asked for permission to enclose the portion leaving the home at rislc for water damage. Staff indicated that would be fine but cautioned the applicant that, if the variance were not approved, they do so at the risk of needing to remove the worlc. He then said that the City has had after the fact variance requests before but that is not the case in this situation. �_. Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ September 17, 2003 Page 3 Commissioner Miller indicated she lives down the street and has been watching this go up and she feels it will add a lot to the house to have it. Commissioner Scotch indicated she felt the improveinent loolced nice. Commissioner Zwirn aslced whether there would be any type of railing around the decic. Mr. Bainville indicated the decic is only 18 inches off the ground and no railing is needed unless it is 30 inches or more off the ground. He then said there would be a column in the middle for support. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:11 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 738-03, a Resolution Approving a Four-Foot Variance to Allow a Six-Foot Roof Extension Into the Front-Yard Setbacic at 2434 Hillview Road. Commissioner Miller commented that she felt it was important that Staff had included a requirement that the structure cannot be enclosed. Director Ericson indicated that these types of Resolutions are recorded so that they are seen on a title search. He then said that residents had been required to record them but Staff has taken over that responsibility to ensure that they are recorded with the County. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. Director Ericson indicated that Staff would lilce to bring a discussion before the Commission concerning a proposed procedure for administrative variances. He then said the goal of the department would be to draft language for review and discussion. Corrunissioner Hegland asked if the intent would be if Staff decides not to grant an administrative variance that the request would come to the Commission for review. Director Ericson indicated that the P1aru7ing Commission would be to whom the applicant could appeal the decision of Staff. 6. 1�1ext Planning Commission Meeting: October 1, 2003 �' I) _ :: __ _ Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting 7. Adjournment to Agenda Sessfon September 17, 2003 Page 4 There being no further business before the Plaruling Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:20 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier Tii�zeSaver Off Site Seci•etai°ial, hzc. .w;��. : ; �. ;,:�� - t°�� -;�� _;;t��c; .�'�i, �7';.",44,rf r,,,,�.x:. :t; �,i�; !i;;� :" � iy s w '� i �. y � '�� .... .- ��. �.':�� ,.w, 'i,* t �Y'r4 f � .•'�i' ?��d�im *�_ 1•. .'c i.� f�?�'N� :�?� � i�::fi;�rs`1. k. ��. ?�z:, IQ� � S��Y _ r�tiw -, ,.;; : � ^� 'L . .. S . 1 �� T. .'!�` ,, l` �.'��::� `� . �- - ".__. -_ -_- __- .__ _ �__. ,-_ __ __ _ .�____.=w�__. 1 �_ -_ _� --__� i_ _.____'_- . . ___��_ _.: MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COl��INIISSION October 15, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGEIo1DA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: September 17, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Coirunents on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case CU03-004; VR03-009 Public Hearing to Consider a Varia�ice and Conditional Use Pei�nit Request to Expand a Garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road — Resolution 741-03 Applicants: Joel and Linda Whitbecic APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. 6. Next Planning Coinmission Meetvig: November 5, 2003 7. Adjournment to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION l. Review Minutes: October 1, 2003 2. Staff Reports: 3. Chauperson and Plaiuung Commissioners' Reports \\Trout\CommDev�Planning CommissionU'C Agcndas�2003U 0-01-03 PC Agenda.doc _, _ ��. � _ _..� . . __ Item No: 5 Meeting Date: October 15, 2003 Type of Business: Commission Business City of Mounds I/iew Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance and Conditional Use Permit to Expand a Garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road Planning Case Nos. CU03-004 & VR03-009 Introduction: Property owners Joel and Linda Whitbeck are requesting approval of a variance and a conditional use permit to expand their garage at 7850 Spring Lake Road. The applicants indicate that the existing garage is too small to meet their needs and that they would like to expand upon it by adding a third stall and a workshop off the back. The proposed width of the expanded garage would be 40 feet, five feet in excess of what is allowed by City Code. The subject lot is a larger sized lot--37,462 square feet—with 112 feet of frontage on Spring Lake Road. Part of the lot extends into Spring Lake. The home is a slab-on-grade construction which means there is no basement, furthering the need for an expanded garage. Photographs of the lot and the garage are attached for the Commission's review. Requirements: Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building, the number of accessory buildings and the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings. 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 garage exceeding 952 square feet, which are that the garage 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. Section 1125.02, Subd. 2: This part of the Code identifies the criteria that shall be used to establish hardship related to variance requests. Discussion: The request for a Conditional Use Permit to expand the 720 square foot garage by an additional 390 square feet satisfies the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds View Zoning Code with the exception of the proposed width of the building which, at 40 feet, exceeds the maximum allowed by five feet. The applicants have claimed a hardship and are requesting a variance to permit the 40-foot wide garage. , , Whitbeck PC Report October 15, 2003 Page 2 The existing two-car garage is located at the northwest corner of the lot and is partially hidden from the road by the house. The current setback is approximately 6 feet form the north lot line and 16 feet to the west lot line. A third stall would be added on the south side of the garage, which would not be visible form the street. (The third stall addition would not encroach into any required setback.) If the additional third stall were the only expansion proposed, the garage would be 960 square feet. If the addition were only 8 square feet less (e.g., 39.66 x 24 instead of 40 x 24) a conditional use permit would not be required and the garage could be constructed without any planning action. However, the Whitbecks are adding a secondary addition of 150 square feet attached behind the garage which brings the total area up to 1,110 square feet. The proposed expansion on the backside of the garage would bring the garage 10 feet closer to the west line but still within the setback limits. 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, 7850 Spring Lake Road, as low-density residential. The lot is larger than most lots and one of only seven homes that have direct access to Spring Lake. Most of the homes in this area were built with single or small two stall garages, which by today's standards are under-sized for the typical multi-vehicle family. A variance is required for this request because the garage would exceed 35 feet in width. If the area of the garage were 952 square feet or less, there would be no limit on the width. While there are no explicit width limits for garages less than 952 square feet, there are practical limits due to minimum garage depths. The rationale for limiting a garage width is based solely on aesthetics. Previous Commissions and Councils have held that by limiting the width of a garage, the garage cannot dwarf the home or be the dominant feature on the lot. While one can argue and disagree about what is or is not aesthetically pleasing, garages tend to be devoid of any interesting architectural features and lacking in character. Limiting their width helps preserve the ideal of the home being the dominant feature rather than the garage. To further the goal of minimizing the visual impact of garages on a lot, the Commission may want to consider granting "width bonuses" for side loaded garages, garages located in rear yards or for garages that are otherwise shielded or concealed from public view, such as the Whitbecks' garage. Variance Consid�rations: For a variance to be considered favorably, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case) 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 criteria are as follows: 1. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. _____ _____ � Whitbeck PC Report October 15, 2003 Page 3 2. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. 3. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. 4. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. 5. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. 6. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. 7. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Hardship Analysis The applicants submitted a statement as to their hardship, which is included as follows: "Linda and I have several reasons for wanting to add on to our garage as in our submitted plans. The first and foremost is that our house has no basement for storage or workspace area. We have three vehicles, so we would like the garage space to enclose all of our vehicles and the additional space (5 feet] on the end would be to house my tools and shop. We have a mature Oak tree behind fhe garage that if we were to shorten the garage by five feet this would also move the attached shed five feet closer to that tree and might put the tree at risk from the construction or the grading. The garage sits at the rear of the lot and even at its present size the view of it from the street is partly covered up by the house. The addition is being added to the side behind the house, therefore the visible presence of the garage will not be be changed as seen from the street side." Staff has reviewed the seven "hardship criteria" identified in Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code and responds to each as follows: 1. As to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, staff would agree with the applicants that the absence of a basement certainly establishes the need for additional garage space. Adding a third stall to the garage makes sense and the only way to do this, because of how the garage was constructed, is to add ten feet on to the south side. The factor which can be described as the defining practical difficulty is that the applicants have sufficient room forthe expansion however are limited to adding only five feet because the existing garage is already 30 feet wide—the minimum needed for a new garage stall is ten feet. Whitbeck PC Report October 15, 2003 Page 4 2. As to the literal interpretation, staff would simply point out that were the Whitbecks not adding on to the back of the garage, they could build the expansion at the desired width without the need for a variance because garages 952 square feet or less do not have width limitations other than practical limitations. The secondary addition on the backside of the garage is unrelated to the variance request because it does not increase the width of the garage however because it adds "area" to the garage in excess of 952 square feet, a variance becomes necessary. The intent of the width limitation is to minimize the visual impact of a garage—in this case, the expanded garage would satisfy the spirit and intent of the requirement, thus the literal interpretation creates an unnecessary hardship. 3. The special circumstances or conditions do not result form the applicants in that the Whitbecks are simply attempting to compensate for their home's lack of a basement by adding onto the garage. In addition, the Whitbecks drafted the garage expansion plans so as to preserve a mature Oak tree behind the garage. 4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicants any special privilege in that the variance would not be required were it not for the secondary addition which does not increase the garage width. The Whitbecks' situation is quite unique in this regard. 5. The requested five-foot variance is the minimum amount necessary to alleviate the Whitbecks' hardship. Economic conditions do not enter into the need for a variance in this case. 6. The variance requested would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the Code or to other properties in the vicinity. As stated above, the spirit and intent of the Code is preserved and the garage expansion should not impact adjoining property owners in any way. 7. Granting the variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, would not increase the congestion of the public streets, would not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety and would not diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Summary: based on the above analysis and the applicants' response, Staff believes there is sufficient cause to establish hardship and practical difficulty to warrant approval of the variance. 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 of these potential adverse effects is addressed on the next page. Whitbeck PC Report October 15, 2003 Page 5 Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. As stated on Page 2 of this report, 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. 7850 Spring Lake Road is designated as low-density residential and the proposed garage expansion would not be inconsistent with the Comp Plan. The Geoqraphical Area Involved. The Whitbecks' home is located on Spring Lake Road, one house removed from Spring Lake. The Whitbecks' backyard does however have access to the lake. The proposed garage expansion would not be out of place for this area and the size of the Whitbecks' lot would easily accommodate the expanded garage. From the street, the expansion would not be apparent and would not impact the adjoining properties. Depreciation. The garage expansion would benefit the subject property both in a practical sense by providing additional on site and indoor parking of a vehicle currently stored outside and in an economic sense, as the addition would increase the "value" of the property. Increased property values are of course a benefit to everyone. The Character of the Surroundinq Area. This part of the City is strictly residential; strictly single family dwellings. There is a mix of older and newer homes, some on larger lots while others on smaller subdivided lots. One common thread is that all of the homes in this area re well maintained and most exceed the median Mounds View home value. The presence of Spring Lake adds an inherent physical and aesthetic value to the neighborhood. The expanded garage would not be out of character in this area. The demonstrated need for such a use. The Whitbecks have indicated that their need is two- fold; they have three cars and a two-car garage, and they do not have a basement. The added garage space would be a substantial improvement for the Whitbecks. Code Consistencv Subdivision 6 of Section 1106.04 lists the conditions under which a conditional use permit can be issued. These are as follows: a. The accessory building must conform with Section 1103.06 and subdivision 1106.03(I) 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. 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'). e. The building shall be a permanent structure. 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 Code. Whitbeck PC Report October 15, 2003 Page 6 Section 1103.06 refers to the location of accessory buildings in side and rear yards. The proposed garage satisfies this requirement. Section 1106.03 refers to specific standards such as height, area, setbacks, coverage ratios, use requirements, total number of accessory buildings allowed and exterior siding requirements, all of which are satisfied with this request. All of the requirements addressed above would be satisfied with the exception of the width requirement. Recommendations: 1. Variance Request. Upon review of the hardship criteria in City Code and considering the Whitbecks' statement of hardship, staff feels the standards have been met and justification exists to warrant approval of the variance. Resolution 741-03 has been prepared for your action if the Commission concurs with Staff's recommendation. If the Commission feels the hardship criteria have not been satisfied, staff should be directed to prepare a resolution of denial with appropriate findings of fact. 2. Conditional Use Permit Reauest. Upon review of the City Code requirements for accessory buildings and conditional uses, this request appears to satisfy all criteria, assuming a variance is approved for the garage width. The resolution approving the variance also recommends approval of the CUP, with stipulations. If the variance is not approved, the CUP cannot be recommended forward for approval. �.JCt,v�,�.s��4 C-l�-t,C..�G�. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Application 2. Site Plan 3. Zoning Map 4. Photographic Documentation 5. Resolution 741-03 I ,_" " _--�- c�� -".. �. ... . . . . _ .__. . _ . . :-_v . .__ ' i �"" "__a' "�,_ � 1 w"r_`_"_�cc' _ � "' ' '_ -__"__ . _ .:� __ ....._.. ; . _ f-"' ' _ � ._._ " ____. . ...""" . _ - i r C��S�I C�G� OM�ID� .� � �� [li ; ,�,7 ��°. �gre'`S ' ParYne�S��s COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING APPLICATIUN 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (763) 717-4020 �ax (651) 765-1660 Please Type or Print Tnformation - Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information Name of Applicant �O e 1 W h� tb ec 1L Telephone 6�2` 7Qd - D1 �S _ Address �g50 cS�i'11/�4 1.ake �, Fax V' 101.1 �1 ci S l%1 �2c�� iMh SS 11 Z E-mail: ��-- � h i't'b ec� e C 6� t a, t�'. Nr � Interest in Property (check appropriate box) � Owner of Property ❑ Lessee, Operator, Manager O Other (explain) ❑ Contract for Deed Owner � Agreement to Purchase App/icants must provide evidence of interest in propeity at the time of app/ication, and if you are not the owner of the property, you must either provide a/elter of permission f�om the owner giving eonsent to the f"iling of this app/ication or the property owner must sign tfiis app/ication for it to be ac�cepted. Property Description/Proposal Address or General location Legal Description Property Identification # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning 7$50 Spr►►� Q L.d k e 1Qoz �. Se� a�t'a.c.k�d . 0 23. 3 � Ooo •g �estd�.N�"�al Type of Application (Please check the appropriate boxes) �____ ____:� .. :_ � .� :w � I Mounds View Planning ApplicG'. ,i � " Page 2 Present Use of Property Classification ❑ Abstract ❑ Torrens Description of Proposal (attach additional supporting documentation if necessary) ��d ��11Nc1 S{-� I l ♦e o u,r rw e v4,� o aNa« �lcu� wi f��a a7'1'a�lr r�S�aga Z c3. — G e � � o't Please Note: Applicants are responsible for all costs incurred associated with the filing, review and processing of this application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon receipt of statement from the City of Mounds View. Fees may include but are not limited to costs for consultants retained by the Gty, consuitant planning services, attomey, and engineer fees. A deposit may also be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and staff time spent fn tf�e review, research or preparatlon of materials assodated with this applicatlon. The applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs in excess of the Inibai deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the applicant within 30 days after consideration . of the application is completed. Payment of park dedication fees is required with subdivision applications. Applicant THAT I have read all of the information listed in the Planning Application and fuily understand that I am coS�tE inr�rjed by the City related to the processing of this appiication. '�- I 7 - D 3 Date BY MY (OUR) SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY DECLARE THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE, Name of Applicant (type pri Signature of Applicant Name of Property Owner (� `ft� « k . Signature of Property Owner Address of Owner ?� S o p r�► ��-akt �-a� d Phone Number of Owner (o L Z. -�4b - 0 l$ S E-mail of Owner �' L l.P u b 1� er k� Co«aca.e�- /V iP'' � ***********************************�x*********�****************************************** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submittal R-i 9- a3 Date of Acceptance: � 60-day Limit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) �� 3- �a Assigned to: �`��3-d� `� Fees Paid: Account # C� � #� Appli�ation: 1 tio��__ �PL�N"L� ! Park Dedication: � �'�� ► Deposits: Other: Total: Receipt # Jc 9" �^, _ . �..< «� : --, e ='_- - � ��. ,..._ . � �_ _ _ ,.� .. � :_ - -•- -�,� ..., ,- � : . . _ . . w _ - - -----' -- —' - �-=— > �__ � .. _ . . __ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ � Site Plan l �'.Sf � �+i {�- �E- /b �� 4— 6'f�� d� � I � �� -- �� t ,, . . � I. ' �,� �b �° � ■ ,�: .-; . ____ � � ��. . ...� . I... ..... �, � UC �L�/� ' U I �� r ,. �,� �. I s , . � � �_ � Area of �, Proposed ° � i "° Expansion r� � � .�� l�3 % � � � � � �� . � . � . , i , , � . i , � i� . i �, , � � °�_ i ��1 � '' -� � � . i -, � � . � '- . - ,� � � �� . � � ��, ,� . � ' I � �`� �� Spring �ake ��, � � � � � � I� � � Q � � � � � � � � � � � : ;; , ; __" =.�,r�._ _- _ _� -�_.... �. �.. � �..� ,_ . � - _ ..y . . . . . . _ . , . _ .. . . . _ . .. _.._.. _ .. .. - - - . �. ..:,_ - .. . . . . . . .v. �_ .:... - . .-' I . ._.�— � - � ---- _--- -- - . . - . _. - . � . . _ . _ .. I J Zoning Map I k I �. . � J � - - -- - � ��, �� - _ _ _ . �--�------ ��; ,� �f�� 73�� c��j ?��;1 .�, rr� -� �� '�' �� `��I � � �%r�'7,•i ' � �J .:. t' v ti! � ?i�1C�.�� ti;C�i�� `��''' � � E � r � �.�i -� ,�! � �+ � � ; r �`' r � � � c �. r ��,� I'`r �, � i ��' �_a � ��•�I�P� ? l„F� � �� 1 C�7 � ��`�-' � �� r =- r-� ' {Y, � �� t i ! � . .� � �. � � �� ' ._ ._._.___.�, 4� �� • �° � � � � �� O �'�� .� � cr, ;,� .r ;r ��i� � �T.,, �,i 1 1 r J �: �� '� ��n � � i ,,,�, ''� � � 4� ti '' - �� '?f.� � �.�? i � �, � I ^ ? �� x � � � � �•L, � f � p� � } 1� i I' I � T -' 1 �� , � 1 +� i _._�- ?�_;��;, � � ��;� � . � .=- c�, _ � � —�r•�- ..,, r r� �: �°ij�'1�� ?��j�4' ( � � �rr.� ` . � ;,,� �t r�, er�� 7G',?�'� r��jr.. I �I"� e.�•.J r- f_ ) (t l y4 I K i}� l� '—� ��_? , ��-'j �� LL y I ,%;� �+ Ii 1 ^r�l ti r [ ry f 7 � - il -r � � � � I'.:� �:� C:� ,fi f�'' `j �� r• ;' � , . . � � ?�'�'�~t ,`r}�.� ��,�;;� � ?;�,�� E ^ �j +- �� ^ n,. ,r1� T �'� •. f ��_ I � 1 �+, �� ry { � 1 ��! � � .•i.•-. i 4 ' � g ' 1 � •-7 r � , -�r T ►=: J-7!�i I � � •F' �1 �.'"I * Properties not indicated with a particular zoning designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. _ _ - _� � � _ _ _ _ _ _ ._._.�.. __ �. _... _ . . _ _ �it� +�f I�I ound� 11iev�r - L+�cati+own I�I ap � � � � � Joel 1Nhitbeck �roperty Invc�lved: 7850 Spring Lake Ro�d Planning Case Nos. GU03-OC�4 and VRO�-009 - 7�50 Spring Lake Road 0 Prope�ties VVithin 350' . . �: �-z�= . _ v r - ° . _' �:� —.._ � .d,. W�_ _ �_. . . �'-' . ---�'��..."._' � ".'—�_ . .___—' _: . .� . . ' . . . _ "__' ._' _ _ Photographic Documentation - ;. ;:;1r:`t' - :e:�_.�.: .:;, ; 4y� .'L. i . : �� , _ �"�� I�--': !�. _ ., �� -�;;i� �i�'L1��0�:'�` `�.�, 3 ., ' � • a r j r • �.' . . �., /' I ; �: �: :��.�-_: ,,. . Y �Y l �y��Y:.... y- � � �.. �+�'y r` � ., .. :.. , �. -^', • �� ♦ ' ly s'.• ..:' . �;. 1, � �r � �`' b„�"�,°� �'� .,M1�j'`,� . � b�r � .� t\:; � �.d��r �, +;, a �'�n � �,.. � � �,r, , �,, � ` ', ,' .c�'- � ��i I�.. � ' '�''p- y L_ �►�'� Y� ` -��,""`_.__ -- _ =:; :r�:R<,;�;�.�,,.: . y s .i • � T�A ' ,{ Y1� • , f � l t�•• . �.. a.V :� _ . ' . � .: �1-. View of the garage looking to the north from the subject property backyard. The shed behind the garage would be removed. View of the property looking west toward house and existing garage. Note how part of the garage is obscured by the home—the expansion would not be visible from the street. : . _- ; ___ _ _ : � _ ... ,_. -. . MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 741-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A 40-FOOT WIDE GARAGE AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR AN EXPANDED 1,110 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE AT 7850 SPRING LAKE ROAD ; PLANNING CASE NOs. CU03-003 & VR03-009 WHEREAS, property owners Joel and Linda Whitbeck have applied for a variance and a conditional use permit to expand their existing 720 square foot garage by an additional 390 square feet for a finished total of 1,110 square feet; and, WHEREAS, the Whitbeck property, located at 7850 Spring Lake Road, is zoned R-1, Single Family residential, and is legally described as follows: 7 he South 451.21 Feet of Lot 23, Auditors Subdivision No. 89, except the East 137.0 Feet of the South 339.21 thereof; Ramsey County, Minnesota 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 Mounds View Zoning Code restricts the width of oversized garages to 35 feet or less; and, WHEREAS, the proposed expanded garage would be 1,110 square feet, thus necessitating application of a conditional use permit; and, WHEREAS, the proposed garage would be 40 feet in width, five feet beyond that which is allowed for an oversized garage, necessitating application of a variance; and, ; � . . : ,.G.=.� �_ . . . _ C._ y . . , . _ . _' �� ' — ". . �_�.3c3Y`�� ..w. 1 .°�- �� - � . L"� ��u:�::____. .._"„' _ _ ,." ...._. __ . . _ . . . .. '"_' "'_ _ . -.- _,._ _ ' " ' "�_ , "__ ' _ . . . . .. � .. _ �� Resolution 741-03 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Proposed Site Plan d. Location Map e. Photographic documentation f. Staff Report WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the variance and conditional use permit requests on Wednesday, October 15, 2003. 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. Other than the width, the proposed oversized 1,110 square foot garage satisfies the dimensional 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 so as to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general; and, 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved and the size of the subject property which is able to accommodate such a structure; and, 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 makes the following findings of fact related to the variance request: 1. Relating to exceptional circumstances, the applicants have sufficient room for the expansion however are limited by the Code to adding only five feet because the existing garage is already 30 feet wide—the minimum needed for a new garage stall is ten feet. 2. The intent of the width limitation is to minimize the visual impact of a garage—in this case, the expanded garage would satisfy the spirit and intent of the requirement, thus the literal interpretation creates an unnecessary hardship. Resolution 741-03 Page 3 3. The special circumstances or conditions do not result form the applicants in that the Whitbecks are simply attempting to compensate for their home's lack of a basement by adding onto the garage. In addition, the Whitbecks drafted the garage expansion plans so as to preserve a mature Oak tree behind the garage. 4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicants any special privilege in that the variance would not be required were ifi not for the secondary addition which does not increase the garage width. The Whitbecks' situation is unique in this regard. 5. The requested five-foot variance is the minimum amount necessary to alleviate the Whitbecks' hardship. Economic conditions do not enter into the need for a variance in this case. 6. The variance requested would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the Code or to other properties in the vicinity. As stated above, the spirit and intent of the Code is preserved and the garage expansion should not impact adjoining property owners in any way. 7. Granting the variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, would not increase the congestion of the public streets, would not increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety and would not diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission unconditionally approves the requested variance for a 40-foot wide garage and recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the 1,110 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 garage expansion shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the existing garage. BE IT FURTHER 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 October, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson, Community Dev. Director (SEAL) __ . , : _:�� _ _ � �.�� r ._ _ � x � : ___ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ -__ _ _ _ _ ____��_ ___ �' , PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting . October 1, 2003 Mounds Vievv City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Miller at 7:00 p.m., October 1, 2003. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Johnson, Miller, Scotch, Hegland, and Song. embers Absent: Also Present: Index to Minutes Stevenson and Zwirn (excused) Community Development Director Ericson Planning Case MI03-003 Minor Subdivision Location: 8419/8409 Groveland Road Applicant: Tony and Cheryl Hoffinan Planning Case MI03-004 Minor Subdivision Location: 7886 Sunnyside Road Applicant: Wendy and Michael Pedginski Owner: Donald Forslund 3. Approve Minutes Page 2 �' a. September 3, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Scotch. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for September 3, 2003 as Presented. ..-�' --_- '---- - _- -=--- G�_:._ _:._: . _.. �- - -- F=•-- -- .-- - ._._� Y _T- _ i:. . . � � . ir `�--+- . � '� Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting October 1, 2003 Page 2 Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Review and Recommendation of a Minor Subdivision of Properties Located at 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. Cornmunity Development Director Ericson indicated the applicant has requested approval of a minor subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road. He then indicated that Staff had reviewed all the zoning code requirements and everything appears to be in order. Director Ericson indicated that the shed is located where the lot line is proposed to be so it will need to be removed. He also indicated that the garage would Ue located on the newly created lot and the City's Code does not allow a garage without a house so that would need to be removed, demolished or the City would need to malce a special accommodation for a limited amount of time to allow for the construction of a house to go with the garage. Director Ericson indicated that minor subdivisions do not require a public hearing but Staff did notify those property owners adjacent to the subject property. He then indicated that easements for drainage and utility would need to be dedicated to the City and added to the survey. Director Ericson indicated that tliere is a healthy tree cover and this is a beautiful lot but it appears there is room within the interior of the lot to construct a home without disturbing too many trees. Director Ericson indicated that all of tlie subdivision requirements have been met and Staff recommends approval with stipulations. He then reviewed the stipulations attached to the recommendation of approval. Acting Chair Miller aslced what the property owner intended to do with the shed. Director Ericson indicated that it was his understanding that the shed would be removed. Acting Chair Miller asked that removal of the shed be added to the Resolution. Mr. Hoffinan of 8409 Groveland Road indicated he would like to keep the garage where it is but he does not plan on building on the lot for a long time. He then said that he has been looking into moving the garage and can do so. Mounds View Planning Commission October 1, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 3 The Commission indicated that the garage would need to be moved or demolished if the property owner is not going to build in the immediate future. Mr. Hoffinan agreed to malce arrangements to move the garage. The Commission agreed to grant the property owner one year to move the garage and aslced that the shed and garage removal be added to the Resolution. Mr. Hoffinan indicated he had considered tearing down the home and building a new one in its place and aslced whether the City has any options for helping with the demolition. Mr. Ericson indicated the City has assisted property owners witli demolition assistance through the housing replacement program. He then said there are two options one is the City purchasing the property demolishing the home and reselling the property to a developer. The second is to offer demolition assistance to the existing homeowner. He then indicated he would meet with the property owner to discuss the requirements of the program. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Hegland. To Approve Resolution 739-03, a Resolution Recominending Approval of a Minor Subdivision of 8409 and 8419 Groveland Road Requested by Tony and Cheryl Hoffman as Amended. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motion carried. Director Ericson indicated this matter would be on Council's agenda for October 13, 2003. 6. Review and Recommendation of a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road Community Development Director Ericson indicated the applicants have requested a minor subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road. He then indicated that Staff has reviewed all the requirements of the Code and this requests meets the requirements. Director Ericson indicated that Staff notified properties adjacent to 7886 Sunnyside indicating a subdivision was pending and did not receive any phone calls and have heard of no issues with the request. Director Ericson indicated that the lot has very nice mature trees and aslced that the applicants take whatever caution is necessary to preserve as many of those mature trees as possible. He then indicated that Staff recommends approval and reviewed the stipulations attached to the Resolution recommending approval. Director Ericson indicated that there would need to be drainage and utility easements granted to the City and added to the survey. Acting Chair Miller aslced when the applicants plan to build on the lot. i � �� Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting �_ � ^ � The Pedginskis indicated they would build on the lot in the spring. October 1, 2003 Page 4 Acting Chair Miller asked them to save as many of the big trees as possible. The Pedginskis indicated that they would. MOTION/SECOND: HeglandlScotch. To Approve Resolution 740-03, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Minor Subdivision of 7886 Sunnyside Road. Commissioner Song aslced what the minimum size of the lot in that area is. Director Ericson indicated the minimum lot size is 11,000 square feet on an interior lot and 12,500 for a corner lot. Ayes — 5 Nays — 0 Motioi� carried. Director Ericson indicated this matter would be on the agenda for October 13, 2003. 7. 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: October 15, 2003 Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Acting Chair Miller adjourned the meeting at 7:25 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, � ; :,�,,;,:,> Jirn Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier TimeSavef- Off Site Sec��etaj�ial, hzc. -;i;° �i'•r �:µ :�::;�.� ;_ _ _ -r , - . � _ : .- . : , � -: ____r. � � _ __ �.._ : . <�_ _-____ �_, _ __ __ _ _ _ _ :_ _ . _ _ �_z � : �. _ � • � . 1. 2. 3. 4. MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMIVIISSION November 5, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Call to Order Roll Call Approve Minutes: October 1, 2003 Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case MA03-001 Public Hearing and Discussion to Review the Proposed Longview estates Preliminary Plat Applicants: Eichi, I�lc., Represented by Martin Harstad 6. Planning Case VR03-010 Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 742-03 Regarding a Variance for Reduced Front and Rear Yard Setbacics Associated with a Retail Commercial Development at 2800 County Highway 10 Applicant: Velmeir Companies, Inc. 7 : 1 2. APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. Next Planning Commission Meeting: November 5, 2003 Adjoununent to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION Review Minutes: October 15, 2003 Staff Reports: 3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports \\Trout\CommDev�I'lanningCommission�PC Agendas�2003\10-01-03 PC Agenda.doc z � � - Item No: 5 Meeting Date: November 5, 2003 Type of Business: Discussion City of Mounds View Staff Re To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing And Review Of A Proposed Major Subdivision Of Land Known As Longview Estates, North Of Woodcrest Park, East Of Silver Lake Road, West Of Longview Drive And South Of County Road H2 Introduction: Eichi, Inc., represented by Martin Harstad, has submitted an application for a major subdivision of the land between Silver Lake Road and Longview Drive, north of Woodcrest Park and south of County Road H2. The legal description of the property to be subdivided is Lot 4, Block 9, MuellerAddition. The proposed subdivision would create 15 lots from the wooded 7.14-acre parcel, of which half is delineated wetland. Eight lots would take access from Longview Drive and seven lots would access Silver Lake Road. All of the proposed lots satisfy the City's expanded subdivision requirements within a wetland zoning district. In addition to Rice Creek Watershed District approval, the proposed subdivision will necessitate a wetland alteration permit approval by the City Council. Previous Submittal: The City processed a request for a major subdivision of this land in 2001, ultimately denying a variance and the subdivision as not conforming to the City's subdivision standards. The original submission contemplated an eleven-lot development with each lot fronting Longview Drive. No lots were platted fronting Silver Lake Road. The issue with the original plat was that in a wetland district, there are minimum lot widths that exceed the standard widths, such that instead of eleven possible lots, only eight were allowable. The applicant applied for a variance which was denied due to lack of perceived hardship. Finally, the plat was revised to show 26 lots, well in excess of what is allowed, and the plat was denied. Discussion: Zonin : The area known as Longview Estates is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the existing zoning of the property. All the lots shown on the preliminary plat satisfy the minimum requirements of 100-foot lot width and 20,000 square foot lot area. Of the 15 proposed lots, nine would require filling of wetlands to create a building pad. On lots where no wetland fill is necessary, most of the land available beyond the building pad is used for wetland mitigation purposes. No proposed home would have any significant backyard area except Lots 1 and 2, which would have 30 feet of filled wetland backyard. Many of the homes would be 15 feet or less from the delineated wetlands or mitigated wetlands. , . _.- .. ,-; . . _ ��.�_ _ _ . . �___.� i- ._.�,�-��-.i�-s�___ir--.. .. .sP-_ _. :'�." __ -. L, .. .. �; . ... :: ' _..—_, Ic__..� "" ""__ _"_ Longview Estates PC Report November 5, 2003 Page 2 Wetlands: The most significant issue regarding this proposal is the presence of the wetlands and the proposed alteration to them, the potential impacts to the water table, the natural drainage flow in the area, and the suitability of the proposed lots for construction. The City has regulations regarding construction within 100 feet of a wetland as well as within the delineated boundaries of a wetland. Rice Creek Watershed District also has to approve any alteration to a wetland. The preliminary plat indicates that Emmons and Oliver Resources (EOR) delineated the wetlands on the site in July of 2000. The delineation may need to be field verified by Rice Creek staff to ensure it remains valid. The Planning Commission however needs to review the proposed plat on the basis of whether or not it satisfies the subdivision and zoning requirements—the City Council will review and consider the wetlands issues. Flood Storaqe Capacity: One of the issues raised in 2001 concerned the existing flood storage capacity of the site and the impact of development. Section 1010.08 of the City Code requires that there be no net loss of flood storage capacity in addition to other flood storage issues. This and other wetland and flood storage issues will need to be fully satisfied via the wetland alteration permit approval process through the City Council. Soils Corrections: It is anticipated that there would need to be some moderate to extensive soils corrections to remove the loamy, organic soils, which are not suitable for building construction. Soil borings and engineering reports would be necessary to verify building suitability. The Local Water Management Plan (LWMP) indicates that the minimum building elevation for any structure in this area is 891.9. The lowest elevation proposed is 894.0, which would comply with the LWMP. Utilities: Water and sanitary sewer lines are present in the Longview Drive right of way with stubs in place for ten lots. While water and sewer mains are present on the far side of Silver Lake Road, there are no service stubs as there are on the Longview Drive side of the development. Fire hydrants may be required on the Silver Lake Road side of the plat. The proposed lots would be served by undergrounded electric and cable, as required by the City's subdivision regulations. Traffic: Traffic will increase on both Longview Drive and Silver Lake Road as a result of this plat, although not to any great extent. While there would be no anticipated issues with the additional traffic volume on Longview Drive, there would be an issue with the accesses onto Silver Lake Road, a county road with a higher volume of traffic traveling at a higher rate of speed. The County does not favor granting seven driveways permits on Silver Lake Road however they cannot deny them either. If all of the driveways were designed to allow for a "T" or turn around on each lot so that vehicles could enter Silver Lake Road in a forward motion, that would be preferable from a traffic management and safety perspective. Traffic engineers generally assign ten average vehicle trips per day to single family dwellings. That would mean that the homes fronting Longview would generate an average of 80 vehicle trips per day, with concentrations of traffic early in the morning and late in the afternoon. Park Dedication Fees: Park dedic�tion fees would be applicable for this development, in an amount equivalent to ten percent of the market value of the land being developed. Prior to Council consideration, an appraisal should be conducted to determine the market value. _ __ ._ _ - _ Longview Estates PC Report November 5, 2003 Page 3 Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the Longview Estates parcel as single family detached. This designation is consistent with the proposed subdivision. One of the stated goals under the land use component of the Comprehensive Plan is to "Ensure that community development is compatible with features of the natural environment and is accommodated without destroying desirable environmental features and natural amenities." The challenge of the proposed subdivision is to accomplish the development with as little impact and alteration as possible. Public Comment: The applicant held a neighborhood meeting for the original submission of the Longview Estates Plat. There were many in attendance and much concern was voiced regarding the drainage, loss of trees and suitability of the area for construction. A written summary of this meeting is attached as Exhibit E. Other Reviews Pendinq: Staff has delivered copies of the preliminary plat to the City's public works director (Greg Lee), to the City's engineer (Short Elliot Hendrickson), to Ramsey County (Dan Soler & Ken Haider) and to the Rice Creek Watershed District. The applicant will need to apply for a separate RCWD stormwater permit for this development and any City approvals would need to be contingent upon RCWD permit issuance. Recommendation: Hold the public hearing and discuss the proposed subdivision. While no official action will take place at this meeting, direction should be given to staff if additional information is required for subsequent meetings and action. Staff would suggest that the Commission consider the subdivision based on whether or not it satisfies the City's zoning, subdivision and comprehensive plan standards and requirements. Issues concerning the wetlands will need to be considered by the City Council and the Rice Creek Watershed District. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Application 2. Zoning Map w/ Subdivision Overlay (Exhibit A) 3. Location Map (Exhibit B) 4. FIRM Flood Zone Map (Exhibit C) 5. City Flood Zone Map (Exhibit D) 6. Neighborhood Meeting Summary (Exhibit E) 7. Photographic Documentation (Exhibit F) �:� � ,.: _ _ ---- --- -_= �" .-__"._ _'-_ "-....�.._'._:_.� �.,.�___� '" z......' '"_�____"_' � . � 3-- --�� -�-��'� M:�'=�� ;a�°�� ;�� it1�,��J`�[U'J�;i -� �•,, ��IS��R ~°�rNjs , P�r�neCS�`�Cy COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNiNG APPLICAiiOIV 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (763)717-4020 Fax(651)765a1660 Please Type or Print Information - Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information Martin Ne Harstad, President Name af Applicant Eichi, Inc. Telephone 651-636-9991 Address 2195 Silver Lake Rd, Fax 651-636-3422 � New Brighton, NII�i 55112 E-mail: mhaz�stad@comcast . net Interest in Property (checl< appropriate box) ? Owner of Property ? Contract for Deed Owner ? Lessee, Operator, Manager ? Agreement to Purchase ? Other (explain) son of owner AppliGants must provide evidence ofinterest in property at the time ofapplication, and if you are not the owner of rhe property, you must either provide a/etter of permission from Che owner giving consent to the filing of this application or rhe property owner must siqn this applicakion for if to be accepted. Properly Description/Proposal Address or General Location Legal Description Property Identification # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning Type of Application � ? ? ? � ? ? ? ? ? 7 � ? � 7e14 AC. between Silver Lake & Longview Lot 4, Block 1, Mueller Addition 07302342006Fi 7.14 ACo R-1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezoning • Major Subdivision Minar Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) PUD Amendment Conditional/Interim Use Permit Variance Text Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code Develop Review/Site Plan Wetland Alteration Permit Wetland Buffer Permit OCher ' $250 $500 $500 $250 $750 $350 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $325 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $325 $150 , $1Z5 $125/acre; min $125 max $750 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $200 R-1, R-2 $25; all others $100 Mounds View Planning Application Present Use of Property Property Classification ? Abstract ? Torrens Descriptian af Proposal (attach additiona supporting documentation if necessary) Subdivide 7.14 acres into 15 sinqle family lots Page 2 Please Note: Applicants are responsible for all costs incurred ass�ciated with the filing, review and processing of this application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon recelpt of statement from the Ciry of Mounds View. Fees may include but are nat limited to costs for consultants retained by the City, consultant planning services, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposit may aiso be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and stafF time spent in the review, research or preparation of materials associated with this application, The applicant shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs in excess of the initial deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shail be refunded to the applicant within 30 days after consideration of the application is completed. Payment of park dedication fees is required with subdivision applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I have read all of the inFormatinn listed in the Planning Application and fully understand that T am responsible for all c.osts�ir uF d by the City related to the processing of this application. ?lt_ �'- � �'/I,E.S %�3/3 Applicant Date BY MY (OUR) SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION, I HE�tEBY DECLARE THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. Name of Applicant (typed/pri Signature of Applicant Eichi, Inc,, Martin N. Harstad, President i�<`"S. Name of Property Owner (ryped/printed) Keitlz T. Harstad Signature of Properly Owner �� l G��,�---`�"i __ Address of Owner 2195 Silver Lake Rd. , New Brighton, MIV 55112 Phone Number of Owner 651-636-9991 E-mail � **************************************************************************************** FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submittal _ 60-day Limit Planning Case No(s) Appiicat(on: Park Dedication: Deposits: Qther: Total: Fees Paid: Date of Acceptance; 120-day limft: Assigned to: Account # Check # Receipt # i oioz �, 1;_3-� ..::��'c.-�._ - `-_ k�'� ..�� r1-: _— i'- � _�:._..�f-�.i'' . � . . .1. _ h_�=`�__ . ��=—.�-c=_e M_-'—'-� --_- -�-'-'.--'�.. Harstad Companies Construction - Real Estate - Development 2195 Silver Lalce Road - New Brighton, Mimlesota 55112 Office (651) 636-9991 - Fax (651) 636-3422 September 23, 2003 City of Mounds View Community Development Dept. 2401 Gounty Road 10 Mounds View, MN 5S1 12 To Whom It May Concern: I, Keith T. Harstad, owner of the 7.14 acres of land located between Silver Lake Road and Longview in the city of Mounds View, hereby grant Eichi, Inc. permission to subdivide said property into fifteen single family lots. � � �� A _ _ . _ _- ___- _ _ _. _ ___ _ _ �__ _ _ _____ ______ J � EXHIBIT A. Zoning Map L O/VGVIEIiI/ ESTA TES Proposed Subdivision ?? Not to scale Proposed �-N�N~ Property Lines , �� . j �� '��r,.� � '� �'`�=� :; _.� ,� ; :.� � ��..�� , _. .;; � � ��r ,. - {,-� �.�'� tt�., � 1 �.�,� K : � � ��' r,�, �� '�. . ' ' ' ' � ' � �. • r``,� P'•- �.r _ � :� � t �� a�� `�- . -_._ _. ,. � � �� ; ��i;; � � � �`�� c � �n'' .«c �' ' � � �• � �� :�"r. �"-� j � �f' i � . � `� � �:: , ,��.,,� . ��a �� r � �-� � _. ... ._ � , :q � � -'r..- . ..._'- `. +� f'. � � i �� i . � ''� 15 .� �] ,� ; ► ' 8 t � 1 �` � � ;,��:��. R� r ,�� ' — . . ,f y �. ;� - ��.q:`' 7 ..' � � � ��.� ��t "��: �� :I � _ fr`�. F � � 6 =�C �� ;�� G 13 - � ��1 �x� �� ''�� `i�� . �., , �; ,, ` 12 ' ��,�� '�� ; . . � �. � t �� 4`� 5�^r"��T . ... f,�. �� : 11 � �, ; , . . � : �,�:� 1� `* � '. ' 3 �'�t��"��1��: � � w.��. ��` 1 p -=- r � �'� k.`��. � � � 1► � � �� i 2 ! �. . . `` � � G �� 3 � ��-:� � ' �: 'i � . . . ,�,�"� � �? � ': 9 ; � � :F � � � �� , � ��►� ;` � � ti ('. � °�7 ��'•�J j,� �� Ar�� .� � �, � 1 �•� y � ��. �� ¢ ��,� �� ! � I � . • ��r #�� •� _ �;'�� _. � �:i � � �' �, �u�r; � V 1 � � � , �;: �� ; :; r , �� ,, ; �� t.� �� ' - � � �` ; �,::, ,� �� !�) �. f�. � r �� S { ^ � ��, � +J �• �y �;�. I� r.�, . �?k� � •..�� ' _ _ , . .. % } i {= i ,.. L . . . . ��.�i b �� '�'��'��.: .r I4, � 'r-°-�,} ' � 'Mt � � �4� � ;;'' �� f;,, � � : �� i;; � 1 1;� � _ ,� �� ., . �, � �`� � j T ° i�' �� ' � i ? �``M-- ,� � . G ,_ _,,.. . � _., _ . . ., .:. _ .--.�... _-�-.----- - �� i� '�.i-•—� � � �'� �11� �� ►� �,.-,..,..� _: � - ,_ � _, , � . :.._ _ �: �_. _ .. : _, � � ,- . - -• --- `:u= --- --- EXHIBIT B �i�� of I�I vur�ds 1ii��nr - Locaii�rr� t�l ap � �� '� ■� ��M■M *� : ��"�� « �� s �� M�� M�� G■�i �MS�r�� i� �� ■� �� ■ �r r�� ■� r� �■� �� ■ �■'� �r� �� s � �� ■ �■■ � �� r r� �r � s�� r � �� r � �� r� r■■�r ■S'� �r��■■�� r�ii �� r� r�i� � Eichi, Inc. Propert� Involved: hXXX Longvievv Driv� Planning Case No. fVIP,03-[�01 - Y�CXI Longvie4v Drive 0 Properties Within 350' __ _____ _ -__ � -_ __ a _ � . .. _ _._ _ _, � .� - EXHIBIT D. City Flood Zone Map ._ __ _ --- — � _ _ _ - _._.--..___--� _ �..�--�-�-��" � � - � - -- �`�` .., � ioa s_�� i i-� r , c :b les.r� rel �s i? r° q Ic � E , � ' � � � �� ^ � of.�ti� � � "' o� � �--��, N S U � V (53 ' -" � ' _►� �.�:.. � I �- � ;,-., ��_ __�� 1 ��.. s._. ,�. , . ,. < '�� : �,'�� gb ,°�� OU'TLI N E C?F ` i2 I �� ,� yw � '— ' �� ' '° =� ' SUBDIVISIC�N O �; , �,� C �" ►t,� ,�. ; � , � "� , : � � o , , �,, $ � ��F�S�'�: � � c 3 � m .!.l.�.32.��_ 1-1-}4 1 T_... � � ' � ti�, r, f� ;��.,: �'��,;p 1ao... iAn � � � � :.? I � � ' �A ` q `�y,, ..f . ' ,:� �� ✓" � , i � �� QQ�+ �.� .� . tS�.i'�j,_ � ' +�i �'r � ;: U J V +: '§� m �, I � �� "j � i + � �' r � . R� -j -_ __ �C� 4 '' -I 1�..YS_� � + � � *' � � � � � '' �. ^ _ ��.1., �n I ? 'i-33. ;.. � � . """""4°'.,3.` � `' `' � � 8 � ir ' �7 I i - �;� ry' � � � u � � �2.� y �� ' ��=� WETLANDS I M -- ' 1 r 37 �� -�'` �' :�, ° ' • �,�...:- 0 : ,_ ;.: - � ; � - 1 _ � 113...i.i _ � �b. �� O � � � ` f 1 �r� I ' � � _i E1 � � � I � 1� ' ' 0 � , � � ��` \, ,� � q 4 ; 5 °: A 11 1 E L� � � � � 35 100-�Ot�T ; �.�< : � , , '� � ,� I , « WETLAND ;3A �� , �`$�� I � , BUFFER � ._ .� ��-i ]+� � � � R I'; � Y� r i'I �� II ,. • , _ - � �, '� _ ' � ��<<3� , . � : ;W _ �- _ ___ __ � �, � a�_4.� _ � ; �, � W— , � , � . � � 2 A � �' , , � c �• _.il- � + 1 IL �' 1---___.-� � �.j'!_IJ. � � ' � :i �1 Y � � I - _ •' - t� A � I I :.s! � �' A;, y! i L.G, I � � � • _ — _ J-- ._ �� 1�I „ J�. I _y1 4 1� I � ��J r.� � I g I i � � Rn ,� m '�,+:�i—... � - � I �ro � � +^ `� ' ' ` _� ��lt..� ,�g I � w� �:, . ; � ;, o . .�_,_' r _ __. . _ • _ �, , _ , � � i .� � �'.i 9S 4d _ - _ __ � � � , L Es V ML' -,Y � c � � J;D�� I n 9�A_ n•-139..�.'L , �; � �p _ � � �, .�=.i- i T�* ;y �y ( ,�_��+1 lhar._ i t�.if �; �� 'I -�}}- i7t ( �`-- , �� . �� J r ` i�•+!.-��T-� f-} tj_ .� � i . �� I _. _.i �a�3.... � :l' r � � � ��0�� L } �� 'r t.: �� `" 7 I 7 I _ i , i. ��y.►s r r�� +�.�_��a��! �l ! � . �a�.� . �'_�_'. e_ ;_... l_. __-.�_b:-��:::.�1 I,_1.�- . r.'=°� �..... 6a=_`?. � _'.- - - ' . . � -.:.""' '�-��"� -��--� �-� _ '�' _ �.L ."" EXHIBIT C. Flood Zone Map (FIRM) _, Y �� .� � � � - n� - r`_�. I: r�� i h� .. f7S � � �a� � , +� ': i o�U �,,� � � , `� � +� � ` � , � -� � �-,� �.��, F :, � . _,__J � AY_�=� (� � z 4� ,,.`�'.,.�, r r - � � � d � t� o a r Z � `' < � tT1 � j O � � r I `� = O O � �� p 4 ( .: : �c-7c-wc-. r--�.�—.rrt .. ...— :t�i� R�, T � SPRiNG � G m � r aT ^ m Area tn b� Subdivided � O n D„_ _._ _ _ I� � -- _-��-- ... z � � � _ ht �T I�o � � �� ' � � �''; � = Q � � � >- � � ,,;�: {:. ; �j .. �'<; ; -'�:` __ r '. � i _ ,J � �� 1 � a�� , ' � "� . � �.,' ' � � ;_; h{ Y;I -°,',S�' 6tr`v, _ 1 — U e � G � r � � m � I � __._.� —i I I � I '_ _.._ _� - A/ti I� r1 /"1 r1 • T r �: - - : __ _ __ � � `. � > ,` _ ___ � _ _ _ __ .� . __ - , >:a.::: �.� _ �. � _. _ � � � � � '� EXHIBIT F Photographic Documentation Looking southeast from Silver Lake Road toward Longview Estates Parcel ''j'+f�� ' ._. �... " _"` — 4 � �,i � � . .. - . i `r y� ` t . . - � ,.� .. f� ��.' 1 � '' S�, 4 ,1�� C } .i �� '� � t �;�,� _�� ; Looking northeast �! : ,;�:;~ f i from Silver Lake � ;��-� ;�� .� � �' t�r:'�t, �!` ,;��:%;� � Road to Longview _; � �� .;� , �; � �� Estates parcel � „�l� � . �\ -e�: � � _ rM,`a� r � ��?• •''� ��.. ��M;'�.�' � ' . � � �I � / .� ��. Looking northwest from Longview Drive to Longview Estates parcel � . : �A�:'� ! i; � _ _ _ _ _ : � _ . - � _� 3 _ . : � _ _ EXHIBIT E. Summary of Longview Estates Neighborhood Meeting 7:00 pm, May 22, 2001 , Mounds View Community Center On May 22, 2001 at the Mounds View Community Center, Marty Harstad held an infornial neighborhood meeting in an effort to raise neighborhood awareness and address questions pertaining to his proposed major subdivision, Longview Estates. Invitations were sent to property owners living within 350 feet of the land north of Woodcrest Park, east of Silver Lake Road, west of Longview Drive and south of the commercial business at the corner of County Road H2 and Silver Lake Road. It is estimated that about thirty residents were in attendance. Brian Kaden from the Planning Commission attended, as did the Mayor and myself. Mr. Harstad thanked everyone for coming and explained the purpose of tl�e meeting, which was to provide an opportunity for the neighbors to review the proposed subdivision and aslc questions and raise issues pertaining to the development of the eleven single-family home sites fronting Longview Drive. He briefly reviewed the site, the location of the delineated wetland, the areas of wooded uplands, the existing trees and the various elevations on the site. He pointed out where the lots would be located and how much fill of the wetlands would be required, how much replacement mitigation and the locations of the mitigated areas, and the area that would be designated an upland buffer, thereby reducing the overall mitigation that would be required by Rice Creek Watershed District, the local governmental unit having jurisdiction over the wetland. After his explanatory narrative, Mr. Harstad asked for any questions, of which there were many. It seemed that a common concern raised by the residents was the water table, the fact that all of the parcel appears "wet" and how the potential development would impact the neighborhood from a flooding and water flow perspective. The loss of trees between the wetland and Longview Drive, which currently act as both a noise and visual buffer between the existing residents and the traffic on Silver Lake Road, was also a major concern. Mr. Harstad indicated that most, if not all of the trees within 90 feet of Longview Drive would be reinoved due to the amount of fill that would be brought onto the site. He did assure the residents that if it were possible, any tree that could be saved ivould be saved, as trees add value to a lot. I was asked by some of the residents what "controls" the City had over the wetlands and the buffer area. I explained that wetlands are protected and that there are very stringent rules and regulations—local, state and federal—that restrict what can be done within a designated or delineated wetland. I explained that in this situation, Rice Creek Watershed District has local jurisdictional control over the wetland but that the City has an ordinance which protects a 100-foot buffer around any wetland. The ordinance provides the City control over what is developed adjacent to a wetland such that it can make certain requirements or conditions upon a development to further protect the integrity of the wetland and to ensure that its hydrological function is not compromised in any way. While the ordinance does not necessarily p��olzibit development within the buffer, it does impose many additional requirements that need to be satisfied. Mr. Harstad responded to what he envisioned being built on the proposed lots by suggesting it would not be unreasonable to expect a minimum of $250,000-valued homes with some being significantly higher. As an aside, he indicated that he would not be involved in the development of the homes, as his specialty was twinhomes and townhomes. The lots would be sold to developers one-by-one or all . . ,, .. . ._ : : . _ , . , , � . ^:,..�� —�--_.� .�, _ _ _ � �; : . � �; _ , _ ^ . � .�, . L ... .� ,__ ..� �.�� Longview Estates Neighborhood Meeting May 22, 2001 Page 2 together, depending upon the offers received. Many of the residents commented that higher valued homes would be out-of-place in the neighborhood. The Mayor asked Mr. Harstad to respond to that that issue as to how he planned to address neighborhood "continuity." While not necessarily prepared to discuss the continuity or potential discontinuity of the project, Mr. Harstad explained that these kinds of developments, barring the imposition of restrictive covenants, were driven by the free marlcet. If people want to build more expensive homes, they will. I also explained that there is often a cycle by which over time, some neighborhoods evolve from predominately smaller homes to larger ones that more efficiently utilize the larger lots. A new development such as this may generate renewed interest in expanding upon or otherwise making improvements to the existing homes, which is a benefit to everyone in the area. One resident asked about the property tax consequence of living next to more expensive housing. A few residents wondered about the role the City had in protecting the interests of the new homeowners and the existing residents. I explained that our building official would be onsite to perform all necessary and required inspections and would ensure that the structures were being built in complete conformance to all applicable City and state building codes. Granted, the inspector cannot be on-site eight hours a day to ensure that no corners are cut, however, as Mr. Harstad interjected, we live in an increasingly litigious society and if tl�e new house were deficient in any way, the builder and contractor would be held liable. It would not be in anyone's best interest to put forth a substandard product. One resident felt that there wouldn't be a problem making sure all the codes were adhered to as they had just done an addition and the City inspector was always there checking on the work and performing inspections. Other questions were raised about the "buildability" of this lot and the fact that many years ago some residents were told the lot was unbuildable. Someone aslced about when the property was rezoned to allow construction of any lcind, as it had been zoned "wetland" at one time which prohibited any construction whatsoever. I explained that to my recollection, the lot was never "prohibitively zoned" and that it was originally zoned single family residential based on a 1961 zoning map. A few long-term residents recalled a point when the strip fronting Silver Lake Road was zoned Commercial while the interior part of the lot fronting Longview had been zoned Multi- family. Mr. Harstad confirmed this recollection. It was not known however when the land was rezoned back to single-family residential. As for the suitability of the soils and "buildability" of the parcel, I explained that many lots in Mounds View had at one time been considered unbuildable, but due to market conditions and metro-area land shortages, these lots thought unsuitable for development are now being developed. The following list recaps soine of the issues raised by the residents, in no particular order: ?? Tree loss within 90 feet of Longview Drive ?? Water table & flooding, wetland buffer ?? Existence of a creelc? ?? Potential high-valued homes out of place with existing homes ?? Intrusive truck and construction activity ?? Restrictive covenants? ?? Assurances and Controls, adherence to City and state building codes ?? Examples of flooded basements, sinlcing driveway Longview Estates Neighborhood Meeting May 22, 2001 Page 3 ?? Soil borings ?? Protection and preservation of wildlife? After responding to all of the questions and allowing for general discussion regarding the proposal, Mr. Harstad concluded the meeting and encouraged anyone who had additional questions to contact him personally either at home or at his office. I infornled the residents that a public hearing would be held on June 6 by the Planning Commission and that a notice would be sent to all residents within 350 feet.of the project area as well as to any resident who had attended the neighborhood meeting. t;:;: ::�) Item No: 6 Meeting Date: November 5, 2003 Type of Business: PH & Discussion City of Mounds l/iew Staff R� To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Request for a Variance to Allow Parking Area Encroachment into the Front and Rear Setbacks at 2800 County Road 10 (aka the Amoco Site.) Introduction: Velmeir Companies, a Michigan development group, has submitted a variance request for a redevelopment of the Amoco site at the southwest corner of Silver Lake Road and County Road 10. As the Commission is aware, the Amoco closed in 1999 and the building has remained vacant since then. Velmeir is proposing a 13,000 square foot retail operation with a attached tenant space of 2,500 square feet. Altogether, the building footprint would be approximately 15,500 square feet. To facilitate the development, the applicant is requesting a variance to encroach into the front setbacks of both Silver Lake Road and County Road 10 and the rear setback adjacent to the Silverwood apartment complex. The proposed front setback is five feet and the proposed rear setback is two feet. Discussion: Setback requirements are addressed in Section 1104.01, Subd 4 of the Zoning Code. Commercially zoned properties are required to maintain a thirty-foot front setback for BOTH parking and principal building. Commercial side and rear parking and driveway setbacks are five feet. Commercial Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) are the exception to the thirty-foot setback requirement in that setbacks, as with other zoning specifications, may be negotiated to standards not contemplated by the zoning code in an effort to encourage coordinated development and redevelopment and higher standards of building and site design. This redevelopment site consists of 3.38 acres, 1.62 acres shy of the 5.0-acre minimum requirement for a commercial PUD. Staff has worked with the Velmeir group and predecessor developers for years in an effort to bring about a coordinated redevelopment of the site. While a prime location at the corner of the City's two busiest roadways, the site poses many challenges from complicated ownership issues, irregular lot lines, minimal lot depth and potential environmental issues resulting from the site's use as a fuel station. The real estate acquisition cost, demolition and environmental assessments together make any redevelopment here an expensive proposition which is a factor in the applicant's desire to maximize the developable area. A further issue concerning this site is the challenge of incorporating adjacent land into the development. The applicants will be capturing a slice of land from the Silverwood Apartment complex just south of the Amoco site and would be acquiring part of the vacant land behind the recently vacated Glacier Machinery Sales building, resulting in three different property owners coming together in support of this project, one of whom is a multi-national petroleum corporation headquartered in London. ___ �,.. _ _. _: >. � �� . � �. � � � ` � --'- - ._�_:: ..__�� - . `_ - a_�x.:..� .-:_ . :. ._ --� -• k' ., _ . .. - - i= Velmeir Variance November 5, 2003 Page 2 The attached site plan indicates a total of 95 parking stalls for the proposed pharmacy/retail buildings with an additional 10 stalls indicated as proof of parking. Interior floor plans have not yet been submitted so staff is unable to accurately determine how many parking stalls will be required with this development—that would occur at the development review stage of the planning process. While other building configurations are possible, (multiple scenarios have been contemplated by the developer and by staff) without the variance, 39 parking stalls would be forfeited. The applicant has submitted a statement in response to the criteria the Planning Commission will be reviewing for the variance request. This statement is attached for the Commission's review and consideration. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in Mounds View) 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 criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumsfances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. The property is primarily zoned B-3 and is proposed to be improved with a 15,500 square foot, two-tenant retail development. The lots are irregularly shaped and additional irregularly shaped land will be added to the site to help meet parking and ponding needs for the redevelopment of the former Amoco gas station. These can be considered exceptional circumstances. b. The literal interprefation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would create a hardship for the applicant in that the applicant is facing unique redevelopment challenges not normally associated with raw land development. Because the site is less than the minimum allowed for a PUD, the developer does not have the same opportunities and allowances granted to other PUD-based developments. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actians of the applicant. The special conditions do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant is attempting to undertake a multi-lot land consolidation with local and national property owners, taking into consideration the individual lot limitations, improvements and irregularities. _ ___ _____ Velmeir Variance November 5, 2003 Page 3 d. Thatgranting the variance requested would not conferon the applicant anyspecial privilege that is denied by fhis Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. As the applicant states in the attached letter, there are other similarly zoned properties in the community with the same reduced front setback. Granting the variance would not appear to be a special privilege. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The five-foot front setback results in a 25-foot variance from what is required by the Zoning Code. While 25 feet represents a large variance in terms of percentage, it is the minimum necessary to allow for two rows of parking with a 24-foot drive aisle. The two-foot rear setback is necessary to allow adequate room for vehicular movements. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to ofher property in the same zone. One of the prevailing goals of the zoning code is to promote positive development and redevelopmenfi within the community. Granting a variance to allow for the utilization of the front and rear setback would open the door to a much-needed redevelopment at this important corner in the City's commercial corridor, eliminating a blighted, vacant building and significantly improving the corner's appearance. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed variance would not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects. Summary: All of the criteria, as indicated above, need to be satisfied to justify the granting the variance. Staff believes that all of the criteria can be supported and that the proposed variance would allow for a beneficial and much needed redevelopment at this prominent corner. The Planning Commission needs to review the criteria and determine whether the variance should be supported. i_ � - , _. - _ _ � . - `' �- =--' _ -- -- ' '_ ' --- �---- =-:.� - -� ' r- -� -' --:: _ _ r�� --- - �.._ . _ z. k _ . . _. ..� _ _ ,_ _ ..�.�_ Velmeir Variance November 5, 2003 Page 4 Recommendation: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the developer, property owners and affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the requested variance with stipulation requiring successful development review, rezoning, and major subdivision approvals. Resolution 742-03 is attached for this option. 2. Deny the requested variance. If the Commission chooses this action, staff will need to be directed to draft a resolution denying the requested variance with supporting findings of fact. 3. Table the request pending receipt of additional information. �Ct,�-Q� C-2c-C-��n. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Location Map 4. Site Plan 5. Applicant's Statement 6. Photographic Documentation 7. Resolution 742-03 `i _ �_ . • _ � . .: � �� _ ___ . � � ':'G1i'�' �:�f' �. ;,::�;1.��`:� E �}�� ;, .� P � G .l�i; •,� !1:�:,,,,:., S �e'��ss • P,�E�,�ri'�,Q COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING APPLICATION 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 (763) 717-4020 Fax (651) 765-1660 Please Type or Print Information - Complete Both Sides of This Form Applicant Information NameofApplicant l�almair f�nn�nies, � I f. Telephone_952-883-3240 Address 7900 Internaltion Dr.� S,i e 200 Fax 952-833-3242 Bloominqton, MN 55425 E-mail: smanqold@velmeir.com Interest in Property (checi< appropriate box) Owner of Properly Lessee, Operator, Manager Qther (explain) Contract for Deed Owner x Agreement to PurChase Applicants must provide evidence ofinterest in property at the time ofapplrcation, and if you are not the owner of the property, you must eirher provide a let�ter of permission from the owner giving consent to the filing of this application or the property owner must sign this application for it to be accepted. Property Description/Proposal Address or General Location Legal Description Property Identificati�n # (PIN #) # of Acres Current Zoning Type of Application ? � ? ? � � ? ? � � ? ? ? ? Highwav 10 & Silver Lake Road __ See attachment 3.65 B-3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Rezoning Major Subdivision Minor Subdivision Planned Unit Develnpment (PUD) PUD Amendment Conditional/Interim Use Permit X Variance Text Amendment, Zoning Code Text Amendment, Other City Code X Develop Review/Site Plan Wetland Alteration Permit Wetland Buffer Permit Other . �250 $500 $500 $250 $750 $350 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $325 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $325 $150 $125 $125/acre; min $125 max $750 R-1, R-2 $150; all others $200 R-1, R-2 $25; all others $100 _=_=- _ , ,_, � _. � ' � .<_ ,_ .—_� _ �_ � � . = I� - --- _ _v _ _ _ __ - _. _ _ __ . . __ l _...- .-. .. . . a 4 �_ _ ' ' "_ "___�: _ '" _-' . � _ � '-.: . __ . _ .� -' �- - .m:. � � Mounds View Planning Application Page 2 Present Use of Property ._ Amoco Stati on - Not O�erati ng Property Classifieation ? X Abstract ? Torrens Description of Proposal (attach additional supporting documentation if necessary) _ _ Developer proposes to redevelop the site in order to construct a retail store for use as a CVS/pharmacv. � See Attachment for further information re4ardin� the application. Please Note: Applicants are responsible for all costs incurred assodated with the filing, review and processing ofthis application. Such fees are to be paid in escrow up front or upon receipt of statement from the City of Mounds View. Fees may include but are not limited to costs for consultants retained by the City, consultant planning services, attorney, and engineer fees. A deposlt may also be required to cover costs of public notices, materials and staff time spent in the review, research or preparadon of materials associated with this application. The appli�nt shall be responsible for all reasonable incurred costs In excess of the Initial deposit amount. Any portion of the deposit not spent or encumbered shall be refunded to the applicant within 30 days after consideration of the application is completed. Payment of park dedication fees is required with subdivision applications. I ACKNOWLEDGE 111A7 I have read all of the Information Ilsted in the Planning Application and ftilly understand that I am r sponslble for ail costs incurred by the City related to the processing of this appllcation. l n �„�'r.��n..� � o � � ( d �3 L Date UiL,Mv�2 C.�vnP/�,.,��z5� Lc� BY MY (OUR) SIGNATURE ON THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY DECLARE THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLED�{ THE INFOR A ON PROVIDED IS�RUE AND ACCURATE. / 1 n /l � �...,r— � �Z-' �-,� `C� Q' _vV�/�.nJ� C5, l_.l._L Name of Applicant Signature of Appiic Name of Property wn r(type�/printed) '"~ See Attachment Signature of Prop Owner To be provided Address of Owner � Phone Number of Owner *******************************�**********************�********************************* FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submittal Date of Acceptance: 60-day Limik 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) Assigned to: Fees Paid: Account # Check # Receipt # Application: Park Dedication: Deposits: Other: — - - 7otal; t oioz -_ _ � _ —.. � - : - ��.: �� , __�. . __ .__ _ _ _ __ __ _� _ _ _ ____ __ _ _ _ ___ ___ ______ ___ __ _ _ _ _ I � ' M�CI�Y • ALTON, P.L.L.P. ATrORNEYS ROBERT M. MSCLAY BRIAN D. ALTON* "Also Licensed in Wisconsin October 20, 2003 Gary Stevenson, Chair Pianning Commission City of Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112 Dear Mr. Stevenson: 951 GRAND AVENUE ST PAUL, MN 55105 FAX 651/290-Z502 e-mail: IawOmcclay-alton. com 651/Z90-0301 Oh behalf of Velmeir Campanies, we are pleased to file the enclosed Planning Application for a proposed CV5/pharmacy to be located at the intersection of Highway 10 and Silver Lake Road. The developer proposes to build ihe CVS/pharmacy store shown on the site plan. Construction of the store would begin upon approval and be completed in early 2004. The application which we are submitting is for site review and variances for parking and setback. The site plan copies and application fee of $775.00 have been forwarded to you under separate cover. Please do not hesitate to call if I can provide any further information in support of this application. . � �� ;, !cI ��v.•• . BDA/css Enclosures cc: Aaron Backman, City of Mounds View Velmeir Companies � >"► Applicant: Location: Veimeir Companies, LLC Highway 10 & Silver Lake Road Attachment to Planning Application The Applicant's request for a variance is based upon the following reasons: _ . i _v � � Exceqtional Circumstances. The irregular shape of the lot, ihe need to provide for sto�mwater runoff storage, and the severe problems related fo redeveloping a former gas station site are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances which do not generally appiy to other properties. Literal interpretation of the code would deprive the applicant of riqhts enioyed by other properties. The site plan, as proposed, provides enough parking for the proposed pharmacy and small additional retail. Typically a CVS/pharmacy store needs 70 parking spaces to serve its customers and employees. The additional retail would require 15 spaces. The development would not be possible without a variance. The s�tback variance is needed in order to fit the proposed 95 spaces on fhe property. Without a variance, it would not be possible to provide enough parking. Over one-third of the parking spaces would be eliminated without the setback variance. The special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the Applicant. The conditions are existing now and the Applicant is purchasing the property in its existing condition. The qrantinq of the variance will not confer anV special privilecte on the Applicant. There are several other B-3 zoned properties in the City with similar setbacks and number of parking spaces, The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. The building and parking area have been configured in order to request the least amount of variance possible. The site plan has been prepared to strike a balance between the need for a setback and parking space variances, and make the requests as minimal as possible for both. The variance would not be materiall detrimental to the purpose of the_ zoninc�code or to other propertv in the same zoninq district. The _variance will further the purpose of the zoninq code bV alleviatinq or preventincl conqestion. The variance will not have anv adverse impact on surroundinq property owners. The proposed variances will further the purpose of the zoning code by alleviating or preventing congestion. The variances will not have any adverse impact on surrounding property owners, The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent propertv or substantially increase the conqestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanqer thepublic safetv or substantiallv diminish or impair propertv values within the neiqhborhood. Redevelopment of this parcel for use as a retail pharmacy will have a positive impact on the neighborhood. The development will provide adequate parking and access and will not endanger public safety. I�_� �_ .- :, . _ _ ,r �____ . -.:_: _ Applicant: Velmeir companies, LLC Location: Highway 10 & Siiver Lake Road Attachment to Pianning Application Owner and Legal Description Amoco Oil company Lot 1 and 2, Block 1, Amoco Silver Addition Abstract and Torrens Certificate Number 343060 Luella A. Simon, Linda Miller, and Judy Wright Part of Lot 58, except the West 100 feet lying Northerly of the Southerly 514.63 feet thereof, Auditor's Subdivision Number 89. Torrens Certificate Number 283256 _ _ __ ,:,i __ _ _ _ _ _ _ •--- _ . —=-_-- �--- ------ ---_-�-==�� , �. _ . .. _ 1-� .. :�. ..�:: - � : : Zoning Map � �� . � ' � f � F � V � � �� `� : �� . � �� 1� � i71p �� i � �6 C} �� ?�;�� 4 � 7��r� i� F�� '�� P�� 1 ,� 73� � �V �� 7�.'_ �� 7 { 7i � � � � � �� i � � � � � � �i �� .�.J " + ��'i , � � � i e� �it� of M+�ur�d� 1�i�v�r - L��a�i�r� I�la� w� l�. ,`�_ff `�. � 1� �� r� �� Velmeir Development Property Involved: 2800 and 2806 Highvvay 1C Planning C�se No. DE03-004 and VR03-G010 - ?800 and ?$06 Highway �0 0 Properties Within 350' �:.;i- _ �-- � __ -�,.� i� � .�� . �,.. �. . _ . 4 _ __ : __ _�. ��.� -- _ �-� - $It@ P�all I \ v \.`\ \ � - o- �\ �� . �\�� \ i �s� �i �� \ ' � �� \ I \ �\' yi � • ��..\� �6cy � � �.� � �� soo �''yr � � ��ti� \ �\.� �A �� I �'�y'� � � I � F'�'T \ \ , �. �3`-°� s�C\ \` �. � � � � \ � � � �� cti% , ' � � ��. �9,Q O I � �, F I �b '• ,� .�. ,. � �� D i � I � {�., � � � \ � � d�. I `'4 ' - ` . � ,os � � � \ \ c r�� -(,��?��q( ' \ ; , \ .� \ �. 100�0 � S� � . \ � \ .� o �� S � \ \' �e�J � I �� \ � • � a O 4 �, 0.'% °�, ''�g s a`•° � p \ .� � � � (", `'�_�,�:,�,� � • p � �� ' i � � r1`' �.; �' �°.p `��s�, °''��/ 9 ,� I i5E0 I` \ i o� o � Q- �" 'c� irZ1Y LINE � V�^ I � NO� �� \� \/ q ,p� � � �.�, G' � � ` �1 q'C, � � �e, ��"" S� ,�, � � w o '� � ' �� y 9 �0 QO b� . �' N � v! y \ ^' ` V I � ` � /, � U - �C'O / -� �� `�.�4� � � ..... ....... ..... . . � .�a.oQU row � �y Cp • � m a Aa� o� J` i/ a�� , % SyQ� I . . . . . . � %�� -- �O� / l �� ..... �: .: .:. .- • .• . .. Q,�o, �i 9%�j 9i- I I 128.t' I ............._ ...._ .. I � S c � - R �a � • . . . . .. �A�'�t�,�-r I I � ......... ... . ........ . . .I 30' I �y ° fl� I 1 I �� / � "rr 1 I � I� h I R I I I� / I I I I / I 1 I I I I � I I I I � I I I 1 I I ol I I I I I � I � I .. �, a. l, zz.�� _ �� . I� Photographic Documenfiation � i Photo of vacant Amoco building, looking northwest _ �.�--r" - - _ =� .�, .�.:��------:-=� ..�.... . _ ....,.,. � , .. � '� �" � . , �� 3n ,. `� ,-r ' �C•�..��j}j�I .., � },y r�,�y T . . Qj,�jI ��'S' � I Y�IY' h �,�'�'.x J (} fP�, �i 1� 'l.� .'Ai -1Dy�� 'fj•.f4 ��iV�� r'7 A��4Y�� '�..'.�'`.��fp!T.� JkL '..�. .�f�I tt � `y — _ _ I��d`�i�+i�4_ ,. . . - -- `- - '�-- . -rs _. - n � . �.�i: - r � ..� .,�''� ��,�.,� � �� '� ,S ' .� � � 1y� . __ � ��Y• �y'• � e .� Y �� -i� • : .; :;, t. , u ' � �/y 11 �X/��f �F"'✓"� . '�'_f: S, ,t-� � � # , �£ . �t� .� r ... .� �� L . L�' i - t` � . � ' y . r � :i:�� ,��,� .�• ,� '�'F �i � `. • �' � .;,+ 1 . �; r" j•�� , w.`.t� � r j'� � t ,•, _ ,a,' 's� t�i'- �� Looking west , _- "' ' � --�,,, :- - ,- '-.4 r ,�=�: ;,:'— � at the Amoco . _ ,--�_-�:�.. =.,.'—+�`�.�-,- �_'� " _. � site � MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 742-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FROM THE MINIMUM FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS FOR A RETAIL COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT AT 2800 COUNTY HIGHWAY 10; PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-010 WHEREAS, the applicant, Velmeir Companies, has applied for a variance from the minimum front and rear setbacks for a retail commercial redevelopment project at 2800 County Highway 10; and, WHEREAS, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the minimum front setback for a parking lot is 30 feet and the minimum rear setback is 5 feet; and, WHEREAS, The Planning Commission reviewed the following materials relating to this request: 1. Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Location Map 4. Site Plan 5. Applicant's Statement 6. Photographic Documentation WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding this variance on Wednesday, November 5, 2003; 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 makes the following finding of facts related to this request: 1. The exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to the variance request are that the lots are irregularly shaped and additional irregularly shaped land will be added to the site to help meet parking and ponding needs forthe redevelopment of the former Amoco gas station. 2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code would create a hardship for the applicant in that there are unique redevelopment challenges not normally associated with raw land development. - � • -- - ,� ..�._._ _.., ., .. . _.�- - - --.� �._ . _. . . --- ----� - ' -- -� -- --- ---=-- Resolution 742-03 Page 2 3. The applicant has not caused the condition which prompted the variance request. 4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicant a special privilege. 5. The variances requested are the minimum variances which would alleviate the hardship in that they are the minimum necessary to allow for two rows of parking with a 24-foot drive aisle in the front and adequate room for vehicular movements in the rear. 6. One of the prevailing goals of the zoning code is to promote positive development and redevelopment within the community. Granting a variance to allow for the utilization of the front setback would not be detrimental to the Zoning Code in that it would open the door to a much-needed redevelopment, and eliminate a blighted property. 7. The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE fT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby approve the variance requested for a five-foot front parking lot setback and a two-foot rear yard setback associated with a commercial retail development at 2800 County Highway 10, subject to the following requirements: The applicant shall apply for and obtain approval of a Development Review, Rezoning and Major Subdivision no later than November 4, 2004 or this approval will be null and void. Adopted this 5th day of November, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) �_.. : _ v � ._ � � � ______ : .-� �.._ _ � ,. I a i PROCE�DINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW R.AMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting October 15, 2003 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., October 15, 2003. 2. Roll Call MeinUers Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Jolinson, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn and Song. Members Absent: Miller (excused) Also Present: Conununity Development Director Ericson Index to Minutes Page Planning Case CU03-004; VR03-009 2 Variance and Conditional Use Pern�it to Expand Garage Locatiarl: 7850 Spring Lalce Road Applicant: Joel and Linda Whitbecic 3. Approve lilinutes a. September 17, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Song. To Approve the Plaiuling Commission Minutes for September 17, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4. Citizens Requests and Cvmments on Items Not on the Agenda None. If , _ � � =. ' �: � __ . �' .. , „-- - _ . -- � =�=�- `�-' �"-�--- -... . . .. --- - ., r__ , `. ��..._= - I:_ Mounds View Planning Commission October 15, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 So Public Hearing io Consider a Variance and Conditional Use Permit Request to Expand a Garage at 7850 Spring Lalce Road. Community Development Director Ericson indicated the applicants have requested a variance and CUP to allow for a garage expansion. He then indicated that the Comprehensive Plan addresses these types of improvements and this is consistent with what the City encourages. The issue with the variance is because of the 10 x 15 area off the bacic of the garage. Director Ericson indicated the applicants submitted a brief statement as to the basis for the variance and the one tlling that he found most interesting is that they do not have a basement so they are very limited in storage space. Director Ericson indicated that Staff has reviewed this request and it does not appear that this expansion would create any sort of adverse impact nor will it blocic anyone's view of the lalce. Director Ericson indicated that the request is consistent with all of the requirements and in tenns of the CUP satisfies all the requirements with the exception of the garage width. He then handed out plans showing the proposed expansion. Director Ericson indicated that because of the variance request the neighbors were notified of this public hearing and Staff has received no comments either way. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. There were no residents in attendance to comment. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:11 p.in. MOTION/SECOND: Zwirn/Hegland. To Approve Resolution 741-03, a Resolution Approving a Variance for a 40-foot Wide Garage and Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow for An Expanded 1,110 Square-Foot Garage at 7850 Spring Lalce Road. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 6. Next Planning Commission Meeting: November 5, 2003 7. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:13 p.m. (The meeting irrunediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) ___ ___ ___ __ - - � .� . � ___ _ __ _ . .� _�� . . . i ____ __ . .� � , �) Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier _ - ;=;;z_ ::� , ,..� October 15, 2003 Page 3 G a � MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CONINNIISSION November 19, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: October 15, 2003 4. Citizens Requests and Cormnents on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case MA03-001 Public Hearing and Discussion to Review the Proposed Longview estates Prelimina.ty Plat Applicants: Eichi, Inc., Represented by Martin Harstad 6. Planning Case VR03-Ol l Public Hearing and Discussion Regarding Variance Request for 8471 Fairchild Avenue Applicant: David Preztycki 7. : APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. Next Pla�lning Commission Meeting: December 3, 2003 Adjournment to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: November 5, 2003 2. Planning Commission Appointments 3. Staff Reports: 4. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports \\Trout\CommDev�Planning Commission�PC Agendas�2003U 1-19-03 PC Agenda.doc __. _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _____________ I PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 5, 2003 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The ineeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m., November 5, 2003. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Members Absent: Also Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Jol-uison, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn, Miller and Song. None. �"� ��`�`"� �`� Community Development Director Ericson Index to Minutes ;�: Planning Case MA03-001 Proposed Longview Estates Preliininary Plat Applicant: Martin Harstad Planning Case VR03-010 Applicant: Velmeir Companies, Inc. Location: 2800 County Highway 10 Page 2 7 3. Approve Minutes a. October 1, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Zwirn. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for October 1, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 7 Nays — 0 Motion camed. _ _ . . _,. :_:�.:. __" ' . _. .: �_:.-.. . � --... L_ `.�' . '..:___ �-�:-_.� ._ii_�= : .�. i." " ..�' . - ti�_c2:_ _..r_ _ "_`_" _. .. _ L..__�_: __ __ �.� ._< Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Public Hearing and Discussion to Review the Proposed Longview Estates Preliminary Plat Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this case is an application for a major subdivision of Longview estates that is a property consisting of a little more than 7 acres between Long View Drive and Silver Lalce Road. He then provided a brief history of this property reviewing previous requests submitted on this property. Director Ericson indicated that this request is for 15 lots with 8 lots fronting Long View Drive and 7 lots fronting Silver Lalce Road. Director Ericson indicated that this proposal has a maximum utilization of the land. He then indicated that the lots proposed meeting the minimum requirements not only for lot sizes, but for lots within a wetland zoning district. Director Ericson indicated that the plat was revised as there was one lot not meeting the requirements and they all now meet the requirements. Director Ericson indicated the issue with this property is the wetlands as appi•oximately half of the property is wetland. He then pointed out on the subdivision map the wetlands and another drawing showing the mitigation area with the area shaded in pink designating the storm water drainage pond. Director Ericson indicated there are a number of issues that go beyond the platting of the property and those issues were addressed in 2001 and he has provided a copy of a neighborhood sununary from the previous application raising those concerns. He then said the water table is of concern, as well as the natural water flow to the area, the trees, the nature of the soils, and whether the lots are suitable for construction. This is a very organic area with loamy soil and the developer will need to remove a substantial amount of soil to create a suitable building pad. Director Ericson indicated that the Commission is not able to approve or deny the request based on tlle issues with the wetlands but must loolc at the application and determine whether or not it meets City Code requirements. He then indicated that the City Council has to approve a wetland alteration permit and they will review and discuss the hydrology, the soils and the overriding principal of approval is whether this is the minimum alteration to accomplish what is proposed. Director Ericson indicated that Rice Creelc has received copies of this proposal and noted the applicant will need Rice Creek approval as well as approval of the City Engineer and Public Worlcs. ____ �-. - . s— �. _ =� � _ . -� � Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 2003 Page 3 Director Ericson indicated that the other issue relating to the subdivision is traffic and Ramsey County has a copy of the plat and is are concerned with the added driveways onto Silver Lal�e Road but they have no power to deny the request. He then suggested it may be possible to share driveways in some fashion to reduce the number of driveways coming out onto Silver Lalce Road. Director Ericson indicated that the utilities would need to be brought across Silver Lake Road with either 7 cuts or ruruling one main and branching services off of it. He then said that there are water issues on the east side of Silver Lake Road to deal with. Director Ericson indicated that two residents had provided the City with a letter concerning the subdivision and summarized the content of the letters by stating that both residents are opposed to the subdivision. Director Ericson indicated that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan but noted there is a policy that caution should be exercised when developing on environmentally sensitive lands. Director Ericson indicated that if the site is developed with the 15 lots all of the tree cover will be removed and a substantial amount of grading would be required to bring the building locations to the minimum recommended building elevation. Commissioner Miller asked at w�iat point Rice Creelc would be involved, before or after the Commission makes its recommendation. Director Ericson indicated that Rice Creek becoines involved when the application is submitted and that can be done before City approval or City approval would be contingent upon Rice Creek approval. He then indicated this matter�would be bacic before the Planning Commission at its next meeting. Commissioner Zwirn asked whether there would be an elevation problem with Silver Lalce Road because there is going to be a need to bring in additional soil and talce out the loamy soil to malce it buildable. Director Ericson indicated the drainage ditch would need to be maintained. He then said that he expects there would be driveways built up with culverts underneath. He further indicated that Staff would recommend that no fill be done within the right of way and that the existing right of way be maintained with the exception of the driveways. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Martin Harstad addressed the Commission and said he felt it would be appropriate to bring everyone up to date on the history of this property. ;,. - -.. -- "' -_- L�� " f=` : -�-°�..� !I ---- -- -- --.. ..__.-- _ -- - . . __ �_ Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 ' Mr. Harstad indicated the property is 7.14 acres zoned R1 and if it did not have wetlallds on it at all you he could have 26 lots on the property. He then said that two years ago he came to the City with a plat for 11 lots that met the standard for the minimum lot size but were short on the 125 feet of road width on some of the lots but, as a part of the project, there was a proposed wetland conservation easement to maintain the trees along Silver Lake Road. The Conunission and Council denied that request and he is back with the 15 lot proposal that meets the requirements but sacrifices the trees. Mr. Harstad indicated that he would like to obtain approval subject to Rice Creek approval as it was done in reverse the last time and a lot of tirne and money was wasted when the City denied approval of the project. Mr. Harstad indicated that this plan means that most of the trees will be lost. He then said it is unfortunate but it is the desire of certain powers that he come in with a different plan that meets all the codes and he has done that. He further commented that he does not lilce this plan better than the one he proposed two years ago but, at the end of the day, both are salable and he asks for consideration and approval. Steve Kuhl of 5176 Longview Drive indicated that he is concerned with drainage after this property is developed because right now this property takes on water from the surrounding properties. He then said that building up the soil along Long View Drive wiih fill establishes a barrier to prevent the water from getting to the wetland. Mr. Kuhl commented that there are dips in Silver Lalce Road in that area and they had to dig very deep and fill to get that road to the current condition. He then said that there is water that flows along the road and there will need to be culverts. He further commented that he feels the City needs to address the potential impact on the water table as well as the viability of putting driveways on Silver Lalce Road. Dave Tillman of 5166 Long View Drive asked the Commission to keep in mind that although mitigation is allowed for what is filled 15 houses with two car driveways equates to 40,000 square feet of impervious surface once this is all completed. Dallas Thompson of 5178 Long View Drive invited the Commission to come by and loolc at the property. He then said that his concern is the water table issue because he has no water problems right now in his house but, if Mr. Harstad builds 15 dams in that area not to mention all the rest t11at goes with it, his question is who is going to be culpable to fix the water problems in his house that are caused by that. He further commented that he does not believe by loolcing at the property that Mr. Harstad can do what he is proposing to do without causing water issues for him. Chair Stevenson indicated the City is aware of the water table concenis and will consider thein carefully. _ __ _�: - . . ,- � : � . -- _ ,_ Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 5 Lil Ward of 5177 Red Oak Drive indicated she is concerned about all the increase in traffic and asked if it would be possible to have an access to Silver Lake but to put all these cars back in that area where there are lots of kids concerns her with the extra traffic. She then said her other concern is with the loss of trees and habitat for tlie area wildlife. She also questioned why the area is no longer a conservation area. Ms. Ward indicated they were told this was a restricted wetland. Director Ericson indicated this wetland is not a DNR protected wetland but there are protections for it because it is a wetland. He then said that 20 or 30 years ago realtors may have provided information that the area would never be developed because it is a wetland, and that was true at the time due to the costs involved with developing in a wetland. He further corrunented that with lots becoming scarce, and property more valuable, it has becoine feasible to do what is required to develop the wetland. Commissioner Hegland asked what legal responsibilities the developer has as far as developing and causing water issues on an adjacent property. Director Ericson explained that the development agreement has certain protections built into it. He then said that, in this situation where there are known concerns with hydrology or water flow, there would be some requirement that if there were damages caused that could be attributable to the development the developer could be held responsible through a maintenance bond held by the City for a certain period of time to protect residents. Director Ericson indicated the City would try to do its best to protect residents if the City approves the development. He then said that tile engineer and Rice Creelc would review the property to rnalce sure that there is no impact to neighboring residents. Mr. Harstad explained that he had been referring to the conservation easement he had offered with the development proposal two years ago that would have saved the trees. Sandra Kuhl of 5176 Long View Drive indicated that several years ago there was a proposal for a shopping center for tlus area and residents were able to curtail it with three words, health, safety, and welfare with the issue beulg the bumpiness of the road and increased traffic. She then said that another concern she has is the potential for the houses to settle because so inuch soil is brought in. She also asked what types of homes are to be constructed because the area may not be suitable for basements. Chair Stevenson indicated the proposal from two years ago was for homes that were in the $250,000 and up range. Mr. Harstad indicated the homes would still be in that range or even higher. He then said that the soil is all compacted after hauled in and it is suitable for constructing any type of home but the homes as laid out on the plat are split entry homes. He further commented that the houses � _ . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . t�; L ... 1'�"= - -�_ ( � = ,�. Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 6 laid out on the plans are an idea of what could be built there but is not a guarantee of what will be built. Chair Stevenson asked how many builders would own lots and be building houses in the development. Mr. Harstad indicated that his brother had expressed interest in building on tllese lots. He then said that if he were to sell to a different builder, then he would sell all of the lots to one builder. Director Ericson indicated that there have been several scenarios presented to the City and, if there is any indication from the Commission that it would prefer something else, it is possible to make that recommendation. Commissioner Miller indicated it loolcs lilce all of the homes are within the wetland or witlun the wetland buffer when reviewing Exhibit D. She then aslced how there could be mitigation if it is all wetland. Director Ericson indicated the flood zone maps were created back in the 1970s based on aerial flights and are not true delineations of the wetlands. He then said that the information provided by the developer has been verified by Rice Creek as a valid delineation of the wetlands. Director Ericson pointed out that very little of the lot is located within a FEMA designated flood zone. He further commented that 95% of the property is outside of the flood zone as defined by FEMA and those homes would not be required to carry flood insurance. Commissioner Zwirn aslced for copies of the study from Rice Creelc from the previous application. Director Ericson indicated that he would provide thern for the next meeting. Commissioner Johnson asked Staff to coirllnent on the traffic count and what the road is designed to handle. Director Ericson indicated that Public Works and the City's traffic engineer have indicated that the road is designed for houses on both sides of the road. He then said that road was built to handle residential traffic and only half the traffic that would ordinarily be there is there. He further commented that a 25% increase in traffic for that road does not represent a significant uicrease in terms of the management of the road and what it was designed to handle. Mr. Kuhl indicated that there is a pond and a creek bed flows through the area. Director Ericson agreed that those features are there but, according to FEMA, it is not considered to be a flood plain. Commissioner Hegland commented that it may be necessary to tear up the road to install utilities. Monnds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 7 Director Ericson indicated it would be a difficult area to install the utilities in but it is possible to do so. He then said that the utilities could come under the road in 7 locations or in one location and branch off from that point. He further commented that, if possible, the City likes to keep the utilities out of the ground water as they last longer. Director Ericson indicated this matter would be on the agenda on November 19, 2003 and told residents in attendance that they would not receive another notice for the Plaruiing Coinmission but would receive notice for the Council Meeting. 6. Public Hearing and Consideration of Resolution 742-03, a Resolution Regarding a Variance for Reduced Front and Rear Yard Setbacics Associated with a Retail Commercial Development at 2800 County Highway l0e Community Development Director Ericson introduced City Administrator Ulrich to the Planning Commission as well as the new Planning Associate, I�7sten Prososlu. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that this matter was a request for a variance for parlcing area encroachment at the Amoco site. He then said that Staff is pleased to have a proposal for redevelopment on tlus site as it is a very proininent location within the City. Director Ericson indicated this is a variance request to encroach within five feet of the front property line to maximize the area for development, acconunodate stonn water management and to piece together the parcels to allow enough room for the project. He then thanked Mr. Bacicman for working so diligently on the project. Director Ericson reviewed the criteria for the variance with the Commission indicating that Staff feels this is the iniriimum requirement to alleviate the hardship. Commissioner Song indicated that this redevelopment is 32% shy of the minimum requirements of the PUD. Director Ericson indicated he had addressed in his report the fact that if this site were 5 acres and rezoned to PUD the City would have an opportunity to talce a hard loolc at the requirements and malce any necessary modifications to allow some flexibility to the parcel but, in this case, there is not enough land for the PUD. Director Ericson indicated there is sufficient greenspace due to the oversized right of way along Highway 10. He then said ihat Staff intends to bring the issue of setbacics along the Highway 10 comdor forward for consideration in the future. �_ ; : ��.�:��lC=_ __-.��'. I� .' .. - . . .... � �—a.. :':.. -.-s.' __ �.. ____�-ia�=: -�: ��.�� ._.... :�'�_ —�. ._ ... __� �..—�_- ._. _ 4��c .. ., �_ Mounds View Planning Commission November 5, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 8 Comrnissioner Johnson indicated that if a PUD were possible on this site, the Commission would not be considering this request because a five-foot setback is justified and there are five foot setbacics in other locations in the City. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 8:10 p.m. Tom Loucics indicated that his client is pleased to bring this business to the City of Mounds View and the intent is to build 30 stores over the next few years and the first one is in Mounds View. Mr. Loucks indicated that CVS Pharmacy is a large multinational company and has 4100 locations throughout the United States and is just moving into the Mimlesota marlcet. Commissioner Miller asked about the stores. Mr. Loucks indicated the stores are approximately 13,000 square feet and are very similar to a Walgreen's. He then said that this proposal includes a 2500 square foot commercial retail outlet for some type of neighborhood restaurant or coffee shop. Commissioner Scotch aslced whether there would be room on the site to locate a sidewallc facing Highway 10. Director Ericson indicated that the issue of the sidewalk would be addressed during the development review but it is the policy of the City to require trailways and, when there is not enough room to do so, the City has utilized the right of way for that. Commissioner Jolulson commented that there is abnormally large right of way along Highway 10. Director Ericson indicated that the right of way is 225 feet all the way across. Chair Stevenson indicated that the one reason he is in favor of the five foot setbacic is because there is such a wide road easement. Corrunissioner Zwirn asked if the building proposed is a standard CVS style building. Mr. Loucks indicated it is a prototype building of 13,0000 square feet with a stucco loolcing exterior that is tan in color with very little signage and a rounded front main entrance. Commissioner Zwirn indicated it mentions that other options were explored but he does not feel thai other formations for the building were considered to achieve the necessary parlcing. Mr. Loucks indicated the real problem with the lot is its lacic of depth. He then said that CVS has certain criteria that they will not deviate from and that is the double loaded parking stalls, drive thru lane, and loading docles and this site lacks the depth. He further commented that Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 2003 Page 9 deviating from the prototype layout creates all kinds of issues because everything is unifoimly done and not custom for each building. Commissioner Miller asked where the headquarters of CVS is located. Mr. Loucics indicated that headquarters is out of Rhode Island. ; .� Commissioner Zwirn said he feels the developer has brought this issue on themselves by not being willing to change the design of the building to accommodate the lot. He then said that the statement that other options and configurations were contemplated is misleading because that is not evident to him. He further commented that corporate headquarters states that the building has to be this configuration. Commissioner Johnson indicated that the other options were land issues with garages being moved and giving up that bacic lot to retain the depth. He then said there is not enough option for parlcing. Commissioner Zwirn commented that, while other building configurations are possible, corporate headquarters is saying no. Commissioner Hegland indicated that other building configurations may be possible, but not for this company. Commissioner Zwirn said they bring a hardship on themselves. Commissioner Hegland commented that this company wants to develop this land and this is their requirement. Economic Developinent Coordinator Bacicman indicated that brining a redevelopment proposal to the City on tlus site has been a very lengthy up and down process dealing with a number of landowners. He then explained the position of CVS and indicated that, in order to malce the development worlc, CVS has certain requirements that must be inet so there are not other options for location of the building. �� .. �;,,-; �- `� of Velmeir indicated that they have been reviewing this site and worlcing on the ' prop sal for 10 months. He then explained that any deviation from the standard layout reduces profits as the company has determined that it wants its customers to wallc through the front door straight through the store to the back to the pharmacy in the hopes that they picic up other merchandise along the way. He further indicated that a lot of time and money has been spent on worlcing out different configurations for the location on the site but the location of the drive thru and the front door cannot be changed. Commissioner Johnson indicated that CVS would not be here for the variance had all of the issues associated with the sale of the property been followed through with, especially moving the garages. He further commented that the hardship stems from working with all the different Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 5, 2003 Page 10 people involved and the extenuating circumstances surrounding redeveloping this property. He also commented that CVS has six months and a lot of inoney tied into this and he does not thinlc they are getting any favors compared to others located along the highway. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:33 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Johnson/Scotch. To Approve Resolution 742-03, a Resolution Approving a Variance for a Retail Commercial Redevelopment at 2800 County Highway 10. Ayes — 6 Nays — 1(Zwirn) Motion carried. _ Director Ericson indicated the next step would be to provide the City with plans for the development review. 7. 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: November 19, 2003 Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Cominission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the rneeting at 8:35 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjouined to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzineier Tij�zeSaver Off Site SecT�etaJ�ial, Irzc. .`�� , . :} �.�:,� � , _ . w, : . b�� , � .� � - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , ; . � I Item No: 5 Meeting Date: Nov 19, 2003 Type of Business: Discussion of Mounds I/iew Staff R� To: From: Item Title/Subject: Introduction: Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Community Development Director Continued Public Hearing And Review Of A Proposed Major Subdivision Of Land Known As Longview Estates, North Of Woodcrest Park, East Of Silver Lake Road, West Of Longview Drive And South Of County Road H2 Eichi, Inc., represented by Martin Harstad, has submitted an application for a major subdivision of the land between Silver Lake Road and Longview Drive, north of Woodcrest Park and south of County Road H2. The legal description of the property to be subdivided is Lof 4, Block 1, MuellerAddition. The proposed subdivision would create 15 lots from the wooded 7.14-acre parcel, of which half is delineated wetland. Eight lots would take access from Longview Drive and seven lots would access Silver Lake Road. All of the proposed lots satisfy the City's expanded subdivision requirements within a wetland zoning district. In addition to Rice Creek Watershed District approval, the proposed subdivision will necessitate a wetland alteration permit approval by the City Council. Previous Submittal: The City processed a request for a major subdivision of this land in 2001, ultimately denying a variance and the subdivision as not conforming to the City's subdivision standards. The original submission contemplated an eleven-lotdevelopmentwith each lotfronting Longview Drive. No lots were platted fronting Silver Lake Road. The issue with the original plat was that in a wetland district, there are minimum lot widths that exceed the standard widths, such that instead of eleven possible lots, only eight were allowable. The applicant applied for a variance which was denied due to lack of perceived hardship. Finally, the plat was revised to show 26 lots, well in excess of what is allowed, and the plat was denied. Discussion: The area known as Longview Estates is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the existing zoning of the property. All the lots shown on the preliminary plat satisfy the minimum requirements of 125-foot lot width and 20,000 square foot lot area. Of the 15 proposed lots, nine would require fiilling of wetlands to create a building pad. On lots where no wetland fill is necessary, most of the land available beyond the building pad is used for wetland mitigation purposes. No proposed home would have any significant backyard area except Lots 1 and 2, which would have 30 feet of filled wetland backyard. Many of the homes would be 15 feet or less from the delineated wetlands or mitigated wetlands. � --: =� - I:i:a=. .-'---. . � .:� .� �- '_°��. __�.. ie= �___..,.._.. .Yr_...___ ... l�.1 =-� ° _. _..... L''c,i:� _ ..v.=�..._ :_ ' _.. _ y Longview Estates PC Report November 19, 2003 Page 2 Staff pointed out that the Commission's role in this process was to review the subdivision and to assess whether it satisfied the requirements and standards of the Zoning Code, Subdivision Code and the Comprehensive Plan. The hydrology issues and wetland alterations, while undeniably a critical component of the subdivision, are outside of the Planning Commission's scope of review. From a technical standpoint, the subdivision DOES meet all Code requirements. From an intensity of use perspective, considering the various environmental factors, the question that needs to be answered is, Can the parcel support a 15-lot subdivision? Nov 5, 2003 Public Hearinq: The residents who spoke at the public hearing on November 5, 2003 were opposed to the development, many stressing the hydrological conditions of the site and the potential impact of the development. Others were concerned about the traffic impacts of the proposed 15-lot subdivision. Some Longview Drive residents questioned the suitability ofi the soils for construction and what the impact would be from the extensive fill brought onto the site. Two letters from residents opposing the proposal were provided to the Planning Commission at the November 5th meeting. These two letters, along with a third letter received after the meeting, are attached to this report. A final issue was raised concerning liability, insofar as who would be liable if basements flooded or if other damages occurred. While the City Attorney will address liability at the City Council meeting, generally speaking if damages directly attributable to the development occur, the developerwould be held responsible. Before any work could commence on the site, the developer would be required to provide a financial guarantee to address and correct any deficiencies. At the Commission meeting, Mr. Harstad displayed and described to the Commission and residents the previous plans that had been submitted forthis land, beginning with the original eleven-lot subdivision and concluding with a 26-lot subdivision. The current 15-lot subdivision represents the maximum and most intense development possible for the seven acre site. At the meeting on November 5, the Planning Commission requested documentation from Rice Creek Watershed District regarding the previous submittal and reports drafted for the watershed's Board of Commissioners. Thus far staff has only received a permit status report. If the original report to the Board or Commissioners is received after this report is completed, staff will provide copies at the meeting on November 19th. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the Longview Estates parcel as single family detached. W hile this designation is consistent with the proposed subdivision, one of the stated goals under the land use component of the Comprehensive Plan is to "Ensure that community development is compatible with features of the natural environment and is accommodated without destroying desirable environmental features and natural amenities." Any subdivision should be accomplished with as little impact and alteration as possible. � _ ._ :�__ .. :___ . �� i Longview Estates PC Report November 5, 2003 Page 3 Recommendation: Hold the public hearing (it remains open from the previous meeting) and further discuss the proposed subdivision. Staff is seeking direction from the Commission regarding the preliminary plat and whether it should be approved, modified or denied. As was stated above, the preliminary plat satisfies the zoning and subdivision requirements, even the expanded requirements for subdivisions within a wetlan� zoning district. It may NOT however satisfy the minimum alteration requirement for wetland alterations. Staff recommends that whatever action is taken by the Planning Commission, the applicant will need to submit an application for a wetland alteration permit for Council consideration along with the preliminary plat. While it may be difficult to justify a recommendation of preliminary plat denial, the Planning Commission may recommend preliminary plat approval subject to certain reasonable modifications, such as less lots or larger lots. In addition to modification, the plat can be approved subject to conditions, such as wetland alteration permit approval, Rice Creek Watershed District approval, Ramsey County approval, park dedication fee payment, soil suitability analysis, execution of a development agreement, and other stipulations relative to the subdivision. If the Planning Commission feels strongly that the preliminary plat should not be approved because the plan is too intense for the area or for some other reasonable basis, an appropriate finding of fact will need to be created and entered into the record to support the position. Staff will consult with the City Attorney to assess the defensibility of such an action. Finally, after all discussion and deliberation has concluded, staff recommends the Planning Commission close the public hearing. (A new public hearing will be conducted by the City Council.) These are the options for the Commission to consider. Please direct staff accordingly. 1. Recommend approval of the preliminary plat, as presented. 2. Recommend approval of the preliminary plat, as modified or with conditions. 3. Recommend denial of the preliminary plat with supporting findings of fact. Based on the Commission's direction, Staff will draft a resolution for action at your next meeting. `��t-1 1"1.i�-,-, i�-'�;�t/� Z�'L_ James Ericson Community Development Director EXHIBIT A. Zoning Map LONGVIEW ESTATES Proposed Subdivision s ■��■ Not to scale Proposed Property Lines , ;� 1 � � � �� .� �• ., � � - ir� ��~? tl'i '-'"- "' � `,��`�� , t�'� �� , = ��, � � ! �-� l � � �-� � � . � :':�'s . _...._ [�J � — a 13: � ��Li?� �'� �+• . .. �... .. . � ' , '.. .. � .S J��: . . . J�a'1��;,.�--�j'��,�� i 4 � � ,: �r. +�� t i �� . 'i,f1f 2�.: 1 � � ,i � �� +% � ' �iG 1 1 � � !�� I � . i Y ° ri i, I��; 1 �""� f�"- �"'� 1 C 4�� rr�. �' j � '�''' r � '� 1 i ,� �,� � ^..r ..,. �. � �� .,� . • - �-;� . . , �� I, '� s ,�.? _�� .� ��',1� : 8 f...�� .a�� ,j. : `i, �" •1: �� {f -��, � � �� , � --� �� ;J � ��tir;: .; ; � �� ,:, ., i �';,�i'• I' 4 ,; _, . �; �l �@ [*;: ,L �.I �� _ �?�� ' � � �7 �C'�� -� '-_'w_�.t �� I . ..... i� " • � '■ ` � �E 1��■■�■..� .` t' ' � . ; '��4� . 7� -ti' i . � ti ■ . . .�.■ . . ■ � � � � �� ■ � 6 � . � 13 � � . .......�. , ;, :.....; 5, . 12 ' � ■ �■■%..■■ � . � � ■ �. . ....... 4��:, ■ �, 11 � �� . , ��} ■ ' � 3� � ....... ; • �; . . t 10 ........ . ; � . 2 . ,, � . , . r�� ,. . ■ I ........ z, . , g . � ' 1 �; . � . � , ; . � ►f � � ' i: � ��-� � ;� .� -r �r��yp. �T .�� -� �'�� . _ ;! �; ��1 � � F,�1� A �.n,. � � �3rr;,, i, �� r. :+. � ��' ��7� � p ��:�� . ,�.,� � �� w�� . ��'�,��a� r .-y, r � �r� �.�i �� '� �+�� = r� �� {� ;�� :�� ; �.i y �� 1 �-� ��i � 1 �'� � � �� -�,� � ; �.. . ,..r.�,�'�{ �' �� I, !�� ..��'�� : r !� P�, ' '�' � � .� E; F�, , r�,.� ; ; , .� i - ' A_ - � I �� ,� � ;�i .Ca� ��, �; ; : �ti � t . � ; � . .. .� . � y ,�, , . �r ,i � � � ' �' .� �J S.' ' """ " � 'L. . .. . - . � �� {' `�? � .� 'l ��"��,� ��5 � `F �� ,,. � : �. !� n.i tI. �v. � � • � � � �.�'' ��, � ��. ,a � �. '� �' IC�"p :i � � I �' � Fi �r7� ;;. .. .. �y 4I I h'"' � :� �� ' �� _ � , -..__.. ..-- - �__. _ .-.. _. _,:_ � r--T'�-`��—+ � ;Q•.dn.'�W i� � 1 � L� .� � �'i.�r3 ti,5 � -?L � � �'i- �,� �1 i �� -�-- . _ -_ _ �... _.. �� . �_ -._ _ _ s �_ _�__ � _ __ i � _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ."_" , _ `�a--"" .,.-�—�._ t,--• --- �___�'=_`�._ -.-_. �'_ :� ' "'F`—�"" _'_' '_'. ' 4 : �.�'_ 1 - _'_ _'—_ ._._ . 1 --_.._...�_.._ ...<_._._......_.._ - - _ � ,�_,,, - �,,,, ....�`..:-.,� _ � �.. � � • � - � � r I y �. _w1 � .rW+�+� � .� � M r..w ..�.��"' `�.., T-100, ' 9'� .44 ,. , 10�.�7 �OlA.IA 3..'� q` 4>-7 $3 1t7j�5�;,� �_ �,.. , 33 � �g�}.z 34.x 6G �,� ,,,� ,�, � ,,,� U � � � ` F i � , � -. �, � �� ` ��:::. �; 4 ,� � ofS� , _ � �,�o-��t `�r�'��"{ �U�'� �'i j�� ; ° , � , � � � � - -� - - . _ � a.s._ r^^,, � ,s,z,. ' ;;��r,_....,.,_�� 1,�?0 �>.�G-= :c� ' ` 1 � i�.�► �' . . �. _� � �'� � _ .�. i 3z �� an�� y a�:;•: �a ��s� �.�: t o Z 4� �� 2 i I P � GT A� k t j f L, Fr� ' � � ' ",)t t f ' �.d r V . 3 ) `� ., r+� y'; f l�. . � N �! d !f � .1 � !f – . � `� � `��f � 6� � -I 41 ,I � r , ,: ' A ' �, t7 �. T- � '� I i � �f r` �t<%� � j ',t U�'`, y � t��7 r��._ ` �' , .; (�, � � ~ ; _.,_.�.�, ..W. � r _ , `; ` � ; � ; � roo tza 4 � � �:�-� �� + . 6. a 5 �, ,.��' � � .l.;.:�.�� . . �y_ _!_� °r • �i,j_ � i.�� {'� ' Ifi • ��;: d' +" - � �3 � Yt ,T I �, .f � � ("r'r� 1 � , . % ' � r {J � � � . - _ ... � _ ( , _ *� 3 9 � i _ _. __ , - ,.. p , ;; _ a �..�s. , . _ : _ . . , ." 4 . - � . . • .. _ g ,, t . . .- C.� 5 � � , .. i � 4,dt_! in � �"1 � . _, .7� i � � �..-..-.u-- . r: . �w,�_ J� � i 1 ! -- � � p _ � - I .3 � � 1 ' .• �� y}•, K t ,� . ......... . � � -��i_ � I � _ � :r , �j� _, _ � i � � � � . � ` � , � � r'. 4,.1��.� I � T .�,_...� _..._�_ , 7 � � �' '� � �� • : ; . . . ,. . .... , , o ' 3 6 , �9 � o . . . . . .. '' ._ � ` ' ` � :r .,, r . . - �. � , � r - � „� ' � ' ; _. . �_: _':�.fi.3. ' ' J � . , j ---- -_ .. . _.._— � u, (8• tJG i �- , ��•.� , +�� ♦'�f'� � `'� ;> � � i � � � '� l'� � . S�a d I �� — � �,0�\ �.'`'•`..'1,;'1 S �.,�. r �k'�` _ n , � y �3 � k 1 � � \ \'�y��4�� . °� U ,� � � r�i � i— 1 3 _5 't � � �. �, . � � � , � m � w j � - r�� -� -' 3 5 � �,�,�.`�,�.�,`� `�.�� i � � . g �� ' i , . ��, �. ,,, �, � �..� ---.�.__.__ ______ if Yr '3 ` �ti��.�> �ti � , ` � � _ , , �.��.`� ` �' � .i.'�_t..f�t.l...`-'� i !J_ `�,� �. . �� F.` ;.. � 5 ! I �4 �� ' 34 . + ,`�, �� `�,:�,, � , � c. � , � � i � \; . - � ti ' , -- -�— � ' � - i�� . � . � � �c ' ,'�, ` -- - ---- i � ' • � � � ' � 1 �.4.S�k�. � � ,'� : \ \ \\�, ��\ ��'.`' i � � _ �.l . 3 z _ � ,��`�,:�� `� �-9o,i,,`.:'�,� ' � 1 3 "� I .-, � � 3 '., ��.��. � ` � �. i � i �1 � _ ` \�, �,.'� � 4�� , ; ti - � I � i 't 0 .r �, � s ; _ q I _ �`ti . .ti ,� � ` .u�--'----i 4 �. � y ti�; ' � — _,1�1,..'��..�r�,.� � `, O �\`�� `, 4 ,�:;y� *ti'� � -,�-- �..._ 3 ? � �• I �1 � "�i�'�` \��1``` .'_ ,\.1j! �� 7 I ; � :"1 I j" ,. � ♦ ti'�, � '�� \ ��`�1� %/ " ' � I ? � .., ._1�_ 4..�1..t� 1 � , ' *� __ .._ —�-_ _. ----� ( � � � ►a�.i� 1;��' ��'�:♦\.� {,"� ; , i _��..,.�_, , y ` ��, ��'\,''`: .�:`� "�' G S � � � � :3 S � � E ��.� . , ,� � , _ ' + � `,� \�`• ��.,, ��.'� `� �5`; � rG._ ey �� i .y _ � �r :, � , �J � • �. \ �` t•�•1\ �, ',,.7 __ . .._ u i L4 .19 � � � ... _ � { '` ` �� \ �. �` ` t I I '��;;�` ` �,� \ ,� � . _._ , -�-� --, y , :� 0 , , � � '�\i�`�`�`Z� ,�,ti~��\1 ,'� � I� � � ; IQ7 � 4 �'� I � �'I . � �\ y��` �� . l�� 'i �I {m g�� I �,\ r �� , l,� �.�: t� i.r d' �%, D 1 �� C1 i I � . - � � � ��l \��` � �\ .'�,. � t... , i �..].a-au -i.. � 7 ' . . - . � . �� w ��4.�.1,. ;y� . �l W ��. � C A � ` � ( u 1 ��.., � . _ _ µ • � � , � i .'P oi - �, a � �'j-` I � �,�'. 95 9fS � � :_ � � `� ' � � �q� 5 cL' . ,, �, _. _ . � , � ?� � ��• o�� g ' 2 8 I ti � 1 � ., ' V �J �L.� � , � r � ,�, ° � ! 5 � �� .. I � c ' .l.3_'�:.l�.__ i d ., � (1 , "- �l � V � �' , r � Y4 PQ't J �r � 511 _ � I O �J C � '�_�-, J , L ? - � _L � e�, { � "� �1 ¢ ''� . -�1�- F _ ' j,J l�i.�."--1 i � ��Ji1y'�x�,�.,�j, �� + �� ~ I' Z6 I � i� �r_a�,rn�� _ _ . . � � ��, �� s� �. 3 s I� � � a� � +� ` �� I 1� �� 4 — _m � � J t j y}e p�\� � ' V �1 � � {' `�� f '• �; S � � F ; � ' � � I � ',Y"� �;' f I � � P ,� � ' 4 I r "{ I� 1 ''.' p Fy, .� � � x ��'� ' i � - '� k %�; r �.-_ � - � ---.... - � ��.-� . _ ..:_.._:_ ._...-. ___-� I � f I �.� � ;' � i' � '� � � ._. _ i' � � f .,� � ,, � q ... _... . .__._. 1 ( � J' � ` � I �� I � •5 � '� ' C'� r- � c� � E�J C� � -� � � ;: �i r '� � � � i f. ''� � � � � � � �; � � �"r'� � � � � � � r m' � � r` �� 'a � � � � � �. q I '`� � ! �� I i i c� a = � � ; � �� ;� �, �� . � �. _. _ I 4-� ..�DAL�R�'VE---_.J � � � I I 1t ' �) � �,..�. � �; � ;�:. l i SPRiNG� ; Vl��^J �ANE 1 : ' b C5 D� Ft��.l' - m � r � �o m � I� � � -� �� ! y � � I I �I - Lr_ -- f�: _ .� , I ': �� ;,,, G �,; � a � �`�`";;' � . � �� ` �;:.: �"� _ � �. � m � �; � �� m � , � 1 ; I � �',` � � , .4, ;�. ,�: � �--- - _ _ . -� _ _ _ ._-- , _ —�i i , I I '; I I � .�+ e-,� rt r� r-+ r� r-r r ■ DEAN & KARIN HAASE 5181 Longview Drive, Mounds View MN 55112 � Home: (763) 792 - 2272 Work: (763) 574 - 7374 E-Mail: haasedean@msn.com November 6`�', 2003 Attn.: Jim Ericson ( and Mounds View City Council ) RE: November 5`h 2003 Public Hearing & Eichi, Inc. Longview Estates Proposal Dear Mounds View City Council, After attending the Mounds View public hearing on November 6"', 2003 my wife and I are submitting this letter after hearing the issues. (Frankly, we also are surprised that after being turned down numerous times by the Mounds View Planning Commission, Mounds View City Council, and Rice Creek Watershed District, that this issue keeps coming up.) ICarin and I are both very opposed to the proposal of the Harstad Companies & Eichi Inc. to further develop the property lrnown as Mueller Addition Lot 4, Blocic 1. This development is lrnown as the Longview Estates subdivision. The reasons are listed below. 1.) Local area water table effects. This issue has been one of the largest debates of this proposed subdivision. Most people who live on Longview Drive opposite from the proposed development have witnessed a marshy wetland with standing water on the properiy directly across from their existing homes. Some have already had v,�ater in their basements due not to improper construction, but to unnaturally high levels of the area's water table. Over the last 2 years Karin and I had our sump pump in our basement running every 20 - 30 minutes to take away the water that existed due to the high water table. Even with the sump pump we could still see damp spots on the basement floor where the water was trying to seep up through cracks in the concrete, (We are one of the few people in the area who even have a suinp pump.) (People will say that this was the 100 year wet spring with all the snow, but what happens next time when we get this lcind of winter followed by the types of inelting that we saw last spring? Pay close attention to what has been happening with the flooding in the midsection of the country in the last decade and it should be painfully obvious that this is becoming a more common problem that no-one has ever planned for.) What we want assured to us is that if houses are built into this existing area that we will not have ANY problezns with wet basements! Otherwise, we too want to lrnow who our lawyer should contact as well because the damages will NOT coine out of our pockets. 2.) Mueller Additxon Lot 4 Block 1, soil stability & soil composition. Again, znost residents along Longview Drive lrnow the proposed subdivision land as marshy and unstable. (Reference the house just built on the South end of Longview Drive who has already had driveway settling and other building problems due to the fact that the ground underneath the property was not stable enough for the structure on top of it.) Mr. Harstad has claimed that he will have to dig out a minimal amount of land for the property to be suitable for building, have any engineers supported this claim? Also, Mr. Harstad has claimed that he will have his engineers, the ciiy engineers, and also the Rice Creelc . _.._ . . . ___. .. _ ... .. . .. .... _ . ... ,.�_;' la- .d.. , 1`.._� .:�_ 4'-'.- Watershed engineers monitoring the project to insure that there are no problems. This statement also makes ICarin and I very nervous because where were the engineers who built Silver Lalce Road on the west side of the proposed property? This road has settled tremendously due to the soil base upon which it also was built. It is like a roller coaster in places! I would hope that the engineers involved with that project had not intended it to be that way! If they didn't, that would prove my point that engineers also malce mistalces and when this happens on the proposed Longview Estates subdivision where should the current residents of Longview Drive send their damage claims to have them covered. (By the builder's insurance company I would hope.) That would incidentally not be Mr. Harstad as was pointed out in detail in previous planning commission meetings before. After Mr. Harstad sells the properly, to whatever builder has the highest price I am sure, there is no assurance that these builders will stand up to what Mr. Harstad has claimed in the past. They will do whatever is profitable for them, and we aze afraid that it will ultimately fall upon us, the other property owners along Longview Drive who will sacrifice the ultimate e�:pense of dainage to our existing homes due to actions of the land developers. 3.) Property values of proposed housing if minimum lot width variance is passed. We are also concerned about the area's property values if the variance for reduced ininimuin lot widths is passed on this property. Mr. Harstad has claimed froin the beginning that the proposed homes that he would have built on the site would be worth $3001c to $3501c and this would greatly appreciate the values of the homes in the surrounding area. We feel that he is full of lies. We just had our house re-appraised not long ago for $165k and I lrnow that most of the others in the suirounding area are very close to this same range. The appraiser even told us that no-one in their right mind would build a$300-$3501c home in this area because it would be so out of line ��vith the surrounding properties. Secondly, the proposed plan shows eleven houses being built in this area, they would literally be on top of one another with no real yards to spealc of if they were indeed $300-$350k houses. Again, very unlilce all the other properties in the neighborhood. If these houses have to be built with no basements due to the water table then the values of the proposed houses will be much, much less than Mr. Harstad has claimed. The possibility also exists that this could even reduce the value of the current houses that already exist in the neighborhood. 4.) City's responsibility for development along Silver Lake Road. Finally, one thing that was not discussed at the meeting on November 5°i, 2003 was the proposed development along Silver Lake Road. Again, Karin and I don't want development on either side of this property! What came to mind after the meeting was the development along Silver Lalce Road. During the meeting it was discussed that The County disapproves of adding driveways to Silver Lalce Road, and the proposal indicates a"T" style driveway for safe access for cars. However, in the report it was identified that "No proposed home would have any significant backyard area except lots 1& 2". If the seven ne« hoines along Silver Lake Road house new or young families with children, and the homes have no bacicyard, then the children or homeowners will be forced to spend their time in the front yards of these homes. This seems lilce a very risky proposition given the heavy traffic that can occur along Silver Lalce Road. This is not a calculated rislc, but only a matter of time before someone in one of those homes would be involved in a traffic related accident. So my question would be in regards to the city's responsibility to the potential new residents of these homes along Silver Lake Road. It seems to me that lrnowing the limitations of the design of the property that approving such a proposed development would put the city at rislc of a negligence lawsuit. Knowing the location and the activities that will be occurring on these new residential homes, the City would be enabling these citizens to live/play in their residences with a much higher risk of injury or death than other residents of the city enjoy. In conclusion ICarin and I are asking the Mounds View City Counsel & the Planning Commission to deny the Harstad Companies' & Eichi, Inc. proposed preliminary plat. We feel that there are other very serious issues with building on this property that would make it very unattractive for Mr. Harstad to build on it. I do not want evervone to i�nore the real issues of building on this propertv which include the serious technical issues as mentioned above. � . � � �' •r � - , , , , .� � - "��yy ' ^-�;��-�. �_;� . _��` ��._ �_�_�l 3__J �� _--l�` �._----- ------ --- ----- �, � , v -_ _ .-- _ _ -- -- -- _� _ - _-- -- -- - --- --- -- - . ------ C� �`'-.��-�.�„�. __.� _ _ _ _ -- -- - -- - - �� _--.--- ------------ _ — ---- -----��.� -�.�.r, � 'j.' _ � _ . -- ;� , i � L�-- /r . c' � .- ��1--LG L'LLiL-yJ Z-L�'�G� �'tic?'['i� L"'��%— _>--t�'_ �J"'�J-�_ '__—_ � , L , �i �' ;; -�� --- - -. ----- . _ _ -- �--t- --- -��- Z -� --�- - G - - --, 1 . ,� ✓r� ��(� '7 . � '� G� �V� � _ ��-c'�Y��c%�LQ't-t�. ✓U`_ --- -' _.._ ...-- ---- --- ----- _.._.._. ---- -- ---- -- -._ _ ----- - - - . -- -- -------- - - --- -- — — - — - —. . _ __- - -- - — --- --- � ��ltin ��-�j�' c° � -� '�-ct. �i��yj c�_� �iGZ �� C�� _,�Gr C[.��__ %�� ---- -- ----� — - - '�1?,�i1- L,. '7'L_�;1� -- � � . . � - , .� . �� .�,. , . -- --------=C=C?C/`N�.GC _C.U_��1'V��c.C,G. t��2,�.._�t�ctiz-�-�_..C/Yt� � .�.�l�C�,-,Lv' �----=-�--`�- ��C....--- --- -------------___��'L --- � -�L� _!'�_�C?�f�1CC�•�_..�YZ�'��lit�2 /L�L�L'rl__LO.�� t�i ---._._. � n ` G�/" - -- --- -_ -- - ��i(�.1�� , Ld,n __�'�(�L�_G�. ��'��{'L - -�v�-�----- — ��G�[� - _. _. -- -- ---- - - -- �- - � . — .- - �- - - , � -------_.. .__�_�� _ �,��. -�'�__:..,. _._ - -, ��C_--�'-� _� --- - -- ---- �� .��u� �.��--- -- , � '' --- -- __ _-��'-�-�_-_ �� _--;�'�z�� __�.- _ .��t _ � --� -�-� ---- --- ---- -- ------------ - �-- � ��--c�z�v7�c%v-!a1_t.�c�n.° ,---' ��'`J_`-5' !/3�� e��n_ ��z -- -_�--�`�-- .. , .�Z�� :� � --- ----- - ------- --� _ � �, _ ..-- , -, _ �::�,u � . ��_I�c� U��-_f�. -�-�2-�-- -- ---�---- — ---- -�-�-.c%- �----- , . _� . ---------- ---- __ , , . , � � , ,� . _ � � ,� �� e��. �:� � �"� � ��'%, ------._. ------�---------- . _ u,�:�'�.�..;. --- - --- .�-- ---- -�__. � - - - -- . , , � U • � _ �.P .�� ,_�� % c_�-C— - -� �'- ------- -- ---- - - ---- --- � - --- _ _s�_�� .�� ;�� ------- _------,- =- ---��-�e�-�. _�-�..�=�.-� - -----'_- ----� � -C,�..�� <� �.. �..�---- , - � =- -- �� -- =��'- ---- � . _ ��--��a_ _ -------- ------ --- -----_.._. -------.. ,_..��c``Q"``� -- -�-�.�� _ . 9, .,,D --i �!c.t__�'��!%yt2^�.7 � � /� �? L-------- - _ ---- , _G'��"�� --`- _ ------__- - -- ._ .__ __ - - _ -- r�, . • .. 7i��. -- - - �� -� -- --- - --------- � �- - ---- --- -------------- - — _ - - --� __..._ _ — __-- - -- � 7 � J� , _—J . %� .,��GLiL� .''--�%ivC.!._Y.,/'LL!1/LQL�L�/yG "_ — - -- � �%Y<-�-.� ---- - ----y,�-- --- _.._ .---- -1--' �. ' / l ' � / �. ------------- a./?_-�-�. _�G�_--�-'.-t� e��C.� - -�_. ..��-��- - -- — G. iJ�<c _ ___ � '`�� _---- ---,-� --r-.--..: ��_ �/� .. , . / • . � ''�' ��G�2'"� ---- ----- '(- �� -- ----- -- ---.._..—. _ ��-(�3? i ----• - - =.._ . :[.<G't-Uj't --—-- � , . . : — _ —... ---- -- - —�- � .. _ �_ _ _ _ _ a� -�� G_t� . -- ��--, �✓`u-G��l�"Z� _ .�!f?-� ��L%��?!j-c�� ; � ----- > . , p ---�-'�'�__ - - '��G�l— �`"`=�-----. .. ._ .__. ��_.�-G'"J�l- - -�'/��u„r�� C_�=�?%r_�� . -------_..._..--- - _ . /, /� . � G'=G�/?�L� �c� `�[�._G¢-C%��z � - - --- ��-�-�' ---- -- -- ------ -- . _ .. �----- ,.- __ _ - _•---------- , 2 C�G�� _��.��?��-� �� - "�_� "� --- - ---- ..--- ----- ------------ ---- -- -. . _ - y -� - - - -- �� L� ; � - � � , r ��'7 �/ .!Y��%7�— -- — -- --- �-- � -- �--- ----- I -- ---.-----_ __ .�!J _.� ---�.... � _ . _ -- - C i�tr�-G�-c2L��. � -��.��Z7c�t�. . - �--- --� _ � . . . � , � - -- - - _�l - ., _ � . G�.c"�?_/_�!1- —��—� — /Z� - - — ---- -- ---- __ "�L'---,��'`t%L---- -- ; — _ �. ._ %- - - ;� i%�u_. . � � --�i/ ------- - - �___ - - - - ---�- - -�- - - -- -- �� ----.--____ _ -- _ -- ---- � � . . . . - - --------- - -.- --------- ----- ------ .. _- ---.--__- - -- - - -- -- ---; - - - - __ -- --- ---- - - ---- -- -- ------- - -------- - -- -- ------ -- --- ----,�-�-,�'�'----'- --- --- ---��--�---- - - --- -----_. _ __ ��= `'.� C-�-�'`-=; ��- . �.�-._.�--_ - �- ; " - ; - - --- - --�1- --- -�-.e ---- . . -- ------------ - _ _ ��_ �-G�.rn�� - - - - �- - --- , - �� - � � -� �?`72� __ _ ° ��?'yv__ ,�%y_c� ._ C� _- -- . z�e - - -- . _...- -- - Lr � � --- -- - - --- --- - - - - - , � ' --- --- . ---- _ ---- ___ __ - -- - ---- - __. ___ -- ---- ;� - - --__ _ _ -------. _----_ --------_ _ __ . � - '' -- - - -- �--- ---- - - - ---. _ __ .-y��'- - --- ---- - — --- -- _ ._. - _ ---._ _... ---- _ _� � , _ . .- -------- ---------- _- -- - - - - ._ - - ---- - ---_ _. _ - - ---- - -- - _ _ �---------- - - --- - - -- - -- --. %� �' � -� � :�,� �ci � � November 3, 2003 Mr. Jim Ericson Community Development Director City of Mounds View 2401 Highway l0 Mounds View, MN 55112 RE: Longview Estates Subdivision Request Dear Director Ericson and Members of the Plaaning Commission: We are writing in reference to Martin Harstad's latest subdivision request pertaining to the property known as Mueller Addition Lot 4 Blocic 1. As he has shown in his past requests, Mr. Harstad has chosen not only to ignore the City of Mounds View's zoning requirements but has proposed a development which is at odds with the policies and sh-ategic plan of the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Harstad has shown outrageous disregard for City ordinances in his past requests so we feel it is pr�dent to view anything proposed by this developer with a particularly keen eye. 'This latest subdivision proposal is not in line with Rice Creek Watershed DistricYs policies on wetland alteration as outlined in Rule F of their governance. Rule F states: ]. Policy: it is the policy of the Board of Managers to: a. achieve no net loss in the quantity , quality, and biological diversity of Minnesota's existing wetlands b. increase the quantity, quality, and biological diversity of Minnesota's wetlands by restoring or enhancing diminished or drained wetlands c. avoid direct impacts from activities that destroy or diminish the quantity, quality and biological diversity of ' � wetTands d. replace wetlands where avoidance of activity is not feasible and prudent �� (source: RCWD'.s website) . ; , . : Mr. Harstad's proposal is in violation of each item of this policy. Putting developed lots on the entire parcel will surely not enhance the.quantity. of wetland on the site nor the quality. The biological diversity currently on site in the form of deer, rare woodpeckers, ducks, frogs, toads, etc. will surely not be increased by developing the entire site. These policies are so important in protecting the small amount of wetlands remaining that they cannot be put aside. Another policy of the Board of Managers of the Rice Creek Watershed District is to "ensure that future peak rates of runoff are less than or equal to existing rates". During heavy rains, the existing ponds and ditches along the Silver Lake Road side of the properly swell to overflowing and flood parts of the roadway. Will this improve with the creation of impervious surface within the wetland? Of course not. The mitigated wetland areas shown on Mr. Harstad's plat are strewn about in small section over many of the proposed lots. How will wetland policies be enforced in these areas that are part of proposed yards? How do you enforce which areas of what yards may be mowed, sodded, fertilized, planted, not planted, etc. for perpetuity? This is a recipe for disaster and failure of wetland management. Rice Creek Watershed District also outlines specific threats to our water resources in their strategic plan. Specifically, they cite il! planned commercial and residentia[ development as the underlying cause for water resources cfialleitges facrng us. As Mr. Harstad's track record shows, he has less than earnest concern for pla�ing by the rules, regulations, and ordinances established to protect ow• natural resources and the residents of Mounds View. ` Based on these facts, we urge. the Planning Commission members to deny this subdivision request by Eichi Inc. Thank you for your time and your commitment to upholding the City's regulations which protect us all. - � Respectfully submitte�d, ^ � � , / ' ��`�� `/ .,,_ c��. ca,:�• � Michael Brandt 5174 Longview Drive Mounds View, MN 55112 ti�-�� ,��.... , �' r/ c.-�� Helen Brandt � NOV-07-2�03 10�45 RICE CREEK �RTERSHEA 651 766 4196 N.�1ier DAT�: �� ♦Pl��.71[�� .., • -- � 4325 Pheasa�i Ridge Dr. h!E #611 • Blaine, MN SS449�3074 Phone:7G3-398-3070 • Fax:7b3398-3088 �. -u•- �� — TO: Jim �rikson FM: RE: v�1:�w.rizeGre��Cv�r�t.co�Y� Cit af Mounds View FAX #: Long �ew EsiatES � # O� PAGES: 7 �INCL.U��N� cov��t) [ ] priginal follows by mail. [ X] Only capy y4u wiil receive ;�� NOU—E?-2003 1��46 RICE CREEK WATERSHED 12YCE CREEK VVATERS�� DIS'�C'Y' 3585 L�XYN�TON A�'V'� N STJ�TE 330 ��,1V g�L,LS IV1N 55126-$056 phone: (�51) 766-�191 �'ax: (651) �6�-�146 651 766 4196 P.02/07 pE�INiT A�'PLICATION [NAGTIVI�II Date of this Notice: 4/S/02 Permit A licatian No: 01-57 A.Uplicant's Name 8r. Adtiress: �i w Bri a on ivIN 5511� il�er �ake �oad, Ne P� Proj ect Location: Sout3� af �o�tY Raad I and east oi Silvet� La1ce road., Ivloun.ds View- Purpose af PrQiect: Laud 17evelaprnet�t plan �nd VV�etland .PJteratio � E� tes, 111ots, $� ai�x s. — residenhal developm.ent to be l�novtm as LongvY pur �i1e indicates tb.� above-ref�rence Permit ,Applieataon has been inactive for at least three months. It is the policy of the Board of Man�a.g ers to con.clude perwitting actia�x "1 a��Y manner. Therefore, unle�s tk�e Rice Creek Watershed Distric�t ��oardlof I�1a.�nage w ill move to ancel intention to con t i n u e w i t h t h� p e i m. i tt m g P r a c e s s, youx Pernlit Applicatian. The cancellation will occur at the Disi�i.ci's meeting on t he fa u r t h W�dnesday of the month. �e advised that a vaYid �ermrt from the rice Creek Watershed Distrtct �s required be£ore an� work can be done on ihis site. . � . r�S�� .�- �.�-�- ��t ,�,o`�`I � � p�- � i� `� U �,c.�-`' v' (��. � l �. �� an �,�(�� - � �r � � l� `. �c� w ��"` � c��' � � �'" � ,.�-�` � . ��.� �f a-� S �'P (1��,�,y��1-� �r ; a�'r-`�' ,��" �(�,j(�� r, t� `e "f �LJ. '.)V V) �., �� c..,�.;, (�t�� .,�,s � �r��,�r � � � � �� . -l9 �� ,1�. � � ��C t� � . ll � c�.� I£you have any que�tians; please conta�t the D�striGt at (651)766-4191. 5in�erely, �� v� . -r. `~ Miexsch progXaxx� Coordinator c: City o£Mauttds View � •�RCWD Fil'e f��=57}� Cnrt'espondcnce �.-'` � �C �°�a C�� S ~. .�'`` � � NOV-07-2003 10�46 RICE CREEK WATERSHED FAX TRANSM�Y�'A� Date: � 1L IT ol _ 651 766 4196 . E�� & OLiVI �R - ��sou�c�s ,._ ... ...�..�- ,.....,,,�.�— �� . �-� 3$25 lake Elmo Ave N. Lake Elma, MN 55042 pnone: (651)770-H448 Fax: (651)770�2552 E.�naiJ: calmer(a�eorinC,COm P.�3i07 To: �N�� Fro�nn: ��-� Snbjects Q��`� �4�►�-t- Fax No: �a�� Total Pageso � DN 4 1 I'i�+'►'� 1�fa�'1 �'n1 S OJ �J a I E�. � t�.h.�� . l��W�J�.�..o. J� vM W� C�'1�1�+4Tiar�, �i'tid'� "i?�1S Alr� �1dT° .�t � �°1�A�-1,1M G� F�w► N�✓^l�.!' ylE►�J n- 1NE �i�LatiGh N� f�s v�1�T7� R��1 �'f� PL+9+VS 9� f�t� ��Fsa `1'}I AT C.�D►M P �� W � G h�1 T�71 N�A'R-�f , pn]y �apy you will receive �43 - /I l-- �{-C3d ( 7 0� 1p,_,p �,;.��t-� '� M�r-� c.��^o'^ i`""` � a..�,e �I t`a vc�e�, �C�kcst'� �r � �c�` .��:.ccd' , Sr�;. c� C�k�.u,.� r�� -�a�� =t1 i � 1'�D h.b rrc N� re,p d� ac- Wi�� ^°� �z�w`� �-g-b�. �.�. � �� - - Ck�ll.e.� `� t�,�-nt�t�.r.c.c, c�- y vR,c�,�cf- �o� �i lo-t� �o �� ('l�ac4u. t�,tlo�s �' [ ] Qriginal follaws by mail. ��`� t�,`t'•\\ n.� �� ,�� a�'s� bu�� ;s NOU-a7-2003 10�46 RICE CREEK �ATERSHED 651 766 4196 r.�4�� Zice Creek Watershed District Permit App lica�ion l�Tumber 01-5'7 ,,q,pp�icant: Harstad Companies 2191 �ilver Lake Road New Br�ghton, MN �$112 ph: 651-b36-9991 Fx: 651-G36-3422 A,g�nt: Matt Davich �, �7, �'1.U(� �L SOI15, Y.i1C. 91$0 Lexington Avenue NE Circle Pines, MN 5501� Ph: 7'63-786-�555 Fx: 763-�86�6007 Puxpase: Land Deveiopm at �P ean od b�t�o�n 1 as a� �� f Estat s�111 a lots, res�dentlal devel p $± acres. ' �ocation: South of County Road I and east of Silver Lake �t.oad, Maunds View. 7'-�-S: 30-23-7 db �teGommendation: T�ble with author�zation for administrative action pending receipt of ..�.. .....,, :. - ' - _ � -- .y - --- � _ /_ _ _ � _ - -�- - - - --- '-_ v`. ■' ■ "- - - __ :1 _ � - ' � ' � .rJ■ . � • ■ � t � � • •�YY ■ i� - '- - _ - - - � " a ' • � . ' � • �� Proof of Title and signedlnotarized WCA Deed �orms for Replacement Wstrands. 1u4� ; 1�Sc�eu�'t7o�K dh+ QYfEId /T' /�O 1�' ��C�'��1� �. ��A F�S. Stipulations: �. The replacement �ut�'etland approved as p�rt of this pemvt shall be constructecl concurrent or prior to any wetland fill activiiy. E,mmons & Oiivier Resaurces, Inc. 2, The Declaratian c�f Restrictivns ax�d Covenants far Replacement �etland shall b� properly �iled and recorded prior to an.y wetlar�d �iil activity, with praof of r�cording fiunished to the �istrict. 3, '�'h,e �►ermitt�e shall submit a monitoring report on t�e replacement wetland to RCWD which includLs t1�.e informatian speci�.ed in 1 1 �/ ar it/17�o 7 I NOU-a7-2003 10�46 RiCE CREEK WATERSHED Pernlit Applicatian No. O I-57 Harstad Companies Exhibits: � . F'�otat� �Ei416K'r i�SC{R1P7?tFJ �+. A'� E4. �'V� �SnNs, ��'y 91N�4-�o, f�:c: e bt�zr,l n i 651 ' (bb 417b r • �+�' � � Minnesata Ru]es $420.OG20 each year for �ive years fatlowing campletion of the replacement weiland. The report shall be submitt�d no later than NovembeX IS of each year. 4. District �ttspector to be contact�d fvr preconsti'ty.ction rr►eeiing prior to gradi�tg. 1, Permit Application dated Jwne S, 2001, received June 5, 2001. 2, l�esponse ta Ju7y 24> 2001 �ngineer's Report prepared by Plowe Engineering, Inc•, c�ated August 8, 2001, receiv�d August 9, 2001. 3. Wetland �'ermit Application pregaxed i�y Kjoll�aug �nvironmental Services, dated May 31, 2001, received 7une 5, 2001. 4, pr�timinary Plat prepared by E. G. Rad & Sans Inc., last revised June 10, 2001, received August 9, 200I. 5 � Crrading, Drainage, and Erosion Contzal Plan prepared bY E• Cr• Rud & Sons, Inc., last revised , 200I, received A�s�-4, 2001. -A� � j�3 Mitigation Area C'rrad,ing Plan and Details (2 sheets) prepared bY E. G. Rud & Sons, Inc., ux�dated, received June 5, 2001. 7. �xisting & Proposed SubwatErshed F3oun.dary Map pr�p�� by E. G. Rud & Sons, Ine•, undated, receiv�d 7uly 11, 2001. 8, Hydrologic calcul�tions prepared bY P1Q�'ve �z�g�.n��g' �c., dated July 2, 2QQ1 y��eiv�d �'u13� 11, 2001. � rp. t1. jrt% 12.� Infiltration worksheet sad checklisfi prep� by plowe E;ngineering, Inc., undated, receive.d J'uly 11, 2001. �� r� � ,Swr�htul��7q� r+�Ftr�t�71dY �WE d�k4�Gftu�+97�0�' p� � �� Wetland Delinea.kion T�ehnical Nlemorandum pr�p�'�� bY ��9 �� o�� dated December 28, 2000, received June 5, 20�1. l ��/vl , �p]and $uffer Construction and Seeding Sp�cifications grepared 1�y Kjolhaug Enviroxvnental Ser�vices Company, dated IVIa� 25, 2001, reccived J'une 5, 2001. i3.�. Wetlan� impact minirrxization memorandum prepared by Kjolhaug Environmental Services �om.panY� dated Jul�r 26, 2001, received August 9, 200 X . , , � / • s �,,,)��-�, �' >>)�3 j�, , l�, �Gr�FT' WG�I D� �ca+-►�'t � Er►amons & Otivier Resources, lnc. 1 01 !/ or 1�li7lvl � NOU-07-2aQ3 10�47 RICE CREEK WRTERSHED pec-rr►.it A lieation No. O1-S7 Harstad Companies 651 766 4196 P.06i07 !6- Xs •�'reliminaty Subswrface Investigaiion prepared by Braun� Engineering Testing, Inc., dated June 1 G, 19�7, Xeceived August 9, 2001. f7, �$13,000 received from Eichi, Ir�c., on June 25, 2001. �indings: ]. Propased pzojeat entails �n 11 lot sin�le family residential developmen.t on S� acres. A1l proposed hotnes have frantage along the existing Lan�vievv Drive east of Siiver Lake Rvad.. No nEw streets or stornnsewer is proposed. Tk�e site is ultiruately �butary to Rice Creek �via overland flow thraugh wetlands downstream of Silver �a3c� Road. 2, The proposed plazt addresses 17istrict rate control, water quality treatment, and infiltration requirements via an onsite rT[JRP pond Y r nt�ri:finxiai 'x:s:'�acc�� arid a sediment/infilt�ratian trap. , � � _ , s. The praposed pc►nd NVJI- is below the adjacent wetland baundary elevatiar�s. However, the vvetiand is ditched to the south with a lower oufiXei eleva.rion and based on submitted sail borings, a�p�a�rs to be predomunantly surface water driv�n. Therefor�, the praposed pond outlet invert shauld not �.ewater the wetland. 3, Tk�e Wetland Delineation Technical Memorandum identifies the onsite wetland as �mergent and forested (as pet NWI maps Type 6/7), Proposed wetland impact is 0.51 acres via fill fo� hause P��• Froposed wetlan� replacemerit includes four new we�land credit � adj acent ta the western � edge of the impacted wetland for � tatal a.b7� of A:£� acres of IVW'C• In addifipn� �he replacement pian i.noludes 6 s� acres of PVC via upland buffer around NWC areas. T}le �,z�p ro pased wetland re placement plan satisfies WCA r�t�u�irements, and se.�uencing discussion has been deem�d acceptable. 4. The 100-year #lood elevation for the site is 892.4. Supporting survey information has be�n submitted identifying a wetlan� EOF elevation of 890.7 (Silver Lake Ro2d centerline downstream af the sit�). The lowest progosed �'irst floo�r eIevation is 894.0, 2 feet above �he 100- year elevation and 3.3 feet above the identified EOF, th�reby satisfying District freebdard requirements- Emmons & Olivier Reso�u�ces, lx�c. 10 1 / �l rr�r7 f p, NOU-07-2003 10�47 RICE CREEK WATERSHED . Permit ,A.pplication No. 01 �57 Harstad Companies $oard A.ction: 651 766 4196 P.07i�7 3s�� Y The proposed grading plan includes t af floadplain fill compensated by excavation for wetland replacement areas az�d for the NI1RP poz�d , n �, ��a� CY�, 5. A revised Erosion Contral Plan 1�as been submitted s�ecifying silt fence down slope of gratied areas and along un�impacted wetlar�d boundaxies, rev�getation rrzeasures, and an implementation schedule. 6. A Revised Preliminary P1at has been subrnitted with sat�s�actory form and desc�ptian �anting panding an.d flowage easements over all vnsite vvetlands, ponds and other hydrologic features. 7. This Permit was tabled on June 27, 2041 and Ju1y 25, 200Y, far issues �'egar�ing stormwater mana ement and r�vetland impact. �IS in tHert�+rr �$$ �tw�E��A'� ��► ��zz oJ � z rS�'u� , Emmans & Olivier Resource�, Trac. 10 1// 0/ 1�,/7 �71 TOTAL P.a7 �;______: � Item No: 6 Meeting Date: November 19, 2003 Type of Business: Public Hearinq of Mounds l/iew Staff R To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Reduced Side-Yard Setback for a Second-Story Addition at 8471 Fairchild Avenue NE; Planning Case VR03-011 Introduction: The applicant, David Przetycki, is proposing to construct a second-story addition above his garage located at 8471 Fairchild Avenue. The home was built in 1981 and at that time was constructed crooked on the lot, causing the northwest corner of the home to be only nine (9) feet, six (6) inches from the side property line. Mounds View Zoning Code requires that the living area of a home is ten (10) feet from the side property line. The requested variance is for six (6) inches. Discussion: Setback requirements are addressed in Section 1104.01 of the Zoning Code. Each zoning district is listed with the corresponding front, side and rear setbacks. In an R-1, Single Family Residential district, the typical building setbacks are as follows: Front, thirty (30) feet; Side, ten (10) feet; and Rear, thirty (30) feet. It is noted that sheds and garages, attached or detached, can have side and rear setbacks of five (5) feet. The Code also addresses the issue of "prevailing setbacks," however, that is not applicable in this case. The applicant desires to expand his home by constructing a 1,209 square foot second-story addition above the garage. Under typical circumstances the addition would not require a variance, however, one corner of the home encroaches into the side setback by six (6) inches. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case) 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 criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had �o control. _ � __ ,< Sethack Variance Re��oit 8471 Fairchild Avenue Novei�iber 99, 2003 Page 2 The property is zoned R-1 and the property owner is seeking a building permit to construct a second-story addition. The home was initially placed slightly crooked on the lot, which is not typically the case. Most homeowners would not find an issue with constructing a second-story addition, as the setbacks have already been established by fhe first-story and in most cases would meet code requirements. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. While the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, because of the way the home was placed on the lot, the applicant is unable to make desired improvements. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicant was unaware until recently that the entire home was not ten (10) feei from the side property line and had nothing to do with the initial placement of the home. d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that every properfy owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and livability of their home. Many improvements benefit the neighborhood in a broad sense in that the reinvestment often triggers similar reinvestment in adjacent properfies and at the minimum motivates properfy owners to take a greafer sense of pride in property ownership. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The applicant is requesting a six-inch variance, which is fhe amount that would allow fhe proposed addition to match with the existing structure. This is the minimum variance thaf would alleviate the hardship. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Granting a variance to allow the addition to encroach six (6) inches into the side setback would not be materially detrimental to the purpose and intent of the Zoning Cade given the placement of the existing structure. The six-inch encroachment would not be noticeable from the street or even to the adjacent neighbor, as the proposed addition will match the existing structure. � Sethack Varrance Report 8471 Fairchild Avenue Novemher 99. 2003 Page 3 g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The proposed addition should not have any impact on the supply of light or air to adjacent properties, nor should it impact congestion of streets. The proposed addition will not increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety or decrease property values in the neighborhood. Quite possibly, improvements to the applicant's home may increase the value of neighboring properties. Summary: In order for the Planning Commission to approve this variance request, the above criteria must be satisfied. Staff would take the position that the hardship criteria can be justified and that the resulting improvement would be a benefit to the subject property as well as to the neighborhood. Staff feels that this is a reasonable request. Recommendation: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 743-03 is attached forthe Commission's approval if that is the chosen course of action. 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 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, �+�Gia�,v� �il;o3.o�i,i Kristin Prososki Planning Associate -� _ . � � _� � _ _. _ , � __ : __ ��; �-f� ;� ;r�ri•��r�'� , � ; �. ��- -� " �.�Sa,lf •� J U�tp ��4 's ' Parfn��' CpMMUNITY DEVELc7PMENT DEPAR7MENT p�.ANNIIVG APPlICATIOI� 2401 County Rvad 10, Mounds View, MN 5Si12 �763)717-4Q20 Fax �fi5i) 765-1fi60 Please Type or Print Infarrr,atian • Compte�- Bo� Sid2s of T3iis F�rrn App[ic�n� Infarmatian I ` �, . �, i � �; �� Ll h''� ' �K:� �,`i' G�-ti _._._ Tele��hane � � Z� `�� t � ,.) � _ N�i�nu oF Applicant ___ . �.L �' �/ �drss �6 � � ��.(�?•'1 C ��,_.� � Fa%�1�'(�`� � ��-Li-?-r '�''t "U+1►'�t 1�1 �t i'ti�l� � 5 i 1�- E-nj�;r: �. � r.-t�1�C ' C 1 V !�- fJ i_ �_ C'r. �-I li� _..... I€lterest ip Praperiy (cltc.ch anpropriaEe box) C�t' Ov.ner of �'ro�crty ❑ Contrac far E�eed hv,!ner 'L1 3 essee, C�p�:rator, f�wnager ❑ Agreement t� Pu,chase ❑ Oti�er (er.plain}_,--.._ ----,� -.— A�plicants must pmvlde evidence af IflQerest in praperty aC the �inre� of appl/tatfon, a�rd if you are nvt the owner of the prapertyi you nruSt' ertJrer pt'ovide a letter af perEnission from the nivner ylviny consent to Che filing af rhis appllc�tton ar the praperty awrr�r must siqn thfs application for it ta be accepted. Praperty DescrlpYien/Prapasaf f , �I�"� I �"C� �!' . �°i i � t-� `, - Address or Ge.neral Loca�ion �..��':�-�=---- -� 1 �. •�� Lega! Description �' _l��.L... �7C-��1 �SFi;t�_E? � � _C"�'� _ �,_� —. `� "i C � �_? �7 � -- Property idenri(icatfon f; (PIP,1 �) -�C� �c , � _ _� � L� y � Z' ..— # af Acres . � �� '� =��'=S __ _^ —. -. Csirrcnt Zonfng ��-- -•�-- �- � Type of Appticatfon (Please ch�eck th� apprapriate boxes) Amendmen_ — ......_.. _ r��o� su�div;s�o� ��a _ - ___:. _ --: - - - t*�i��r Sub�fi�,+isian I ��SU ,_ ..__ --- —._ - -- Planr,ed Unit Reve�rypt�ienk (PUD) � �7�0 _._„ —.._ , •.': PUD Amendm�rit _, ____.:...$350 ,_ _ _ _ GflnditfanafJInterinT Us� Pet'r'�it P.-1, R-2 �150;_uyl othcrs r3�5 �� Varlance T ` _ � �� 1,iR-2 �1�0� oEl �ther� �32�, --- TFxt krnen�lmPr�t, Zar�ing Cod� �: �150 _�__ 7�xt Amenclt�sent, Oti�ic.r Ciry Cc�rie _�1Z5 ,^� De��2lop Revie�vl5�+te Plari ._ �s?25�aere, min $125 Raay �^;eiiand Alter�tiqn P�rmit R-1, R-Z �150; aU pthers � 't:�etlat1d Bufrer P2rmit---__ R.1, R-2 �25; all othars �: qtrier — .-_--- • � _ _ . _ _, - •� -- : — -: ,� � ` � � .� e. .___ ___ _ i T K�171 I'airchild .��E- ?�� 1vic7i�nds Vie�c,141w 55112 C1c inlx.r Z $, '? S1U3 C'ilv uf h4ui��tds �'i�w' ^ 101 F�l��.y l 0 '�lounds View, h4N 5i11�-1499 I)car Ylattuine {:onunissian: I woiild like t� r�Ylucs�t a r�ariance from thU Cit}' rec��tirement that residei�tial co�istrtiction he at [t�s� 1 f) fi;et from fl�e Property linc. I havr. liv�d in ihc hcruse al tlie abvy�e adciress fUr (he p�st eight years> ;ind I w�trld like to lauitd � seL�tid storY adc3iti�zn, cxttnding over the ��nge. H��+�c��cr, the �roperty survey I har! iione. tlxis m.onih sho.��cd tt��it 1��17an tl�e h�usc w:js buiii ic� 1481, it �v�x huill sli�}itiy Ci'fi�ked Un fhe 1c�L �1�hC Z��Ck of�ihe bara�c is 1l?" from dir prr�percy line, but tlie front i: 9' b"- I<un rr.cjiiesiing a six-inch ��:u`iance so that thz ��ditinn can be built to m�t.ch the e.istin� str�aeiurG. ? ;�Tl�anl.- ya�u. �(� � r r �j�l�.l✓ll ' ; �� '�j I)�tv9d ?�+I. Priclycki L :� _ ._ _ _ � . . �: _ _ r �. � . � -�: _ .. _, . _ _ � � _ . . . �---- � - . .n ..�. „�I i ] ra.�rohilcl rtve. A9ot�nc�sti'icw, Mn, �5 I 13' LEGr1L I�IiSCi2i!'"1'!f)N: Lot 3, fiipc}: l, CED��.ft F]AY ES'I'A'f�5 LEGF N iS:. Scate' 1 i��ctt = 20 i,.i:t Eicarn,s as Shuvm are asswnuci e� Denot�s lrcn l�4��r.umcnt Faund o�euut:s lron Mo�w:ncnt Se� iCtip;.�cu by rt.LS 1�I�. IC1?a3) ❑ E3cnn�cs I" x 2" Ll�c�ud Stulcs Sct !;o�c; pist:,nces �s me-asured are i:� iee.t� t�n;i'�;; �l; hu1d,-c�'ths pi a lc�ni. ._ � d� � / � I i j_�.�i,7,�'�• �`�5��%? ��` � ,.�W"�,nar��;'iit.�r �Fr1Cr--- - _,. � . � .1 � : � - _ _ _-_ __ - a .: ��_�_ _. .. ..�... t , __.� . -,-.- �� 1 ' �� , - `�'�}��7 ' I ;�� .�. � C Ur,t�Y'Q.�FE'•� Nf� a— � — ..,. � .. . _'—s - �....._ . . ,.� .. ... _... . " • 47 rc' t/ ��i � �.�' r--- ��IT 1-- , ... _"_' `-', _ _.__. ... ..�� .,- ; , _ . -� ; -,`^---- 7-T- � �< i , ,; � ' �!—� 'r . �c. _rnC .f h'a.rn.�'f ,s(�J�:,1�• .f 7 ,,. ,} —�!� � ' ' ' • � '� � �� ['3St,i�i PPrU:u.t1�.1'IOfOu^ I � `w � ,; , . =; cd ' I •� � i _ {y =_� ` � .�j;-`�r; �tY/'ICC'�tr� � � • Jf�L-�i}�� l0 ,d :I . . ' ; . pl j I<} I_N � `. 1: ; � „� . 7ri�eVd� _..� '� r Y , :� , ' �"'' L ��,/�`�t _ ' , . � s it} J -f I � _ `�''�a"`� . ? '� � ] `° � �-•� . � ' � � � � L' 7 1 t • I �..—. . . . `a- _ I V � �. f'�� 1 ' � -t_� �r• � �! ,_ ,, � , J �.- .%• \ _.� �, ; i� � •r �-t �•:—T-. -,-r '1� -�1- ,�_ j� �� I � �; ��` 1 '1 ry w -L I G ,..- �� _, ( cc� / lt� 1f' �` �- � � o- { ~ cYa � � ( U •t- _ � . = � � t, � .�? , �.Y ;�, 1 _� _ �� = 4 . �_ +'�'� f � • i :� i ;' ? c' � �. � � � � ` u� o-- � �' , g i d- �,�� - ' "� c� � v � ,r h� `� __ 1 J`� �'; � �yI''` 1 . /`L �,, -/...,.._i! Ll �+ f6 �i .. I. � nn �t I �' fB , � ^ '��} � _ .-"- f i ! �� v � J � °�I ..�-=�/� ltfaa�f Yrt�!dc�� f-�Y4Cr'�� 1 � t _ �..._ -- — =°Y — --r., r. — ; .1`-�.�_....,... .�_-.� -� cr-.��:..-�, ;' i 5, 4 �� -- 3 0 `d` _—�.i--= _ �. i . _,_..z`� � c °- ,� " _ ._ �. x,' h�n`l �� E /� � s . -- I L��'� I°�o_<S- — � � i�laL �ra l'; �. G • � .. g.�""��,�.� Cl . f • � �`4 t�. n?C/�_`�? a_, .�'a si:��tr�:��c��i'ti C:1'sRTIf IC�TIOh: �, „ F,� �� Y. 1 hcrch� ccriif}� th�t this surv.y u`as prrp�rcd by nte anrj ifcd ( acn a d�]y �.,e' . �r��e�a��?.air�S.u•��-r.}'01'L'il;lerc�e�y-�� `f �sr.ateot n4inr,�.sa;a, As . ��!sT�RED s rve,ed n;�- r�e �his �,.� `+�.jay of C./C�.o-"�� _2Gi.t1. L}�U � r, . .._ �G, i� SURU�Y�I2 � g,��: � //-!� � �nk + �.� (J j J/� � f � � " �;Yeh 10) k - -_'_' .-.J..J.-�._:�L`��Ci+—`�,F•".'...'. . S.' ��.'i��ji��ic,l`�-- SS*,�'-�� liRi'�' i_.. H5c''c , l_snd Survcyor, FAn. Lc�cnscT�o. 10}�B- M4(1iv+��-,��tiY`"43i?=s` ., Mounds View Zoning Map o�r �� .. _ _. __ . : ---'" ♦ � `-- j �_ __. � _._._ . . _.._.NORTH—COI�JTY K--2---LINE— . . -- — . . __ . � . . _C�. � .—. =-- �- iA99849G �' -,°°�o'- �,, �ni-� �n, .-�� ,....._.... _u_-.-.-. ..._-.. _ ..-_-,, .. ; N 649! h.; N�.g494 495F.^� °j8494 p455� N� &��C -..��- _ .. . ..... . 3489 � 8480 , 8481 ��P1�j;��9490 8485 .- �� 6484 � 3a%9 ' � 84i1 8� E48a 6475 8i:0 aa�c na�a ea�s 7`'�` 896D '965 �� B4�� ea61 . 8475 A47a Ba77 8s66 p ��. 5460 gqg7 8464 8965 8961 8456 8467 8460 8451 A�1561r 6e4�� . .. .. ... �. w�� `4..,:-_�� i'�JU 8959 8450 8p� 8440 8447 - �'�,5 845i 8455 8'�� 8aG5 � �� 3445 . 844G ... ` P9321.l � 3M1n� 8443 ... 844a � 3445 . Bi44 8455 6464 �. 8438 8451 > 8931 � ;a39 ��. ¢ � 8435 Sa3a 8433 Bi32 8441 8454 �.�� y ?47.5 8432 P419 `8� y 8425 � ' B429 . ��u 8425 . Ba25 6426 8429 a�;4 8a25 �•�. 9423 E426 8400 8415 8420 g415 ' E414 -- 7 . �. 9415 8420 8d� 8392 . . .. 8nU1 BaU6 d4pg - 8a04 6415 8408 84f5 84T.a1 8475 B408 � 34t5 84tt ,g401 � . . . . .. . .. � . 8aG0 \ . o SSE4 8i90 8i05 8400 E395 Sa00 0 8+05 �+ +'.� � I � c, . 8400 8379 3A05 8408 j3597 m"� 83'3 8389 ..- . 63E0 � \,, �J o� 5384 8395 a�Ei E390 8?95 6366 � p4Ut � 839d �ROVtLfJJ '�0� 8�79 8380 8373 8.i70 3�?� - li �.. B�� 6365 3597 - 83eR � C � ES367 9Si9 � 8380 Bo65 8S6•7 'y' � , 83.2 � 8360 8375 - fi3c0 � �' � -!' �Y'1 8378 37S �-„m� 936 Co65'.. .. . - E3'S � SS76 5�75 8578' i, ``� .1' p �_� R' 636E `� SS59 8350 Ss55 8350 � ! 33'1 8568 � 8369 gt50 6�55 < . . . � k �'�._/ ;3.51 83a 8365 8354 83•75 b369 8345 83ap 8355 834U 837i .. 8372 �365 E36D ' ',`1 i,;...; � - 3340 8335 O�: .. g?4n 635� 83a6 6735 8331 8330 8330 8357 8340 E3't5 Q� _�� ,�, - 8325 8320 6321 OK� \ .,. 8323 932U � ' 33+1 .. ... 8343 . BD42 8325 9352 8�15 8320 8315 8378 .. E315 � dS4U � �.`` in '�`� 3139 3334 . . . - � � �321 8300 8305 � 5530 �I -� , ' - 5335 ��32 8375 g�j0 6303 83i0 0 6305 83tU �.: 3353 � E 30 8}J3 8aG2 83��.... 629D 8295 �. � 8290 � 5291 d290 P285 6290 6295 � E.ilp Y� 8307 ��., i327 � �-'' � g325 8300 9 6285 8280 8287 �- 82P0 z 326i 8260 827:� 8280 � 8?73 3� APDAN � �. ��;, ....�.. _ , 3..71 I `_`:.'- „S . .. 6270 . .. go70 � 8^�t �270 O 830D r ��'�� , i y � sns o ese� - ' a2ss ezbn � ezs� PAR�< __�-' � Z v.-- ... aaoi �. GROVEU+NO � azeo a a2so szei ezs� ue�eii_ `' . � � -� r,I 8265 (52�3 . . . � W - tl� - , PARK � , szso e255 s250 w e's� E2ao f�.� 3285 �� l I'� 8255 - 8250 8267 8_50 82i1 � . - 8285 '� � . �� F . . . . _ � S260 � 8?41 32a2 � � Z r . i 61 p� Q 81� I II � � � -�E2a0 8?6� ezao �' �o � v N N �� O n271 . -� ?91 N H 1-�.:.. �� .... :. o. N N�o r 8215 8232 E25G J- l ,' AROGIJ �� `� "' ^'�� 82J0 s2s5 1O ; aVE ��{� i . �— � e ro �� o a �' � �-, ,� �,� cv ro i ,h^ w�� 8'L'LO �, m � � N� g�i � 8239 � . m ro 1524 N N m'y� m��n n � H. � . i �'�i (V N � 8206 - . h Nr��V N �'BL1O s2�� ezos � -� i � azza azzs �} i� 822% � E7&: 8795 • 8202 � � i I m �. m a . v 820 . . . .. . � � � 8257 ; �'� 8212 1-: gtgp E205 � I irv rv �+ �i - 81fi0 E1S5 i.i 820E � - 8�s2 0 8203_ . � E2o� �R . . . _ , e.. ^p :. �- gt7t : . . . a2oa r-'J ,--__. Z „� - �n : . . �r _ � � m ao 8775 � � �'� - • 8160 . . 1 � � 8200 ..-� � .r � 8760 W ro N�_N �8200 N iv N NNE� BIE�S m 0��`. 8165 �. • j 875C -" -__ �� .'�r`:' . . .3tas � LAPORT , .. � . eiss a� �t 8�SO ... . . � . . &iao1._ _�- ! �� . . � 8745 si O �� 8145 � SIaO � i 8138 � ° �. 874 'O B .a`i_ . . $i35 ;8tS f° N c'�v cO rv� . 8135 �P P.S` 87s0 r1 .� n �qg63: II732 N.: N � +31?5:8730 p/A731�! � . 6141 i St32 gi21 Et='E e�`�2-' � 8127 . r.;� � . /�2@t8�. 811 h'u> ��m .�:i�v a�� N�_.....�...�nm�� ry� N Bill :�N °��.;NN..�n�v�i810 8701�N �n � o � B1O6 n�N N-N N� N N N N N:NH72 7L7N N N . N_,N N�N C p WOOD Ro:+D � o m �. . BYYJI n. a '' ^, 'o' � v � 606D .�'° ° 8D99 . N e�v 8085 ��`r�i SOE6 8085 N � N 8090 BD85 il�Pil` N m: W W ry N� a HOL'1. N, N s�� fiDiS rv'. N � . . . � . ... N , �v p . I 8031 - A085 � � 8070 BOit E066 8075 � BD68 RD71 8072 N 80'2 BO6G 8055 - BO84 . . . . BOJ1 8077 3070 8077 .._..-..�� ' 8075 8DE0 8059 � 8050 8055 8060 8065 . 805C . . 8�� ..�.1{�BOe0 BOa2 8045 6052 8051 SOa4 SOSS 804b �41 80a4 BO;t :i!':R-�t.80YJ 8045 , SOa6 8045 ' 8040 8039 � - � 603� BG31 8^38 :r°iI1 8030 . E032 BD'aS 8040 80;�. ' 6035 80^<a ; � 6026 SG25 8�?B LL . . . . '. " �o " 8030 Q . 8027 802D A025 '. '. -¢ 8078 � 802t 80_.. 80�4 i°'� BOt6 BD15 p 8025 . d077 bGOD � � O � �01t 0000 800: .a �- .. .. . SCi BU09 �DOb 8D17 D000 sooi SO10 � . . 8005 749? .. , 7590 798F � N;7989 80D5 . B000 . .. ' . . . . ... a . 7977 7984 ` �yop 7965 ' BOD4 ,�961....�.. 7990 � 7987 799D �'989 '.596 �`- "... � 79QG i969 7980 7979 � 79P0 �%985 �970 . ". iq =.j�� 7980 7975 797U 7979 . - 796� . r� �` ! 1�. °m , 7Q65 . 796U 7959 79i0 ?9�5 79C+9 7960 )9G1 7975 7980 7571 � r 1. 7960: p - 7966 - 7350 79 1 7�� O `�:.�� ^ 7050 7995 - 7956 � '9�9 � :554 7959 .. - -.- 7955 7944 952 _ 7 � � c„ � ,eao �yns 7946 79Z� ' HILLJIEW � m ij �. � 7934 �933 7950 7935 %930 791? 94e j PAR K 7945 ' 7$Ji 93' �' 793D � `� .4 f k,q�-x6 � 7932 ; ^ . �' . : � .. - N n ._ 7907 o ue i�� m �- o• r� �n a c � �-� N 7900 7901 H N' 7900 ?: �,F � 90f '� N.._�n..:� � i900J � � o�' p.,\ 7� N N�soo 7soi �sa� � r ROtiD `�-: _.: -._ _ � - �92C HILLVIEW — m o m a .::791FQC3°1z �.� ..,. �� s�� `�,. ^ 78860�691 iv N 7860 7895 ,10,� N 7890 7A95� N� 7804 7B65N �n� 'O �7A8 �RAO uj: � d`.�7861 � c°�i ��.>a\ �;,'�Q �„ - ✓�` ��_ °' . .. _ . in -� 7867 78i0 7869 . 785E ! 7 �8 ie?5 ;.28&D�zr�. I,w'�•. � T 885 7806 '1853 �� _ r� ..�o �_^ �Y� S'� e.` 7576 Z � • - .7860f f 78.i5�! I� �� o'`�; � B-2 '"+y .� � 7677 7854 7851 7860 78G5 � 7852 w . ' 7870 786f - �'=A �j � - p �� '+� 7870 in � . . - � Y 7847 � i Z - :7A50 7821 �F o`: ��` + 7gq2 78YJ 7855 � 7RaF s 7836 3 � z�B ,i�p r ~�i..y �c' >e 'Bb3 '841 7840 �E2� � g '64i �i I '1 / � y o 7840 'd3:� 7$07 , � b 7630 . o H �.iBU � � �i /1" :. �,. �y .f�� 826, 7851 � .. �y 5 78i �� I %820 � �E3? r7791 F� <� ��. ,��z.�b-3�:: �820 7815 7750 7900I :EC 7Et<� %St5 hY.VJOG R_3 ��R-S i / ,�ti <, 5� o"�., .� '� o , u � � F �L� "'+�'^ .{� ,> 9y; 78t�N o'SO5 "E'� 78U1 :aoG N . 786 7781 7750�' �7 ,r".,�. .� ,, :'. �°� x`:. � i g v� �� ` ��.'ti �� i8G9 . 7770 $I ?807 ?;r>0 779' 760D 790! 77B ''� I. f . � i` �.,'�:., 'i;. 7800 z. 7?E7 "7:S �o [. . .s, ea :759 a 4°; ,^ryo `�a 6-2: � r `o- R-4 t. �aoi »ssI WI -��i ,'�� n�� ;�ca �_9 >s ns� ;noz�, --._.....��T-,.;�o_� ,�,�,� "e. �.6' � - ____ -, ,. x,.,.,. ,... --,.. ..__ ,___,_ _____ ____�_� __ ,` _ _ _ -: __ :_ �-� � ��.. ,:_i_ Cit� of N' o�nds Vie�ne - Loca�ion 1�1 ap _ � David Przetycki Property Involved: 8471 Fairchild Avenue Planning Case No. VR03-011 � 8471 Fairchild Avenue [� Properties Within 350' � � � � Photograph of Existing Home �� - < �, - � � �, ,k��, ,,�� . - � . � � � ,�, b7 +. A � } �� a. � .r.. ,� � �'r� . .. , _;,`i'�1 r . , . , `,� ;i` L �dti3�� '� tzN� ,�.�'.(� �, � i.� � -�++ r� ��. r+� �} T t �' �'; � "� r s � �s ,;�. r�� 4 J' � � a;� ��di ST : ,� �yF—e� �� t ,M N� jj� 'I 1 } ' ��+�Fft.�?` �' 4" ._ � xtd �pLp o �y k�•� =r 'i'. ��4��t � < �"�-4.:�' �' �SC ��.�",�,,�,�, 'i✓«S �., �i �. �. ,.s�, . L , j r ' -i .. % r - .. l 1' . � � _�c . . . . _. :�' �,1 ','� r.- . �i .. . ,p�W9dM11�� '_— �� l s � �:c.3��•; . ' . - �� a v!r�"'' u�� , .t Y ` _ � - -� �y�µ�' _ fi9- � r t _ c� � r:� --� - -. . _ ,_: i� L�. .—;-' Drawing of Home with Proposed Addition IL� _�LO!I.t RGP` �.�,,,,,�,:.�u, r_X15TiF:u uARAGG � If+HMti �I1LI ! -��_ 1 N_l 1:�'aILCh ffli t _Vf�:lC,t NVlL•JiT l�ll3 . ` ��.. LkiJl ��'iGl �'�IiUJ= r-i�orir e��:��ivN :lUtt. �i�'. i'.Y' � [1 I•i �L•VII t�Y lro�a"f _�.InIGt „ : ��<,o�u .:'I� �� t-ti- . i I�L�',.�f V.7 �I � � '-�— � I II --- _- — �'�`��..'� �f�.�f doS _ .�._ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ - -_ _ _ , . , - __ ___ ____ , . _ r_ . _ _ � , _ ____ � �. J. _____ ,��. _�___ �_. � , MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 743-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A SIX-INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SECOND-STORY ADDITION TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE-YARD SETBACK AT 8471 FAIRCHILD AVENUE; PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-011 WHEREAS, the applicant, David Przetycki, has applied for a variance to allow a second-story garage addition to encroach six inches into the side-yard setback at 8471 Fairchild Avenue; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as follows: Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Bay Estates, Ramsey County, Minnesota WHEREAS, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the minimum side setback for a principal building is ten fieet; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a six-inch variance to construct an addition above the garage; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a building permit for the expansion; 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; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Location Map d. Photographic documentation e. Staff Report WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the variance request on Wednesday, November 19, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following finding of facts related to this request: 1. The exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to the variance request is that the home was initially constructed crooked on the lot, which causes limitations as to how the property can be improved. 2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code would restrict the property owner's ability to expand and improve upon the layout and functionality of the home. 3. The applicant has not caused the condition which prompted the variance request. 4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicant a special privilege. 5. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. 6. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. 7. The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby approve the variance request to allow an addition to encroach six inches into the side setback of the applicant's property at 8471 Fairchild Avenue, subject to the following restriction: 1. This variance applies only to the portion of the home on the north side of the lot that currently exists nine feet, six inches from the side lot line. Adopted this 19th day of November, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) of Mounds i/iew 5taff R� To: From: Item Title/Subject: Discussion: Item No: AS-3 Meeting Date: Nov 19, 2003 Type of Business: Report Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Community Development Director Planning Commission Appointments Chapter 401 of the City Code indicates that Planning Commissioners are appointed to three- year staggered terms. Three terms expire at the end of this year: • Mike Hegland • Mari Scotch • Herb Zwirn While reappointments have been handled differently in the past, the currently the practice is to reapply for appointment if the commissioner wishes to continue to serve on the Planning Commission. Prior to the terms' expiration, a notice is also published in the official newspaper to advertise for the potential vacancies. All applications, including those from sitting members, would be considered by the Mayor. Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor with approval of the City Council. Recommendation: For those whose terms are nearing expiration, an application is attached if you would like to continue serving on the Planning Commission. The application should be returned as soon as possible. \.,,! i:. i��t-!._J c' j? �c.,�<) �.7v' James Ericson Community Development Director _ ., . . _ City of Moc��ds l/iew 2407 Highw�ay 10 Mouhds View, MN SSI IZ (612% 717 4000 Ap�li�ation For Advisar� Boards and C'orr�rnissiorrs G�otap App/iea' Fo� � Fc�// NA�ne (P/eASe Priht).� Home Phone.� Ad�'ress.� Work Phohe.� YeArs At this Address: Ye��s you h�ve /ived ih Mou�c/s View.� E�nc�i/ Add�ess.� Oualifications You Want to have the Mayor and City Council Consider: Ski//s Ahd /hterests.� En�p/oyrneht, Occu,r�qtioh o� Othe� Expe�ie�ce.� Me�be�ships, Accorr�p/ishments or Othe� Quc�/ificc�tiohs.• P/eASe state your reasoh for wAhting to se�ve with this group.� SignAture.� DAte: �You� respohse to c�hy of the Above inquiries n�ay be cohtihued oh the bACk of this form c�hd �nay �ttACh �any other mAte�ia/ thAt you wou/� wc�ht the Mc�yor A�d Couhci/ to cohsi�lerJ The City of Mounds View is cornmitted to the po/icy thAt a// persons shA/l hc�ve access to its programs, facilities and emp/oyment without regard for race, creed, co%r, sex, age nationa/ origin or hrandicap. MOUNDS V�W PLANNING COMNIISSION December 3, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: November 5, 2003 4. Citizei�.s Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case MA03-001 Consideration of resolution 745-03, a Resolution Recommending Dei�ial of the Longview Estates Prelllnulary Plat Applicants: Eichi, Inc., Represented by Marti�l Harstad 6. Planning Case VR03-012 Public Hearing and Discussion Regardlllg a Variance Request for a Non-Conformulg Curb Cut at 2817 Laport Drive Applicant: Jim Thompson 7. Planning Case VR03-013 Public Hearulg and Discussion Regarduig a Request for a Side Yard Setbacic Variance at 5072 Brighton Lane Applicant: Marlc and LeeAnn Lolcen 8. Special Planning Case SP-120-03 Consideration of PossiUle Revisions to the Zonuig Code to allow for an Adminisnative Variance Approval Process APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. 9. Next Platu-iing Cominission Meeting: December 17, 2003 10. Adjotu7iment to Agenda Session F _ . 1� . . : ��__ ..,z_ �� ,.__ L . . . . _ : . � _ :�2:- ._=..r. l`= =�__....Y_.._._.- .. 1.�.—x� ._ � ... I::-. � ".__ . � �_ . -'—_ �... "__' "'..a.y:_ . . _ _ Planning Commission Agenda December 3, 2003 Page 2 AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: November 19, 2003 2. Planning Commission Appointments 3. Staff Reports: a. Review Zoning Code Provisions Relating to Temporary Structures 4. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners' Reports UTrout\CommDevU'lanning Commission�I'C Agendas�2003U 2-03-03 PC Agenda.doc i I ) � _ Item No: 5 Meeting Date: Dec 3, 2003 Type of Business: Commission Business City of Mour�ds l/iew Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Resolution 745-03, A Resolution Recommending Denial of a Preliminary Plat for the Longview Estates Major Subdivision; Planning Case MA03-001 Introduction: Eichi, Inc., represented by Martin Harstad, has submitted an application for a major subdivision of the land between Silver Lake Road and Longview Drive, north of Woodcrest Park and south of County Road H2. The legal description of the property to be subdivided is Lot 4, Block 1, MuellerAddition. The proposed subdivision would create 15 lots from the wooded 7.14-acre parcel, of which half is delineated wetland. Eight lots would take access from Longview Drive and seven lots would access Silver Lake Road. While all of the proposed lots satisfy the City's expanded subdivision requirements within a wetland zoning district, the applicant would need to obtain Rice Creek Watershed District approval and a wetland alteration permit approval by the City Council. Previous Submittal: The City processed a request for a major subdivision of this land in 2001, ultimately denying a variance and the subdivision as not conforming to the City's subdivision standards. The original submission contemplated an eleven-lot development with each lot fronting Longview Drive. No lots were platted fronting Silver Lake Road. The issue with the original plat was that in a wetland district, there are minimum lot widths that exceed the standard widths, such that instead of eleven possible lots, only eight were allowable. The applicant applied for a variance which was denied due to lack of perceived hardship. Finally, the plat was revised to show 26 lots, well in excess of what is allowed, and the plat was denied. Discussion: The area known as Longview Estates is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. The proposed subdivision would be consistent with the existing zoning of the property. All the lots shown on the preliminary plat satisfy the minimum requirements of 125-foot lot width and 20,000 square foot lot area. Of the 15 proposed lots, nine would require filling of wetlands to create a building pad. On lots where no wetland fill is necessary, most of the land available beyond the building pad is used for wetland mitigation purposes. No proposed home would have any significant backyard area except Lots 1 and 2, which would have 30 feet of filled wetland backyard. Many of the homes would be 15 feet or less from the delineated wetlands or mitigated wetlands. Longview Estates PC Report December 3, 2003 Page 2 The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the Longview Estates parcel as single family detached. While this designation is consistent with the proposed subdivision, one of the stated goals under the land use component of the Comprehensive Plan is to "Ensure that community development is compatible with features of the natural environment and is accommodated without destroying desirable environmental features and natural amenities." Any subdivision should be accomplished with as little impact and alteration as possible. Public Hearinq: The residents who spoke at the public hearing on November 5 and November 19 were opposed to the development, stressing the hydrological conditions of the site and the potential adverse environmental impacts of the development. Others were concerned about the traffic impacts of the proposed 15-lot subdivision. Some Longview Drive residents questioned the suitability of the soils for construction and what the impact would be from the extensive fill brought onto the site while others were concerned about the complete clear cutting of trees and the loss of wildlife habitat. Commission Direction: The Planning Commission discussed fihe proposal and the concerns of the residents and came to the conclusion that not enough information had been presented to support the applicant's position that the development would not adversely impact runoff, the water table or the hydrology of the site in general. The Commission was also concerned with the absence of engineered soils reports or analysis as to the land composition and whether or not the engineered house pads would support construction. In light of these concerns, the Commission directed staff to draft a resolution recommending denial of the preliminary plat of the Longview Estates Major Subdivision. Recommendation: Review and discuss the attached Resolution 745-03, a resolution recommending denial of the Longview Estates Preliminary Plat. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Wetland Zoning District Map 3. FEMA Map 4. Resolution 745-03 EXHIBIT A. Zoning Map LONGVIEW ESTATES Proposed Subdivision • ■ � � � � � s � r Not to scale Proposed Property Lines � ;► � �� —�i � '�J � � �:, ��. .._ __--.�-i ] !� �'t, � ,r:� � c � I �� i; , - --,; .=- { � �@ � �� L+� ^1 '�.�' � o�► �=:��s - s � .-�� _. ..� ' � '� I � y. - . �tit"� - �,�1 � u�,,"�r� � 1 � �� . . �� I��i.'� � � ,�, � I`/^'s.� r'�. `*+z � r-� � ! ''-��: � � � �+' �'-- �- '1 :_i---'��'— � . " � '�'"1 °"' 1�f 1 �+ � � k �_:. ......_ . ,... , P i � ;ry i� r��,� � I �+ ,i• �� . � � i .� .! � '1 � N I � � '�1°� '+ , i S � r r 1� �'_' � .�� .I p�-_ � I Itti . f�� ti � 4 �-l. � f' f F� i. �� ` ' - 1�fYl�....'_{ y�9 ,rtil '�'',� -t,''r .�� A �1 �� 1'..i ..-�.�.;...: '..•'.. ..1.... �:..�.,� . , 1 � �. �Y 'r1 . .�__�.�''�. �. I -�i .i .� �',°',15�� + $ � �� ,� ,� ' 1 � '� ,'� � �i� '�:;�i a, � {f -• 4 ....�.: :; ; ; . : � . ., �� r . . . . . .;: : . ; �.4' : 7,.-.' .� - � ' � �....�.... ........ - . �'� ��.� • 6 � . '� 13� �� . ..■■■..°. � },. �. ■....� �` ■ �: � 2 . ��, . � +....... ;. , . ��.. , �......, �. . 4 �''�,, ` 11 � �� . .......'T ■ r. � ■ �,:...... 3 ■ . : �� ......'. �; • . i! � � ■ ......; . �I �� ........; � � �; g . � �� ' 1 , . ; � • � 1 • ', ; . . �■ �•�'�� — �� ;� � i F �� `� � ;�k�' �; � �� ,� � �' i � 'Y. � '1 �,�� r � � ? :� J � I � � �� I �k � � � k1�`. � � '!� �. � 1: ��, � � �ti,`'+', � �,.�.�,� �'?��ai i .. �� . ��. � � �.�? �� . ��.�:C� ;:� �� : �:� �1 '� r I ��". �7' i "'t i � �. �� I �� t ��; , � �- i :� L• ��'.�� ,�.,-r,. ,; .., � .�� 5��'� �:� 1, �r.z-.. _.,_,_. j, .:'jl� `+ :, �� . � �� : i; i;� b� r�'� ; , _,, �' �`,' �j' ` ' � �i : �; ;; �� t� -`�i`' �'�� t t. }; '� � � . I�_ _ . � ' � � •..�,.7 � _ - ..-. �-,.; _ .. _.,---- � . � �� 1 •�� b ,�'�:�� +�,�.��! �`'� ��i: t.� � �� r � � , . �7'� R . � 1 �-�l. 1 . -�-� ; !�'`.b ! ? �r � 1 •� � � ; � Fr� '�. . ` �, . �,,' � I``'• •� .� ; ; � � : � � �� . �------ �. . _ . . . . . . . ._ .... . . ., _ ._......�..__ _.,._ ._.... .. _... _ �!,--, 4 q L �r+.t.a 4? 4:�� r � � �L� ` � � �# ►�w � � �� ,�y � . ��i �• � �. � � `� .1 �-� ;� � � ti.�,�,J' � � �;'��5 ��. ,�.:� . � - I_–_–� "_ "�. ��,.�"'"'_' _.'r___.' "-.•,:-. -._.. _. .._ �. _ . __'. _ "_.:_.-._. _.._:__'-_'__ L_–'___"___ __ . '_ "_ "– _' 1='_I r i o �n . i �- `�j�` � � t; i � ; I I �� `�r �'�j h� ! ._ _ _ �_ e.� ' ;r ' "r_ � a j 1`�LL � 7','` % � � � + { 9 I � � ` � , � �,�F� , r�i� 1, �_ r � S � '' �'� �, �. � � �f�y, �:�' � ��a� � _� , 'rs, : � � . .� f ; _ ��i , � �� , - - =---.� , t�. . . � : ��: '" o . o �0'.5� f �l ' �,,,�:�.,.�. � i? I� � � � _ti`.3'�„ ^_ � �' � tf) �i � rae,ic� � � � d a � n iY.4.19 � � i '� _ � � _ � 95 ' 96 I u -r c� � _ . _ _---- —.. � �::, ,.�_ «�_� s. ,�'"" r'�, t ! h�. � �� _ _ Y—.�� 33 �J-7 �� i C� �..�a ,,�. ...�_ "r—, o o—_I__ g�3 . 4� �:�1 �`�, i 3�4 z 5 i'3 �. z �, p ' '�"'t : �" �.�V �: ti �4 E r L7 F �Z'�` a r1 ! � 3 G ' � ,,;s 4 O ! � ��^ � ,� s- � ' -: �� C�-, � r C ; ; � rt a �r .� v � ��, i��. ( � � � ' � � ' Cti F �-y � , J J 4 ' . .1',�,.t:i.. . i.� 4.� p-'� � + - -- - R..eJ �.4 �� rj. � I 1 - T1 � 1 �2'.S� - ¢ r� :�� 1.' I . �. .� ._a��M�.�, ,.., �r .�.__ ._ y.._ - , :; P \ � '-'� �`i �t -f r � y ' c �. : � �% 0 p 1 C�+�S - tl ; I � r 1 � � :7 / A. •-1 w �, � y!� ,,,1{{{". i !� �J� L' 'y . r{�., . � � _� c �=-r, �� _1 f �'� I _..��c�, �-J ; �`� R� a�k � �� ' � i4��l1 a�`' ' �,� ��.. ,r.- � � I -� '� I �L., r . ', �, �,,.,,�. n� ` � ' i � ,. , Ly o '�� y � � ,�.: � < X. --�---� ° `°`s , '" � ° • �o-�.... L.'.�i i � � c � 1 � t- 7 ^( ^'y r`�..p;� I i7.. G } , , ' • L�i i,�,i _ . � t &e G � r� 5 +•• t� .- ... . �'' r-'w� 'S�' '✓r' � i 3_ri ; I �� `' i.�.`3..�_r f w � � t� j' �� d �... �. I �� : i�► � � �', � " `�. � 3 � f`�, ; , ; , �. , . _ _ ... � , _. 5 - j i � �� ' �.� , � , - - �i k ,,, �'"'`�, � _ i.:�5.....1. � a .,, -� � �_ ; ` i �` I � - ,� � ., _ ; 7y �� 1 7 i :3 8 - � � �•�� __ I � � � - i � � � ¢ � � . .a „4 � � � 3'� `�.,�. x � , . � �!' —!--�----� , , , .--� �� ' I �'� 3 7 � � ' � ' ty � i � �� _°_ 7 � : , , -�� ; � _.�_:�.�.�.� _ : � � �, � ---- ,-__ _..— , ti + � '� •.0 �, � 3 �i !�� I � �.``��4�' � � ; � , ,�� , � � ; a � ' � �.-��-� �,��t�-:,,� � .; k, �n �� ; �. �, � _� � � � �. �1 F. �.''1 .'"v '� � ti:��1e��,V.�;� ��.. ° � � '.:._"` F � � r! - 35 �, , , , • . . ��•,, , � •� �. . � �� + , , .., '� ��\'�� , 1` �t _.._ _. - ---- --I � ` t ! �. .. .'t ��.`\tiS, 1 '�'_ � ' ° t3 ,. : ; . � ' , � �: ,, .. �,�..� ` Y�,, i � I Li `' i....c �i..{eJ..._ .34 I i � ` �) 3� �'•.� , � � � .��,"�� ` - � .., � � � , .1.� �� ti�,J ... _ ,.r . ...�.__._.._.....__r � �` �r�' _I.��.� . . ��,,\ w �'y� �; � r � � ,� � ' l. �.�i�£ci�� `. �\ ,y� T �k�\`�ti •, �`�' �v �� y�f . -.. h i ^ �' ' �i� ! � :� 3 . .ti`..t'ti` � � �, � ,� � �y T � � i ,� ;�� •,� �t�, \� � ,�v --- ; � , r !T� � � ; _ � I � - . .� ��.\ •�� . � i � ' � � f � 13..�4.Sr.�...,`� .�..��_I � ti. \ �. ��` � i ,� .�� h �. - _3 ;� � ( ! � `ti.` �. \�\ ` \- \ 't � 7 � � � '. . , " � � . `�� , , �V� .1\ *1, � � .� 7 . �� \-1� ` �� `( �q � i .' I Im_'�...� � ��,�• ♦ ��``� ♦```�'.I 1�I' -_. .... __�_.—_ I � ` � � � � 1 \y� ti �\ ; � �` �\., �� , � ��'. .;`\ 5 �` `�} � �, � �,��., • ; � � ,. ; f -- �— _ , ; i : , � �`�\ ` *• � _ �5 T1l �'S � � _ 'q'� ! ��''.,�ti`��'S�,'1.�'!,) I � -..._.. . . , ._.._ ...._ I �-� �� 3 � , , '� � ,� I ° �4� y�`+.'�,� `t` '_�ti�,` �5,;•/ � � ;�-h� .Xil I �\ i � �. � , ` tiy `�,, ti�`�., , , � .� ., �,�`ti, � ^ . y\�+�� 't S. -';,;�, t, C� f rj ` � �r} �,�.�•��T� 1,\ � �y ~,,�1 � � i ;g � � � I -0� . I . � .., 1 �� •�� 'N �. � � .� , . `. � \ � ., � ,`1,'? ir O ' ?�g � '1�� i : 3'�.a�`1.. a... '7 � _ �� R �A�, �'6, A4 1 '� .rp ` O ��A:'v� � C ti + F ' �. R � ,. E i h' � . C- � I �-pr� � �_ � _ µ I � ; �"_Ka��7 � t 6 `y�Y � � � G1 � �.%�'�.—��. � � � , . , 'L".,__ � � 5 � �;,.- �' .�k: � � , �ry - I ,� ` �� J 'j � .X �, � Z 8 �f -1 Go � �^� t I � j � � �6 � ' r G , ,f Y^ � � f 5 � � ati , ,.� _ 1.3 �< �.�.. ` � . - � C� n �,T� � ' Cl C. � � t' -i � ..:. ., �'�� fl�;*� � ��.,l,T_�5� � ry ��.._��_°��' T,1 ??' I �!I� �_ - �n e L�` r i nc' - � Pd $'i �r, . . � . , �,.�� _'1 �Ti -- i , � � * 1� 4.�°�-- �aF�e�� i� ,� � ;i � 1 8P � , �� , . �}� j+ 1 � i �'_�_'a,c��"'' �_ ... .. L�`1v �.yi I I l.�'`r'3 ti I � 6 � � � � � , 9 � -,-,.; - �"+T . - �:. ; � i �_,.- . �� .'.,_..' � . " ... � . � � '' � - -�. Z 3 � ''� �k-1 i � �, . � -- � � ; rv T��r�rv�ra �-�� . —1 � _. ' �� x � ; z '' � j'. t--� d :^ � ; � � _ _ , � � � i— - - - � ' � i � �� i � ,_ � � ; � � � � � � � � � � �' � ! � ` � � � � � o� m � � := '� � i 1� (�j r,,. ": !M 3+; � .� �' � � `�; 4 b � I �� Q O ¢.,� � �i : , , � � � ��` � m { `� � � �.: ; � ;, ; � j �; _ _ ____ � I :f �� .: OAL� R 1 V E ,S``.�`, :: _ ,�'+V� _� , ;,��<; ; 1 '' �_. ^_ a ; ---.. _ . , �'°' � . C ' � � , � I I � � � —! .��:��,�':.��' � � � � I � � � � ,i � � � � ; i -:�"�C--� tn � ., - � : ---- , . ___ _ ' ' 1N(�{7D�R��rt �� ' I G , ,,;, � _ (-- , II I ' < _ ' c —d . y �J _ _ .—.— .. _ -- � �- —, ;__ __ _ _ i _ ��. � , SPR1r�C , , . , : �.. � � I _— , � � � V I� W L. A N E , ,.,, ``�� ; , I f`�J �"f � � I � � I �i � I � I , � � � � '' i i � I� , tA � ''i , r � ; cc� 1� t .� � J I�__ . -� -:� � �_ __ - _ _ ---_ _ ____ �... _-- __ -- - -- .:_ _._...._. ry r't r�t t'� !'ti r'a e'7• r— t _ _ , : _ ::: . __ _ . . _ � _ .. b MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 745-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDI(VG DENIAL OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE PROPOSED LONGVIEW ESTATES MAJOR SUBDIVISION PLANNING CASE NO. MA03-001 WHEREAS, Marty Harstad of EICHI, Inc., representing owner Keith Harstad, has applied for a major subdivision for a single family residential subdivision on land located west of Longview Drive, south of County Road H2, east of Silver Lake Road and north of Woodcrest Park; and, WHEREAS, the preliminary plat date-stamped October 30, 2003 contemplates a fifteen lot subdivision, with eight lots fronting Longview Drive and seven lots fronting Silver Lake Road; and, WHEREAS, the subject parcel is legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Mueller Addition Ramsey County, State of Minnesota WHEREAS, the parcel is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and the adopted Comprehensive Plan designates the parcel for low-density residential development; and, WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision is completelywithin a Wetland Zoning District; and, WHEREAS, within a wetland zoning district, the minimum lot width for single-family residential lots is 125 feet and the minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Planning Application 3. Wetland Zoning District Map 4. FEMA Map 5. Preliminary Plat, date stamped Oct 30, 2003 6. Staff Report i--. -- _ . _ .. - - - - - -- Resolution 745-03 Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on November 5 and continued said hearing until November 19, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission hereby makes the following finding of fact related to the submitted Longview Estates preliminary plat: 1. The proposed fifteen-lot subdivision is situated completely within a wetland zoning district. 2. The minimum subdivision standards within a wetland zoning district are 125-foot wide lots with lot areas of 20,000 square feet. 3. Approximately Half of the 7.14 acre wooded parcel is delineated as wetlands. 4. Approximately 20,320 square feet of wetlands would be filled to create the fifteen lots with a total anticipated alteration of more than 200,000 square feet of area within the wetland zoning district. 5. Neither soil borings nor a hydrology analysis were submitted to support the applicant's request for the preliminary plat approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above findings of fact and its review of the documentation presented, does hereby recommend denial of the proposed Longview Estates major subdivision. 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 3rd day of December, 2003 Gary Stevenson, Chairperson Attest: James Ericson, Community Dev. Director (Seal) . . � . ;� i -�' � . . ' �__ --�_ Item No: 6 Meeting Date: December 3, 2003 Type of Business: Public Hearinq of Mounds I/iew 5taff R� To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Driveway to Exceed the Maximum Curb Cut Width at 2817 Laport Drive; Planning Case VR03-012 Introduction: The applicant, Jim Thompson, is requesting a variance to allow an already constructed driveway to remain as built at his property located at 2817 Laport Drive. The driveway was constructed without a permit and exceeds the maximum curb cut width allowed in an R-1 district. Mounds View Zoning Code requires that the curb cut is no more than twenty- four (24) feet at the right-of-way. The expansion of the driveway created a thirty-two (32) foot curb cut. The requested variance is for eight (8) feet. Discussion: Driveway and curb cut requiremenfis are addressed in Section 1121.09 of the Zoning Code. The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. In an R-1 district, the maximum curb cut width is twenty-four (24) feet. As built, the driveway has a curb cut of thirty-two (32) feet, eight (8) feet in excess of the permitted amount. Section 1121.09 allows a maximum driveway width of thirty-five (35) feet or the width of the garage plus twelve (12) feet, whichever is greater. The applicant's driveway is less than 35 feet at its widest point. Section 1104.1 states that driveways must be setback five (5) feet, unless permission is obtained from the owners of the abutting lots, in which case, the driveway is permitted to be setback one (1) foot. The expansion has caused the driveway to be only one and a half (1.5) feet from the lot line. The applicant has obtained his neighbor's written permission. Blacktop Driveway Company constructed the driveway addition. Blacktop Driveway Company is licensed with the City of Mounds View and has performed work in Mounds View for many years, however, the company failed to obtain a permit for the addition. Had a permit been obtained, the curb cut would not have been permitted to be wider than twenty-four (24) feet. The contractor falsely informed the applicant that the company had obtained a permit. Staff spoke with the homeowners regarding this variance request. The homeowners feel that their hardship stems from the fact that they were led to believe by the contractor that a permit had been obtained for the driveway expansion. In addition, the homeowners informed staff that the reason that they needed to expand the driveway was because the driveway was causing damage to their vehicle and their recreational vehicle (RV). The Thompson's recently purchased a new truck and RV and the slope of the driveway before the expansion was causing the truck and RV to scrape and dent one another when reversing into the RV parking area. Staff observed the damage to the truck and RV. Driveway Variance Report 2817 Laport Drive December 3, 2003 Page 2 If this variance request is denied, the applicant must remove eight (8) feet of blacktop at the curb cut. Beyond the curb cut, the driveway meets code and would be permitted to remain as is. The applicant has now applied for a permit. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case) 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 criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. The property is approximately fiffeen thousand square feet (15,000 ftZ) and has eight-five (85) feet of street frontage. This lot exceeds the minimum lot requirements. Staff is not aware of any extraordinary circumstances that apply to this property. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, unless a hardship is proven. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The driveway expansion was constructed withouf a permit. d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Granting the variance would confer upon the property owner a special privilege denied to others in the same district. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The Planning Commission must first determine whether a hardship exists. Driveway Variance Report 2817 Laport Drive December 3, 2003 Page 3 f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. The variance may be detrimental to the purpose of this Title unless it is determined thaf a hardship is present. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within �he neighborhood. The expansion should not result in any of the above-cited adverse effects Summary: In order for the Planning Commission to approve this variance request, the above criteria must be satisfied. Although each of the cases brought before the Planning Commission are viewed individually and on their own merit, it is worthwhile to note that a similar case was brought before the Planning Commission by Violet Woods in 2002. A driveway with a curb cut that exceeded the permitted width was constructed without a permit and the owner requested to be allowed to leave it as constructed. The request was denied. Recommendation: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Deny the requested variance. Resolution 744-03 is attached for the Commission's denial if that is the chosen course of action. 2. Approve the variance as requested. To move forward with this option, the Commission should direct staff to draft a resolution of approval with findings of fact appropriate to support the approval. 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, � , , , Kristin Prososki Planning Associate j�- r...-�'-------' - - — . L .- -- - - - -- ' ' -' ( _ _�. __�. .-�_'-'��, £--_� ir—.�—,�_:_.___�_:._:1i �:.._..�..._._--'� ---'—� _ b.__ _._ _ �-:. Y;. . 7 ra ^ �.1.^., L 10'�f '�I vu �c )�!; �;��'r" � n��n�J4'�n •A ii:• .-:l ,��/'p�3 . r,<<n�<z�.��' -� r �., .v ?� ..s �? 1� T �— CqMMUNITY DEYELOPMENT DEPARiMENT PLANNING APPLICATION 2401 County Road 1,0, Mounds View, MN 5511Z (763)717-4020 Fax(65i)765-1660 Please Type or Print Information - Complete Both 5ides �f This Form Applicant Information Name of Applicant � '^'�+lo�'�''-� � °'�� _ Telephone�� Address _�_ 'k i 7 L,{.�r�_...�-- Fax _._..___ y1 r � ��%') o lc-,� G� S �.L? 4J�_.�[�..11� 5�3 I f E-mail: !mN'�� "0� � e �� Interest in Prpperty {check aporopriate box) j� Ov�mer of Property O Lessee, Operator, f�lanager ❑ Other (explain) _,...____ (� Contract for Deed Owner U Agreement to Purchase Applicants must provide evidence of interest rn property at the time of applic�tion, and if you a�e noP t6e owner of the property, you must either provide a/eiter of permission from the awner giving consent io the fi/ing af fhis application or t/re property owner must sign this applitation for it to be accepted. Property DescriptionJPropasal Address or General Localion Legal Description Property Identificatfon n (PIN n) TM of Acres Currznt Zoning ��! j�.�,,,��:-F 1�r n1��<<�,� �� e �� r- � �. � �,- � .,, �-��+-� ��; f�o�, .�,�-� .� � �dl I r l� 3 � :� 3 � � r � � _..----- C S I -�--�G� -- Type of Application (please check the appropriate boxes) rehensive Minor Su PUD Amenciment Conditional/Interim Use Permit Variance _ Text Amendment Zonin Code Te� Amendment, Other Ci Code Buffer 750 `. ------- �50 -1, R-2 15$ 0; all others $325 -1, R-2 $150; all_others �325 150 � 125 � 125Jacre; mfn 125 max,_�750 -1, R-2 $150; all others �200 -1, R-2 �25; all others �100 '__ _ _ ; � _ � � ,._ __ __ _ .__ - �� Mounds Vievd Planning Applic� ,n Present Use of Property Property Classification f_7 Abstract � O Torrens Description of Proposal (attach additiona� supporting documentation if necessary) Page 2 Please Note: Applicarts are responsible for all costs incurred asor.iated ��i[h the filing, revievd a�d prc[�sing of Uvs applica�on. Such fees are to be paid ln escww up frcnt or upon receipt of statement from the City of 17ounds View. Fees may inr.lude but are not limited to cosLs for consullants relained by [he City, consult2r[ planning services, attorn_y, and engineer fees. A dep�siC may also be requim� to cover cos�s of public notices, rraizrial> and staff lime spent in the reviEw, research or araparatior of materi:,ls zsso`^iated with C�is applira6an. The tpplicant shall be respor,sible for all reasonable inr.urred costs in excess af die initlal deposit amount. My portion of the daposit not spen[ or encumbered shall be 2CUndad to thz appiicant within 3q days after corsideraHon of the avDlicytion is completeJ. Payment of park dedication fcs is required ovith suhdi��ision applicAtions. I pCKNOVJLEGGE THAT I have ead all of 4�e Inforrnavon listcd in the Planning Application and fully underst�nd that I am responslhl2 F�ail cosls i�r�e .tho Gity related m the processing of this application. ._..... _ �._ � � ��-�=� °-�d'� �—. A....�:,._., D'dte BY MY (OUR) SIGNATUItE ON THIS APPLYCATION, I HEREBY DECLARE TMAT, TO TNE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, 7HE iNFORMATlON PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCURATE. Name of Applitant (typed,rprirted) � _ nl e� �v _ - Signature of Applicant_____ �� _ `�' ' " - l� Name of Property Own �typed/printed) � i'i �o i.. sen� �►�_t'1--, /z O��-L�S J'J Signature of Property Owner __ Lru,�GL 1� �/��%'�' �'"��' Address of O�rner �•�I�c�r;t 17r� /Y1vtG.ds ��+Cc�' �l�.l: 5 S//�- , Phone Number of Owner �� 3- 7:�s `!� s_� . . E-ma�l of Owner__ � N � `"L�.,�U � � �"''1 . WMx.%;k�I:M*��***�q=��K��*�:W�:�,y:x�kt.t•i:Y#%;# � x#A��:�4A:*�k%:*�#:k�*�*x�W�k:e�KMx:*a:�k�:��k�K�#��k*#*ac*:FapW:kt:F.*�: �:*#* FOR OEFICE USE ONLY Date of Submlttal 1%- �- a.3 Date of Acceptance: _ 60-day Limit 120-day limit: Planning Case No(s) Assigned to: __� _ Fees Paid: Account �i Check � Rpplication: /s.�5 • �0 _ '� � � Park Dedication:__ __ Deposits: _ _ _ Other: _ _. — — 7olal: Receipt T . : _ ,. �.�- �1Lz�._ss_-�_�..� _..._._"��. Y.�Y.::. '- . �_-'. . .___.. .. .Y:::ti ._.___� __�. ___�__-. ._._�. . � . .- �.�:�_<. �___,__. "_.. __ '"__—_ 1. '.. -. _�-_ _ � Mounds View Zoning Map 3289 8280 8?85 ;.� N�K � 8255 8250 � i50 8�51 8_�> i8255 E'_8J' E2E5 . ...629n . .._. - B287 R250 8267 �\ � � "' � � _ B?aU 32G1 � �''�� ° ! u3 ,n .'e �• i PF V_� e_ni � a2ao sr. s » z3e 9 r P < o - W � E2�G $�6`, R23 6_'Ol rv°�, yI. �_�__" ... � y�� 8"<3U E�55 � 'v �v g�—'�__� s:�o ��==. ARDldJ � � A��E � 8^_6G � L•"_55 8248, � o o�. 6: m pa�c � _ m O1 .. tO o ..� � . 'D u J " 1 ' P. � 1 NI :J .�24 + ni P � 'i �D ' P:': . \`�� I 8250 a 8245.�—.-..---:..: .n . i� CI �r - [roV N N N. � N V N g^�� O_�J � e<oe� r - s�os ; `l s�io - Pi a s., azza �• Ezas N � szz� �ez�r �" $ ,a �zo2 � � � d�zo siss At33 <� �� 8<..5 .� 8210 6' J � Y,�98 82"vJ �+ i� N� rv- . 97E0 g�E`. ^ �IE2U1 �pJ�6t3 m 6177�: 8?00 87@7 ' a.t92 OZ 8%G' N 82G3 � N� R p 8775 °.^^� 8i60 ��71 32 7� 1+4� Q�� m •_� �lF.:.: . . 8775 ' 616G W `° N 820p . �.ci<:�8� Ei6ti , � ¢;� 576: n � 6, 1 <o I 1.61 �-�l , 618DI .. � -! 914d p LAPORT ,J c. E155 , rB.�G{ 1 375U �2 1� =qi2assis-., a�so \ E117 � � nt57. _ � � .; s "+ , _ P}� E14. ��0� °�- 614`. 3003 8756 ', m.. , 873E '� c�i c�OV rv . �. �/ OP d 81a0 j` .001 8156 HE'� ��`' °' �i'S � J, :S� Sta1 �\�,� �, B �' eisi`�4=QD PIAC� �,�8J3 cu2 a� � ' eizs ai3e 'aiai°� (;Jj wl � ;� o� ��' o�i�s 811 n, i` ` uin. n o, � N_ .M a c g�tl � � io,,,' d7..1 h� �i m J; g106 c00v��N-n i N� �i " n812 1^I° ❑ I �o c _ �� N N - ��, RWOOD RO��: �� ; e.t„ � ;, ��o � � �L � :r, ,� � � o "' a 7 � � � 80 N N N� � � � ° Eoso s�ei � ° eoee eo,s �, � ee�= N fL N � `\� ��;. �t' � r�- � 3085 ry 2G70� R0:1 V 3066 BO':1 N2066 R n � 7 �. �+ �� 30G0 8065 BOB4 - � '__' 3 j \ . ec � �_t-y..i,__.�,.,�, . .�. 8 0' S 8 0 6 0 8 0 5 9 PU50 E055 S06G 8065 � w 1 � V� fi 6040 > � ��'� i�g-Jli i' BJ45 ��aF 59e5 E�M1� 6Uh2 ROM1S 6052 90` 1 � �� V �. R-O . BG30 a�36 8039 � I ,C" j� . 8G52 S033 60a0 B�J35 \�.•�7 �v°i}; i , 80ig E�'-' 8p?g,Y o ! i� \\. .yR w�E020 80?5 ��. 8015 dOtS . p$025 - SG18 gp11 � BDDO R021 \� ,nk�, r�'� 8D�5 b0 � 8UU9 � DODG � 9�� Zi i i \ �'�1�798D 8005 ._ BG� y965 8Q94 7987 .. 7990 � 7581 '990 �?9.?3 . 4 p 79Q� I �y75 7970 7979 '/98G 7959 79BD 7279 � /� �� ,•"�.� Gy� c � 7?B0. .. . - �� f/ @> � 7? 5 � 7960 7959 73:L 7965 a �V o '. 'lQ ,iN jt � 7960, � . O - 79GE 7965 � I � �°J '��4�.. c4.k � 7g50. 795i 7556 � 7�4g 795a 7ogu � I � �� i940 79-05 73d; 79=7 I I 'y o m f`' ~\ ;934 �o}} ?9`yJ ,9;� 7P35 :9'G� 7977 � 4 F a . . J �� r � °� I � 7932 �f, p T� ,.to � �L � �— .. _�� J_�� NR ,i� ��.,�' jO � Y i9P� 79G1 �. 7gpp �� 79DD .i07 N p `v �n�,�:� o � HII.LVIEW � F � _ — _ — _ J �a�; y � m '�: _,..., v.. � e • j� � �� _ �- 791f �� . �� !'� ` �4i y��'7�i� ` 78F6 0 ?E°t- � � � 7"oGG '845 � �, {, � 78�0 7835 ?890 7887 � �� C �861 � rmi � .� 'i .. �v_+ . . C„�^. .. . . E7?E@0�� ..� -oh i.�d'�f '�. �p� Z7885 , 786c ;867 ¢r 7820 7II^.5� 7R80 IPF� 78f5 .. 0/ rb60� 47835b �I �0�'D ��v�. � f3-2 ��.. � 78:7 N 7A:i ?6:.1 �ai � 7e,s ?s�o d � i.:._; G N`'�., �� ';. �s�u V, � � 7606 � - - - ° � i 1�� 7E50 p 7827 .- ... ,�• : � 7642 . i805 7860 76..7 � � �.,h6�•�ryp0 �.. � � >6, 7865 ?8st o° � - 3 0_. -c o� P 7601 �c. r� rp :930 =� L _ � ascI��a; � o �, ��ao , � . y` :, f q s�� . �asi o ! »si � � �eis �-�_._,� IN x A Wo�C� g P:_3 �R A' �7�.� •. B^o �. � ia:� ti""""�,� 7e'd 7821 m n 7)Bo `778f �. _ 77 0r� � ti^ � iR" +r�' ?�dq7 r 7E1 N - �¢6 . 7753 i769 778 S �I p�p'k' � ' � �p�� V� ��ra��, �\ �l \ �.. 78Q0 � 7509 . � : _ �`.L '7E5 � � dL 1 ¢' . . � Y�,..�' g-�L > f2 �. . 7801 i _ t i775 I7?5P 7.59 7768 � i757 �� l PIID / �"v��• 9�0� '� � �" � ` :. � . .., � �a7d8 J7M19 r :, , - . . . �i�7765 77: 773F p 72p ..�nP � � . / `ti/��ti..�Y � va( � �' _ t 767 � 1 w __ I� 'ns o �ra�» P-2 iXi ;�as , � � ',� � '° R-3 f4 ��ss ..,. � y � �-�9 � . „�,f °�� y t ,;45 � ��I li l� ..�\„�p"�� y � _ �,77i p,7197:18 715 772aK�k � /y �,1�6 y - . r � 7_ � m��. i 1 �. j� �/ `@.. 7 i 15 . F�.� .. 710Y 7709 iJ10 77n . rv� 70C d� `� � � � _-'-"- _' . .._ . _� v� ;;„„.; --� y, � __�. .. ',°.!ii'-- - � ` � ._. ._ .__ - -� � �. °- � Jr oGi. COa. �` ap� ' 2 „� ��.. \ � �13k, �I - �."�• 7036 7G65 � 7692 7685 �N 75 0� �••, �� r r'UQ o .. `� � �n B 3�t' .,.�..�., i �+ .. �� ' i z 76$2� r `° � �l I� N Nl� N 9 'tr. : �...... C�, / �:075 °i 7GB0 p 755? 76�p 76G5 f._._ 76E4� P ti�'�..,. ..., x� . ''��\ ."� � i n �n o� � � ?ei0 ;5C•5 � 7660 ° � �� ,�s+�,:+� � �I� �c°i o e. °o i66 � ! ,. '� I. � °. 755.`. � 76GE 76;7 754a o'653 i' �^,� 7v °i� E-.i ry° I. i63 7oJ3 7564 762q ?633 a 76�5 � �� -. I �0 � wo�♦ I 7524 76�u .. �.._U 7625 %820 � �j �� R^Y i.� , �, I 7674 ��7 ,6CJ 7E19 7F:Y.� �rpt ( � 1�� . :'� w �en � SILVER VIEW i�. �? 'S�"i 7:�65 � ?5oa ,75 � � t; k �n � n � �p�� -: � 758 75g t 759 � - .. Q ��..V �i °i ). yds.� �o >se� o •rs�s ;:aa� ' ' .~. �i PHRK � I I - I. F. +r �`/ r o�� , N �,'t, 755s 'Ses �t,s o �SfiS ,'584 � �se5 � `x. 7.55E0 � R_? � c o� °a,y:. �s5s 3 �sss 75%? � �I '� / R-4 � ' 7 5 a� 75;6 ��-� w 555 55i p '� oN n oN � oo� _ �, . - 7� 5_ O': MS 756� p � `. 550 2 i � r�� n J N � ?545 r � I ?525 7538 w 75•t' Y is15 _ �^y5a5 s S4� �� I�� P� � - _ � o= � r°. I _ "' �f - Y in m r, �:...,..._ 7540G ] �. G _ � 0 0 ° g 75Gt � N 75U0 N I 7 o P P ° o' � o- I ' ,-. � - � � � 5�� 7530 � u ,�:� �+ cJ i�i � eaoi.sora � � o�ive y��> � C ,•, " _ v y� r. � � , � < � sc, � .7�,� i�w;-� � � � �� 0 o n o 74J-7 7469 rav i 7450 7485 N r•. o. _. ._ ' r �a T o�ii i c�" v.� � n . ^ 593 m � ro��SOit . rm /%':- 74E5 74�4 .737 . a �. . . . � / . ��j �a57 . . . . Iw 7a7t �_ . BRONSON 741� 743=j. � •• . . I� - ..o_ �'_"7454 J..-y. �,c. :45G ... _ .. _... / � .. /_ �-�\ _. _ _ � : _. ;_ __ W.�. _ . _ - ._._ _. ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ ��__ _ . _ _ ___ ___.____ _ ______ _ _ _ i � City of I�I ounds View - Locatian IUI ap r � � � �: .� . r' r� �� s �� rr �� s �� r� s� �� r� �� a�� r �� .�r �� .� � �� r•. r■r �� s�1� 11 li C'r 1111r �� ■ tf�' . .. . - i� i �M� -� r � �� r �� 111 � �� ■�1�� ■� �■ ■ ■M �� r�� .1� �� . ■II� ,�_ _� _.. C=== �= =� �= s� ss 'r� .. ...r Jim Thompson Property Involved: 2817 Laport Drive Planning Case No. VR03-0012 � 2817 Laport Drive � Properties Within 350' u , ` _i_ . _ _ _ � � �_� ; . _ _ ,: _ . � � �� _-- =-�--- - - - . �:;_. --�__ -- — _ , � --- - ----- —� _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ --- --� I ., �y, � ��.:, A � � �• L...', sW�: �� y�i ; .- y; � r '3, "� ": F''_�c� f . :. , � �` & 0 t � � i 8 � �k k �i� !� ; �` � ' � � - . _ .,,.:;�,,.. .. -.. .. � y� : '., . _. . ,. _ , � �•.�...�.--� � w,;�� ., y + i . ��x��.,� I� �� F � I F : �' G � : .r . .. . . . .......::.:: . � F: � a ! � `�4 �: ¢ 9 � � ., r.. ._.._�.. ..�.._.:_ ... � . .. ,.... .....+x-..�i. . w .s i. ��..�:��trl� l ' " ! ; i �' 1 �; � ��r,et; �,y ,�� e . � � � �� . ; �.. ��_ .t� � �2 ft. �`��! ��a:�: � �k� '�:�� l-=w � _ _: - -:: __ _ - _ ..._ , _ -- _- ��_-- ;x �::� � __ . ..�: � ..� :_ _ ._ ____. . _ . , . � Photographs of Driveway Expansion -� f-_ , .. Line shows portion of driveway that would need to be removed if variance is denied. � � ;, i. . ` , . I -- -.�, MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 744-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FROM THE MAXIMUM CURS CUT WIDTH REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW A PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED DRIVEWAY ADDITION TO REMAIN; PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-012 WHEREAS, 7im Thompson has applied for a variance from the maximum curb cut width requirement to allow a previously constructed driveway addition to remain on the property located at 2817 Laport Drive; and, WHEREAS, the subject parcel is legally described as follows: Eigefzheef• 4`h Addition Lot 3, Bloclz 1 Ramsey County, State of Minnesota WHEREAS, the parcel is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential; and, WHEREAS, the maximum curb cut width allowed in R-1 zoning districts is 24 feet; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has constructed a driveway addition without a permit that increased the curb cut width to 32 feet; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Location Map 4. Site Plan 5. Staff Report WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding this request on December 3, 2003; 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, 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 Plamling Commission hereby malces the following findings of fact related to the hardship criteria identified in Section 1125.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: The property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. 2. The maximum curb cut width allowed in R-1 zoning districts is 24 feet. 3. A driveway addition has been constructed on the property, which increased the curb cut width to 32 feet. 4. The property is regularly shaped and is neither exceptional nor extraordinary given the number of properties within the City that are zoned R-1. 5. The literal interpretation of the Code would NOT deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district in that the property is not unique compared to other properties in the same zoning district. 6. Granting a variance in this case WOULD confer a special privilege not enjoyed by other property owners in that there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to warrant approval of the variance. 7. The variance WOULD be inaterially detrimental to the purpose of this Title in that there does not appear to be a sufficient hardship to warrant approval of the vanance. 8. The hardship criteria as identified in Section 1125.02 have NOT been satisfied. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon its review of the hardship criteria, testimony presented at the public hearing and the identified findings of fact, does hereby deny the variance request to allow a driveway to exceed the maximum curb cut width on the property located at 2817 Laport Drive. Adopted this 3rd day of December, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson Attest: James Ericson, Corninunity Development Director (Seal) ` _.. Item No: 7 Meeting Date: December 3, 2003 Type of Business: Public Hearinq of Mounds I/iew Staff R To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow a Reduced Side-Yard Setback for a Second-Story Addition at 5072 Brighton Lane; Planning Case VR03- 013 Introduction: The applicants, Mark and LeeAnn Loken, are proposing to construct a second-story addition above their garage located at 5072 Brighton Lane. The garage was constructed in 1972 and at that time was built eight (8) feet from the side lot line. Mounds View Zoning Code requires that the living area of a home is ten (10) feet from the side property line. The requested variance is for two (2) feet. Discussion: Setback requirements are addressed in Section 1104.01 of the Zoning Code. Each zoning district is listed with the corresponding front, side and rear setbacks. In an R-1, Single Family Residential district, the typical building setbacks are as follows: Front, thirty (30) feet; Side, ten (10) feet; and Rear, thirty (30) feet. It is noted that sheds and garages, attached or detached, can have side and rear setbacks of five (5) feet. The Code also addresses the issue of "prevailing setbacks," however, that is not applicable in this case. The applicants desire to expand their home by constructing a 682 square foot second-story addition above the garage. The existing house has 940 square feet, which is less than the current minimum square footage requirement. Zoning Code requires 960 square feet for a one-story house. Variance Considerations: For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning Commission, in this case) 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 criteria are as follows: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective date hereof have had no control. __:.. � _... i _ _ - �- - - I _ _ -r a.. � � : � . � : , ._,_ -- - - � — _ - - '__-___ =— - -- . . ; _ s� . , . I� •- - -- ----� Sethack Variance Report 5072 Brig�hion Lane Decemf�er 3. 2003 Page 2 The property has an area of 10, 915 square feet; less than the required minimum of 11, 000 square feet. Because of the relatively small size of the home, the homeowners wish to add more living area. The homeowners are limifed as to where an addition can be constructed because the front yard is sloped and a deck and mature trees exist in the rear yard. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Title. While the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone, because of the way the home was placed on the lot, the applicant is unable to make desired improvements. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The applicants are not the original owners of the property and had nothing to do with the placement of the home, fhe location of the trees or the slope of the front yard. d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in that every properiy owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function and livability of their home. e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship. The applicant is requesting a two-foot variance, which is the amount that would allow the proposed addition to match with the exisfing structure and use the existing foundation for load baring walls. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to other property in the same zone. Granting a variance to allow the addition to encroach two (2) feet into the side setback would not be materially detrimental to the purpose and intent of the Zoning Code given that the attached garage already exists eight (8) feet from the property line. g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Setback 1/ariance �epori 5072 Brighfon Lane December 3; 2003 Page 3 The proposed addition should not have any impact on the supply of light or air to adjacent properties, nor should it impact congestion of streets. The proposed addition will not increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety or decrease property values in the neighborhood. R�commendation: After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 746-03 is attached for the Commission's approval if that is the chosen course of action. 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 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, � , , + Kristin Prososki Planning Associate � __ . _ _ .... y _ _ _ �^ _ _. ,. ��,.:.�. � � �.:. �=-- ; _ . _ ' _ —L_" _'�__� �___'-..,.�_ __ � __ . �c.___�.: I-�_ _ _ �_ "__ . -.1, � �_. . "_'" A (,�;��,r^i; `,'�� 'C� `l�(1j,j{;lr., �_-J�_.,,. c� A A �j C�: j�:� .� I I� 5��.f '�L'rei� , Parinccst`�P�' COMMUNITY DEVELOPM�IV7 DEPARTME�IT PLANNTNG APPLICATICIN 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55i,12 (763)71i-4D20 Fax(651)765-1660 Pleasz Type or Print Information - Complete 6oth Sides of This Form �,� Appticant Yn�ormation 1 C a. \1 4-=.� �: - � � i: -� - ��-1 � � Idame nf Applicant �1� �� /l �' �+��ti'\._4�= �'e-'�1 Telephone ��.� 7`C��'-�� 2�=�� Address `:�C>� �2 1 �� c- �,�� ` Fax __..---- �>; �.�� e�:_:_y V1�"��:� -�i`� \ \ Z E-mail: � c.:+7_a� ��c`�� c�� ,..,�� —��... t'`��' Interest 'in Property (check appropriate box) � Ovdner of Properly O Lessee, Operator, Manager f� Other (expiain)___. ❑ Contract for Dezd Owner p Agreement to Purchase App/icants must prnvide evidence of interest in praperfy at the time afapplicati4n, and if you ar� not the owner of the property, you musi either provide a letter ofpermission f�am tlre ownergivinq consent to the filing of this applicativn or the property oivner must sign t/rls app/ication for it to be accepted. Property Description/Proposal Address or General Location Legal Description Property IdentificaYion # (PIf� #) # of Acres Current Zoning Type of Application (Please check the appropriate boxes) Y� - .. � , �, _ _ __. _ . _ ____ ___ ___ _-__ �.__ . , - � � _. �____— �� . . .. _ . � _ � f�iounds View Pianning Application present Use of Praperty Property CMassification Description of Proposal (attach , , �rra �Icsc-��..�t�c�. Sa�,s � _. C�� L_- \ \-1�� c_�C'z�Ge_ ,�,�1 ' rt-�v��:��'�r;.. ' X��c� c�e , i�,� r�:�� . �.�� , _� . � ❑ Abstract CJ Torr2ns litional supporiing documentation if nec2ssary) � Please Note: Appli�an's are rasp.,r.sible for all casts ir�curred as>�ciatecl wiJ� the filing, revie�x and pro::essing of this apaGCation. 5 �ch fezs are to be pafd in escrov; u�.� front or upon receip: of statcment from ihe City ef 1�lbunds Vie:v. Fees may includc but ara not limiled to a�sLs for consultank; re�ained by the City, consultant planning s�rvi�es, z'tomey, and engineer fees. A depri; may also be required to cover cosL of publir. notices, malerials end staH fime sper,t in the revieal, research or preperatian o` mzterizls asudated wi� this a�piication. 7ne appticant shall be responslbl: for all reasonable in�rred mstr in excess ot the InKial de, �sit amount. t+ny p�r,ion of tiie dep�sit not spent or encumbered shall be refunde:l t� fhe a,�plicant x�itliin 3� days after consideration �f :he appllcatlon Is tnmpleted. Payment of park dedicatlon fees is require� with subdivisl�n applicaUuns. I ACKNOINLEDGE THAT I have read all of the inform�llon listed in the Planning Application and fu{ly und�rstand [haf I am �respo fble for ail co Ina�rred b• he Gty related to the processing of this applir.a;ion. � .'�� ` I -� .Ib`3 Applicant Da,e Page 2 C� � _�r.� c c,��'e.\ �j � \-'c �� `��5 . BY MY (OUR) SIGNATUI2E ON 7HIS APPLTCATION, I HEREBY DECLARE THAT, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE AND ACCLIRA'TE. Name of Applicant (typed/printed)_�r��`�� A�_ti+� �-�'�'�-'°'� Signature of Applicant ��,✓'.; _ ��-� _ __ r° / Nam2 of Properly Ownzr (typed/prinled) ��i��c+�``� / L-E•� �rti� ��--c� �� '��' :> � �✓—//' Signature of Property Ot�Jner , /� �F�� ._ Address of �v,�ner `��%Z P�: ;c�.\r �v l.-.�1 �v� C'� \�11�\ �-�-. S� l7 Phone Number of Owner_ �7C- "� - ',C� `- �� Z-�� E-mail of Ov,mers-�c`i r`� � ��.�t'� `=�� '�C=k xa::��W�*�:» x:xx:***x *x:r�;�**�:*z:r*�x**xx*x.*�x�:Mx:�x�:�t�x�:**�:r� x�r*W�x�v:�t��::i �_�.*w�::r�::r��:W�W� �W*x FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date of Submitta( l� - 7� i�3 __„__ Date of Acceptance: _ 6D-day Limit 120-day lirriit: _. Planning Case IJo(s) ��A? D 3- Ol �___ Assigned lo: �_ Fees Paid: A�count # Check n Receipt ;F Application: __ Park Dedication: - __ Deposits: Other: _,� TotaL _- - _-_ - _ � ___ �-- " . ' �--u-=�L-.--:aa,: � `�-- � . ` �- �---� - t �-_` � `==_ - --- - . � _ �__ _'___" �.'�_'" . . ___" --___- _..... ._. Mounds View Zoning Map 29 i.�ov ..�� - � i , ..__ . .. �, ..�.. .. . .__ . �� ,.. . ..--' `� .. .. �. 7 Tl�� ,, , .'-•� q9 77A5 77to 7711 C9 � 77to 7700 7zt p 7 � 79 7718 7715. ... 7�2C w'. . �' .ry�° � - o !Q�m v': 7 U � N- : o ol .. Ip� . 77i1 `O 770[ �� . �'� II 7775 N . ry�i fY. N C+ NI' 7;Ot 770G h )9 771D , e e 7 0 � �. .._.._.. ..... __ � _ .. � ,- ..-_ . -_ .t ' �� '- , .. ....:, _ .. _: ,. .. r 7 �. 7592 CO ' G E 2 <' . �` � n � . ,� . . .n . �.^ � . p. +. I 4 O ` t.. \�38� r �n ��n 551 -; � N--�' r.� �r-� i0$2 7EC5 '�N7690'�I � PLn � 1 lNN�N N NCl N �� N� -� 768 p 9 �� J' N N.�� c� 25si'• i695 A � . y� C' "bi 7c70 7663 768G�' t' � I�w�.. � ,. � z547^ 7687 ._7v6i, I. �y'�T.� 7600 � .- F . �r �.. . �� c wo . Q-'F 2541 �r � 766a � ?_.; .Q ?6a4 7653 �'' & . c . ._ � �j t ,tit, ,. _� Z. s� 253a ; F � 'T 7631 0 7635 c� p � :. 25 S i I 7 E> � 763511 F'j 7 o a _� '��:. R' Q� ' G, yp � 7F5 :7655 �, P�. �c_o � t �:' � : / � I �&as r �'�f 7E�5F 7GG0 ?�i01 tl . � - �� WVVULP.WN SILVER VIEVJ -J �: � �,;�Q- h;o i � o � :a �see 7575 0 ; ' ohJ / � ° ��rif� . B 2 4�' �ry� '� � ..., eN . 6�� PARK / M � �o (�4 �..�� 75oL � 75F5 ti a� ,: N'" / o N ° , N � `9 ..,\ l�, �� , ' ! h 6 3 - � io � - =n. .o.. __,-E W F � �p � 'V N �5; •, �' r' 7 E . ! e�. � R•-A � �, ��'�� yti ;� N N w 7 55 �� ' � �' m 75G0 � i 7550� �� 0 �h ^ °n N°i�° a - � : . �� `ry �� N< ° ��a5 li 542� �F' y..a - n n^ °'on. m°;� y : rv,°v N a � . N� t� 7530' �•` °� � "' �^ <v N f ObN ° . ��'Pi� . y . RNE J f � �� sr3.[� , t�� _ , �✓ ..a oN � - N ., ,I ' _ %'?` ��r n 5�1 C_ 7S2QLWE_ . � ,�^� u� a l f �; i . �5 � o � _ CITY HE � � � A ,�� 7a� 593 w�°�p m�� 7501� .. -,N e o� N � � .:.. '� n r^4y i'� ry�M� . �� h� � eROrisoia = t ` i; W �: _ �y 43 . . . r . : ci .�.i<5o� � N � .7A44 `� � 7�5,� � �s 'n `=^�� ...� � _ . . I '�J ��R 4 �i3�'.�_ -��`\� ^��.Yti D1 h 1ul �� . a '7a01 �� ..: l .n i � , .>� IS � aa2 � �7441:r7[27 a ^ n ` 1 , '`O a � . �a.�o ��PARK �. �jE�V DR �asii Pf �'�.,,;�� . �� ay ' i �� O'/..i } � � 408 �' i 390 � � 7333 �� _ _ __. _. .._ _. _� ._ _ . _ _ .., . � . . ��: ��' � � � !�,'•, 35 ' ''•.' 7400 N 7386 �� - / 379 i - .._ . � � �i ! \pJ "`. %��eo ra N� J��zs t! � e v, � �� i i I w 7s � 1 I 757s H G LN 731 � ^ a � _:i / i'Ji• `•"'"._ � ' 73501 7374 � �� i � o t: �! ti� 3 R� ,J � � � 7a�oa �� .1" �, � n. � o N H � I c�l �. .7 ,� ' 7344 � 6 � 73�'. u I' y � K ..' r` N O�I I7 � m i - � : 7352 6`�'� i ' � >309 : 1. ��. ... � 'r 4 I J ^ _ _ LO . � .. p .. i cW NNr '1 > 50.• n II N D '`° I, f h� 'Y ( 'S 0 K 7 nh rt, 7310 �RD N Zn IN~ ...JZi a.5_;g�� . ...•NNNNNN � N n N N c�. �iro _......�517i .:272.327' S27? ,�._.. . � . . ,�.. ..._..,./ ...-' S266 ..�262 _...:.... co __. j � � �' f_ ry o � ° 1D p. 295 �' � n �$ ��nvr c -� ,� v� n n 5275 �c io ��, d � N,� �?9 : B i �� N 7° � � rr _,n m � � � • I.,. _-„g tI � - 516}�7a. 5^<66 52G" 52eb N t° N�' � c1DV rv r� c� 5256 526t 5�56 5267 � � � � N.., 1Oi N � 5267 - I � ' S260 526t LOUIS�A o N AvE o p i 5250-525 szso JL�$ Q 5260 � � O� � �5'I785i7 p �+ . e . 37 Q �� 525d 525 Q r��'. �n � N`� �- �o O 5244.5240 52t4 G n t � �- O I� N N. � N N N. rv�� IO - ��4� � Y�i :25 i� !� 5176 517 � 5248 525 K�� d' n M �n N n', � w p Q 5�36., 524 5236' . � n 1O �'D N e° /� N N N� 10 �O U'� N. N w . S24 N N N ` ..- ��i9oi i o52a2.52aa N a�� i ;x. _5:5� 5z=2- CLEkRVIE44�. ,,, i i St�a.sn. � CLE/+RVIEw � AVE e c� r �, a ,23� .•f ... . y � 523G 523i N w < n,'�', n� o �� 5 i5�D231 5<26 5451 `O m e� 91 - �.r !�-� � � 5�72 s17 230 ° `O N r'�i N -" �iO � 1O . � � PF ��53P5�� szzu g?o � a a- � 7180� � ' 52:]0 523 . q. N. �n � � V_ .� N. 1_ . � _ m�) � il M � I 5770 a a� o 0 0�. �n � N '. '�H y 516 5224 � 522 22a N, u u c�OV .�v N i° N rv N. N n� 1'v. � � i:5219 52 �I M1 , I, . . 521 N. N _ ,�, ry ` $" - - t I Z5:685v5� g218� 52t RIDGE� ~ � � _ . LA�VE RIDGE �L4NE 1� N W L9 f0 DO 1 $Z1 �O N V O. .t O ? O<- ' '� N l0, � OSiG551fi` 5272 �� N� H 5-� �� 1-� J212 5213 "� $21 527? r N'. ,�p ,`�'� (`n N � ry N �R Y` � S16M1516 Y 5211 � W 5?O6 � N N r . �� n g . . � 5206 5206 5207 �� ..07 5206 h. o v� �' m�. N 520C � 520 ,� .� e a S O 5 2 0 5 � � � N. .n �n u"'i r N 5 2 0 D - 5 2 0 o a e N.-. a� � � N � �oo � St62�5767 5200 5200-.5207 5200'S201 w 5200 -. . °i "' . � "' � � � � . 5?oi . - . z � 5i�s� WOODALE�� R 514 St5 1900DALE I �',YlGODALE D 57i6� 5148.�ia� 5i485�49g 5148 � . .. `�� J070 ` �� 5143 514� ... � 5165 515? g755 5150515` w 5138 .- 574 5150 515 7t 5t40 5140�5147 514p'.5141 iiQp.. 51,i'[ ��5 - _ � � . . 5147 . . . .5i55 SIM1I K 5140 514 Sial 5149�b165 706�i i-J ��.5739 5132� .. 5132:St;3 5132 St3 5132� SI�t2 o g 5726 � 0 51 S1J3 -5145 O 31� 51a0 �175 �. 63 ' � t :� P['i � . 5732 5135 513. .-. . . g. 51' W �51?S 51[a 572_ � Si30 5120 r n n p % � ... ._. --..,-(. 03 51?a 5725 � 5724� I 5124 5155 �� 5125 5535 ;�65 .30 �N � � p ��. WOCDCREST 572 571. Z 57i6 5117 �116 5777 5776 �� 5728 S1S1 57[651?, lt4 �� . 511� 51 N a 5116 -r .5125 5128 5149 lOODCP.EST � \ w��l �Stt9 z 5109 �5109 5118 5115 511a �11 S70d n N 5109 5120 5145 5. >„ PARK p stios sioa yroe- sioa sioe sns > � � < � � �1. N �f5it3� �y � - � Ff O1 � � � S. � �� : ' .... �. j+r 1.�� 570 �107 510D � • 5706�.5107 5{05 �ht ��. N� rv N.5101 510$ .^ � � °� °- : 'a;' : � 1,5107 � ,.5767 IOG 5101 �p .5705 v ��. 51�5 5, . N " - ' - � ��"�-� '--' w / R-� WOOUCREST � WOODCREST DR �... ..� � ..,,. _ • .. ...�.. � 509i: ' ...." � . 5092 509 � 5092 c� >092-a o �092. SD91 5�92 509 50?2 509i 5D92 }°v N'5091 5092 ,°v � °0 5053 5090 0 >; N ' N J� < �y�."�"'� �r '•.. 5096 500 � 5086 506` � OSG� SOBi 5086.: 5065 5D86.�`� 5086 508> 5086- 506' S0845G8 5084 �� c, � 5"v71 �� D75 50 ___'"' 69G0 5079 5080 507 OB0.�50�?. 5080�5079 Z 5060��75 5080 5��5 � S�SO.SG75 � 5076�07_ � 5C 5080 ,�7`:.. O � �69 w 5070 5D71 a51 •.. . . 5D72 5071 ;�J72 5071 �0 2,- 077+ 5072 5D77 r 5072 �77 � 5072 5077 O jp72 5G7: � SDGR.506 Z 5C74. a. . 5C � ?a5 6930 5066 5055 W Sp�6 505,° � SO6E � 506 . 5066 SD65 C� 5066 �065 m SCe6 �065 � 506e SOeS w 5062 5061 O 5064 j� gp5R' S061 ¢_ 5�61' �� W '-� 5060� 50G7I� � SD60 SD59 � 5060 505 \ 506C'gpg�: 5050 �D>9 m 505p�Q Q� 5060_3C59 506Q 5053 � 056�505 5054 _ � � . Z ,: .. I�'. . � N �. _ 5066SU51 5C n N n � 5054 5C530 5054 5�53 0.�4i�505 g05S 5053 505� 5053 5054 5053 505a'S�`-3 �.^ S�SSI �^ ° c pa, o ° °' N n N tO 5045 50<SJ SDS65Q45 Si?tFtj�p '; 5�465G45 �q65045 50q6'5045 50465045 �� '�f� 5� ��rv --- H------- -- ----` � _ --�-- --- -- ------ �_-_ �---_ __- P�J E �-'�' �(:,� �;; �.j ..� ;_, i'' i :_-__`. :�.-:" . . . . .. .. . . . .. -_ __ - . :_ : -. ' - . 1�""J.." "_��r. " _" ' _'_'__' _ . . . _ _ . .: . __ ...._�. . , . . -_ _ `."'., . __�`_- . �f . - �:z _ '.._.._ � ... � Cit� af t�l aunds Vievrr - Loca�i an M ap �� :: :: ■■ ■■��'�"►��, � ■� ��r��r�� ■ �� r� �r�� ....•�,r�r�� .. �� * r �■■� �� !■ ��■ ��■ w �= � 1 � • _ • r � �� - �� - �� •� �� -. .1 .� �� - ■� *� �f �� ■ ■ �� ri� r �� r� �� w �� = r� �� a� r■� ■�� ■� � �� *�r�� r� s� � �� .�r '� r� �r �■ iw� �� r� s ��■ �� r �r�i �� i �� i�� i �r ■� Mark & LeeAnn Loken Property Involved: 5072 Brighton Lane Planning Case No. VR03-0013 � 5072 Brighton Lane � Properties Within 350' "'" ."" '�__-I F Photograpb of E�isting Garage ; i Photograph of Garage Roof and Backyard :i �I - -a ;`; �- .�3 ��: --- __._._.... . ;.:.�:.�,:�-�� --- Photograph of Existing House i ?= �� ; �� `.� :�' l.v—,�, �. t4 '. � i �.:.4 u-. 'S . � � . � �i�` > i . ° 5 III� . :.I jv1� LfI� f',��t �f �, `�r i ..0 v,�� ,ri . .� _ h ��E� � �. . � - � !"�_ _ , p� ' .�� -:� d .; ry,y ' ' � .�'+'Yl; � i aR.� " � '� r . t le , t i i1o. :,, i .— f � _.�.. 7 '",„ ; � _ ,. — q � � �� _ � -� I ' k` �'r 4 ' h „j �� - r. � �. � n.,t � ' , 3 � � .�:,�� , _ < _ :i �. r� >�-� -� ,�,- , �- - ' -:� ��s - _ � Drawing of House with Proposed Addition ._- �.._.._ _.__.._..__..,..--�------- . .... _-- ,' .. .. , � .._ . Jll � li.il� 4 � , , _ - _. ' ... _ � ' ri .` _ . _ _ �•..._ � � , ;:, �� i ;i � .., i , � , � � - r " i i.�.,.�.�—��--�. � �''' _ - . _ _._ � _, `;, __ - _,,,. . _. _ . .... _ ' — � �� z �, �! �� i� I � i ' ! 4�� ' �f � i I' �_l � 4 �; { 1_.;.. il = :n—� 4i I�� .. � . � ' �� J - . .� �. �� y i � � I I , . . . , . i � - . . _+ ... .___.. � , � . —'�—'---.�.'�'J_ __ ....__ �r... .--- — — _ ------- — --. - -- — — a - __� �._� tl__�_ _ . � � : � . . . ;, �-�; i° ,.•�., �i��'.!�'( Ji �! i�: � I , i i� �i � �i ; ._�-- --�— — � — ---- � ', : _^�'__�'—r__. . , . , � _T_-__: _ _ , � .�. ..._ _ ,:_ i �� . . . ,:.�,3,.,... :._......._ _ _ � I _ __ __ __ _ _____ , _ ,_ _ ; -- -- -- ------- =-- -- - - — -=--�- MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 746-03 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR AN EIGHT-FOOT SIDE- YAD SETBACK FOR A LIVING-SPACE ADDITION AT 5072 BRIGHTON LANE; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR03-013 WHEREAS, the applicants, Marlc and LeeAnn Lolcen, have applied for a variance to allow for an eight-foot, side-yard setbacic for a proposed 682 square-foot living space addition over the existing garage on their property located at 5072 Brighton Lane; and, WHEREAS, 5072 Brighton Lane is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: Lot 13, Block 4, Twelve Oal�r 2id Addition Ramsey Cou�zry, Min�zesota WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Location Map 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 difiiculties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner's control; and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held Wednesday, December 3, 2003, with regard to this variance request; and, .=..��s� _ . � .�.. . ----_.. . --'.. . _�.�--- ::� .y ,r__-- y -" _- ° _ .,'i [-.y------ —'---:. --- - 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 nlust be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Platuung Commission hereby malces the following findings of fact related to this request: The exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to the variance request is that the garage was constructed only eight (8) feet from the side property line, the fi•ont yard is sloped and mature trees and a decic currently exist in the rear yard, which causes limitations as to how the property can be improved. 2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code would restrict the property owner's ability to expand and improve upon the layout and functionality of the hoine. 3. The variance is requested due to the building setUacic, the presence of mature trees, the existing deck and the grade change in the front yard, factors over which the applicants have had no control. 4. Granting a variance to allow for the eight-foot side yard setbacic would allow the applicants to expand living space without increasing the footprint of the home resulting in a more efficient utilization of living space and property. Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owners a special privilege denied to others in the same district due to the unique nature of the existing conditions present on the site. 6. The eight-foot setback is the minimum variance that would alleviate the applicants' hardship. 7. The construction of a second-stoiy living space addition above the existing garage would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of the Zoning Code or to other property in the R-1, Single-Family Residential zoning district. 8. An eight-foot setbacic would not impair the supply of light or increase congestion, nor would it increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or diminish property values. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon its review of the documentation, testimony presented at the public hearing, and the identified findings of fact, does hereby approve the vaiiance request for an eight- foot side yard setbacic for a proposed second-story living space addition constructed over the existing garage at 5072 Brighton Lane, contingent upon the following: 1. The applicants shall obtain approval of a building permit for the expansion prior to any worlc being accoinplished. 2. The variance applies only to the portion of the home on the south side of the lot that currently exists two (2) feet from the side lot line. Adopted this 3ra day of December, 2003. Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: Jim Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) _ `� ��. Item No: 8 Meeting Date: December 3, 2003 Type of Business: Discussion City of Mounds I/iew Staff Re To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoning Code to Allow for an Administrative Variance Approval Process; Special Planning Case SP-120-03 Introduction: Currently, a resident may seek relief from Zoning Code by applying for a variance. The process of applying for a variance entails submitting an application and a fee, staff reviewing the application and situation, staff presenting the case to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission voting to approve or deny the variance request. The process can take up to one month and is somewhat time consuming for the resident, Staff and the Planning Commission. Due to the number of variance requests received, Staff has researched another option called an administrative variance. Discussion: Administrative variances are used in many other cities in Minnesota and the United States. The process for an administrative variance is similar to the formal variance process, except that Staff makes the decision in approving or denying the variance instead of the Planning Commission. This process is allowed only for variance requests within certain limitations, set by the Planning Commission. For example, an administrative variance could be requested if the request is within 10°/o of the code requirement. In order to qualify for this process, a hardship must exist and the same variance criteria will be evaluated for each request. StafF researched administrative variance processes in other cities and has developed a chart for comparison of each of the requirements. (See attached). If the Planning Commission wishes to go forward with an administrative variance process, the process will need to be discussed and a recommendation for a code amendment will need to be made to the City Council. Some of the topics that need to be discussed include: 1) Limits and Standards — There are many different options when it comes to deciding what qualifies for an administrative variance and how much deviation from code to allow. For example, the City of White Bear Lake, MN limits administrative variances to the square footage of accessory structures, the location of air conditioners and pre-existing, nonconforming structures. In this case, the administrative variance process does not apply to other requests. Another example is Boulder, CO. They grant administrative variances for up to 20% of a required setback. The Planning Commission may review the chart and based on past experience with variances in Mounds View decide which topics would be suitable for administrative variances. All other topics would need to go through the formal variance process. In addition, limits need to be set for how much a request can differ from code. , � ;. _ � . _ �--_� =;.. :�� ; - ;��. -- _u.s--� = — - _ . .-- — .�_ __� _ � �..� �. Administrative t/�riance Repo�i December 3, 2003 Page 2 2) Application Review — Many cities allow the Community Development Director to grant administrative variances. In some cities, the request is reviewed by three members of the staff, and yet in others by "qualified staff" 3) Requirements for Approval — White Bear Lake, MN, and a few other cities require written consent to the variance from adjacent landowners. Many cities require that the City or the applicant notify the adjacent neighbors and allow ten to fourteen days for the neighbors to respond. In addition, many cities require that the neighbors be informed of the decision made. If neighbors object, the applicant needs to apply for a formal variance. These requirements are in addition to proving a hardship and meeting the variance criteria, as evaluated by staff. 4) Denial and Appeals — All cities will allow a resident to apply for a formal variance if Staff denies the request. The applicant may also appeal to the Planning Commission if they disagree with conditions required by Staff. 5) Fee Requirements — There was a wide range of fees charged for administrative variances. The range went from $15 in White Bear Lake, MN to $227 in Boulder, CU. For a formal variance, Mounds View charges $150 for properties in R-1 and R-2 districts and $325 for properties in all other districts. Recommendation: Staff is seeking input from the Planning Commission as to whether the Commission is interested in developing a process for administrative variances. If interested, please direct Staff to further investigate the possibility or begin writing a code amendment. If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend a code amendment, decisions must be made by the Commission in regards to the five topics addressed above. Respectfully submitted, �� iGo3.n'.�l.i. Kristin Prososki Planning Associate ... _�=y= � � ... _ .�..._ -r � _ ��- . . _ . __.� ..._.- ___ . . . _ :: • _ - _�:._ . �V i 1 �� ., _ _ _ _ r -� -, - . . . . - O U > �' �o� � °�o � o � � � ; �. b N'� c� � c� � cn 00 O O•� p" 4, �� U N �--� �". � �-"+ I� � Q" p+ �.i� �' �;b�' S N `� s-�. U C/) ��'i c� O 69 cdC � q � � O � '� O a`�. � �," O � � O U o � T � � � a� i ,� � � � � Z o � � �. �'' -O � � an o � � .. �"'�� e�., ��-�� a3o �� o � ;r `'-' � � � � � � � cn � N � �1. O � ''J � p '� v' O . � •d ��' � � � 'O '� s.�., �� N N �a--� •.d c�C 4-. v� � y"d y,�„ •� U �4: � ��°, "� � o�� a3 � °o � �, �� . � � � � Z��..a�� ¢�Z�3o`��,� °� � U � i a"' � �� i v�i i O L]. � O I �� O °' � b v � -d b v ¢' � a� w o a� � a� a� � � � � .� � � � � � � � o w � � ro c�d � o" � o" .�°A � p� � � � U� � Q 0 � 4-�"i o' 4.�". .�" S�' '� P. Cl' � O U � 4. 4-+ O O N O 4, 4-i 'b 4� N 4r Q �+ L." �. O O � O �,n O � � O O� O O� O o o �\.� \ v � c�'d \ \ N U N vl �� N'd O N„d N �� y� � � �� O O� O O�� O O y O 4� O+-' C� � �. S�, � �, 'y �, � c�d C], � �`�' � � � cd �' � +� c� �� :v � � � �"� �"o � °' �'a� � ��° v�i � c�i, `" v�i 'b v�i N � � � a� � a� � N `� N •� � �' o C� '�" CC �.o ai i-� Cd 4-i ao ��, � F-� �. o � Q� Wi t�, 'r" �--� i; � °; • � H ° � ° � °�-.' o N � N �' N .�+ N � � V `� � U. F" U'� U.-[; U�i U,� %-� N%-� V �.+ ,s: o-'� '-' '.= •� O N� N N N �"' N'�"' b N �. V U V'^ V bD V� i �+ � f� �(� 3(� �'Q��1 0� �� °a'"'��'� °� aa � i �. �'d i � � 3.� i�"r � 4. i P. i'C i� Q d ai 69 � �+ � � O O � � � Q� O� M � N N N � rn L: ,� � ,-Y. N �bA O � �", � � yN [n U r�..+ �a�� ,�•�� o�� in � � � �' � a� � v .o � o � � � N � � ' � 4" � � � �bA � y � �p,p c� c> c� � � >C `n cC �' cd � v" O "-' .'_' O Q' ' >' -� :� � `" °' `ti � °' � ..c o � � � ' � � ao .� o .-. � o �. Qr�� a ' � z , , , � � � U � aj O s.�y O O �-�+ N• s-�_. � U `� � .� � � y � � '.� � cC � � � � 4-i bD �' . � c� O ^ ^ � � �1. � � � � � �n � �. . � � � � O � � � � � � � � y > O � • � � N b � � � N � ��=+ cd � � � o , � � � � U P-� o O � � � ,,, cd cn cd � di Q O � � � 4-i l� . � � �C � � � � o �� U'C N� U U�-' � c,�,d L�. �� i� cUd � � 4� O � � � � O '� � �. N ,--� � U' �`-� c°� Q' b�� a�i 3 r, ¢�� c� �° Q�° c� � w ..0� � � � � O� b 'b � � �p 'G . 0 � � N �, � � � � � 3 � w �. � � � b o U � �.. .. . . . �-�-..- - . . . . �. . . J __ - ��' _ . � : � '—::� �""`.;—_—� " . . .' _ ."_- ._. .;_ . .. _ _ ;- -- - -------- �. _ __ _ _:r.s.. , t__ '_ '"_ _'__�' ' h ""'s_" �___'�.__—__"__.�... � � �� O � � � � � b O � � ✓l -�i � CI--1 � � � � � � � .� 0 O N bA � b �� O c�V U p.D O � � �, o°��o q '� � � � � � ° � � � � ° � '`'' a � 'd � '� � � � � +, � o 0 0 � ' � � � �v . � U 3 � ��' >, � a° o �° o � � c� Q, o .� o a�i y`b d.y �� -d 3 .,_, � �, o ro � .0 � ,.., o �. 'd °' " +, o c�d � 'b o c°�i ° � a Q" � y.�, a � .`�+'' �. � � ,� ;� � � � `�-' 3 4? ,� � �, p o '� � a) .y.,.�C .ir ,b c+.. v .� 3 cd � .rn .� � (V v� cti p � � � ,S� � O � � � '—' cd pp � �,O � O cQ+ O (�i � N N ' N p�j cC 'O � � N � .�' N c� �+ -�"• � � N `� � -/-� 'd 'd 'p 4-� � � Q � � b � � b N c� y b-0 ' � � � � Y, c�C .--� cn � � V o � � v� ^�-� s.�. � � 7i � ��-' � '� . �" N � O � � � i a� � ' �n � .� � -+-' v O O �n V cd t-. .� O •� � . � � bA � ,� � � � p � v +' �' 'ty �' � � � � ++ ro (� «S O v� O � � c�d �, � c�d � � .�" 'a� � . c�d s.�• �. � �-�• ' � . � � . � �p � 't"" � t+: � N o0 ca �' v� � C7 d � � � o � p� �o^ c'"a l� � � (� � a"i � a"i a`"i � ,� � ° o a�i � o`to i O i i cn i N U rn i cd � i f�. s-� � f�. TJ �'T� L�. a, F-� 'LJ �� V] 69 69 � 'L7 � Q � N � � � � � � '� w � b a � � � � O ^d \° � O � � y � � in O �" �" � �-' �, � O �.�. N U � � ' � � � � O � c> � , � � c� �. � � � � '��" � � C%] � � �' O �� s� �1 a N � Q o� s~s � � �, � .� � a o � o `� � � � �.. a� � a, �' � � � � � o � o '� °' o •y °' s� ' a� � � � � v w��o o `� ��N°�� 3? � �� `�.�� n . . � P. a� s�. � .+� A ' o • �-' � a �� '� � � � o .� � o y o �� 3 � .� '� b o ; `� � � � � �s � � °' � '° � � v � � ' �--' � o ..� �, v � Q � on �' �, � . ° ��-o � � � d � a�� 3��v'� �� a°� � a� � �o �-' c� � b a� bA • � o �„ � a� c.� � '+-� '� ��., ca � a� � O �' DC s., ' s-' � C�" '� v �.�.. � � t`�' � �" rn � N � � • � � � � • O o cd O c�.� .b � � � o ¢ � a ,.�°d � �C � Z ,� � a� � � N � ao � � � � �° o i� cn i O i� N i v� i cd O G U i.ia 'd +'�.+ i U � �� cd �� 69 � O �' O 'vi � 4.� .fl N � O � � � N � .� .� � ti � � � �� U C7 C7 a� ��-d 3° w of Mounds I/iew Staff R To: From: Item Title/Subject: Introduction: Item No: AS 3A Meeting Date: Dec 3. 2003 Type of Business: Discussion Mounds View Planning Commission James Ericson, Community Development Director Review Zoning Code Provisions Related to Temporary Structures Staff is seeking guidance from the Planning Commission regarding a provision in the City's Zoning Code which implicitly prohibits temporary structures. From time to time, the City receives requests for temporary storage structures and up to this point has denied such requests as being inconsistent with the Code. There are situations, however, when allowing a temporary structure would be preferable to other alternatives. It is for this reason Staff is requesting the Planning Commission's feedback and direction on a possible code amendment. Discussion: The Zoning Code implicitly prohibits most "temporary" structures in Subd 1 of Section 1106.03, regarding accessory buildings as accessory uses within the R-1 zoning district. The pertinent language is as follows: `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." This passage was added to the Zoning Code in 2000 with the adoption of Ordinance 664. The intent of this passage was to effectively prohibit the often unsightly tubular metal framed membrane covered temporary structures as well unsightly plywood "shacks." The prohibition, however, prevents staff from allowing membrane structures on a temporary basis under certain conditions. Recent cases which would potentially justify such a temporary "permit" include garage reconstructions, home remodels or reconstructions or winter coverage for vehicles stored outside. (Examples of these types of temporary structures are attached for the Commission's review.) Another issue staff has observed that may further justify a code amendment relates to a growing storage phenomena—portable outdoor storage devices. Portable outdoor storage devices are delivered to homes or businesses for a specified period of time then hauled away when no longer needed. There are two nationwide purveyors of such devices—Portable On Demand Storage (PODS) and Door to Door storage. (See attached company flyers.) Because our Code does not specifically address such storage units, they would either be treated as would any other accessory storage building or not permitted altogether. Due to the growing prevalence of this kind of temporary storage facility, staff feels it would be worthwhile to adopt regulations to permit such structures on a temporary basis with conditions. _ � _ _ - __ �--- -- r---, -°-_ -- --- °- - '-= - --- --- - - - Temporary Structures Report December 3, 2003 i Page 2 What do other Communities allow? The City of Crystal recently performed a study regarding temporary structures in response to the same issues Mounds View is experiencing. Mounds View participated in their survey and their survey results are attached. Some cities expressly prohibit such structures; some are silent on the issue and allow them, while other cities expressly allow them under certain circumstances. Ultimately the City of Crystal opted to forbid such temporary structures. Inquiries were also sent to the cities of Fridley, Shoreview, Roseville, Blaine, Spring Lake Park and Arden Hills. Recommendation: Discuss the possibility of amending the City Code to allow "delivered" outdoor storage buildings and membrane-covered structures on a temporary basis under certain circumstances. ��cw�-� ��tu.c��. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Photographic Documentation 2. Portable outdoor storage literature 3. Temporary metal framed structure plan 4. Crystal Report on Temporary Structures I,J � � _ �_ . .� ..�. : . k_..5:,. . , - . . . . . a�_ .,... ._ '= �_� _"'�_'� �........,-�. ... . T ,.,__""'� �_ _ _ . �., -.._. - �-� . _ ' . . . � _ . . _ _ _ __ I_ . . _ �'__ __ " _' ' _ ' __. . _� -- - . _. _ . . � _ . .. Photographic �o�umentation -�,� �; �'� t� F��_—_ � t �c � � .. I ��`'{_ ��z �t�"' } i � Tl �?��i: � _ u � 1 J,a� }ii� . ` j.' r ,� i�- j� �h J f i_ t�y� ,� �q;�l��f e �. . a�,) �� -, r i � �, `� r �' S .. r `'�C� A � 1 a�` � �`�.� �,� . , � i .;; ,� V�. • j �'"f�` n.a-r, x, f t f . �t �,.5. � `�Cl r� a .. _ �'c `,��rk� . �!t � ", i I `' ; I j {�' �i� v � � �If'- �i: _rk � l +i i� 'f f . y . _�� ``T . i k . s I r `.t,+�,�-,,� . � �....tl -1,• �i�y'•,li i:� C �ti F '.`!. �i� '��,I�rJ:.. F�- grt i"`e'` '�� '"P%�i�°rt :'�i�i .Yi < <�` _ �-�� .r -,C�� N � �- II � i``F'�j , i ! ,v1 y' s t��5a�� 1 ,�r � 3 .. �r Z �� .�� i'� ��,. !.:�rt�.tit��'�s �:i.,-, � C� S �F�f i�k �cc . 1 y,�f -. �..TI�."',�i'o-1 �76'S�• ',r'F <,r" .sa��Y 1 �3^_l :� Y �' � a'; �_ � �: I a x e- �:.... _. `: .... i :s �� 5 21 � r" tif .dr� „_. � .�5.•- , 't ..F;?1.�f) '.f � I . I 1". k'67'' i. � �t1i1 I "t �. "'"� ,�1 z� .'1� r � . . _ . �� '. � � 1 `-121 �� : �� .,, � ^`s,. ''�. ��'� l (ifl .7 1 � �`:" ,t''^�y — •��r•�` � ' f`� � '" � - 4 i�,; y t w ��. ,ev.— .a-�-"- . . -- .... . �>.,��. � _- +.� ' .�.i .. � - "`x . . . r� , f �. � �' �� _,1 3 . w � � ! I � , �.. . . . y�. , �.. � '� �'Y•'�`� q k . ! � . .. . . . . � r : l�. Q� ' I _.` � � � , . ' .. . ', -$:k..�' ...o��il�/:tF 4ir�� , '�I`yE,"�j-. . % .., �- `4.j �" d . _.. '�'�Y.7n1f .. j re � �� J vrT W f�� f � ' F - h �' K (. �.. �';'� '4 - ��+-�.,ry� "�:i��.,i I �.�; .• `t,, �=: .!F . ` .� _ , Y 14T. vgf � y� � r l�;tlix�+ y-� �d . �.♦ a"1 .. .rY�.� S ::.ta �Sth��Y "'kr.� . X...r�y,.� .; . . . � �= 3 Tmw:y,�� `� t�t] 12i + ��; �' %y� .a. y s } : � / �I � i �¢An fr �'.t � r . r� � � * t w'^� .� �a�v . � '.. .�, �y ; � 'lJ7� V ._i,drE r �'�'»+, -r ��#-ryyy'-E ��¢ .. r y �Y ' .� f� �h Y lit; :li - �}� l � . ly A' fS' � F��J. "+�Yl ,� . _, . .'`' .. .+ ..-..'^'... ..'w__ � .'_ .::.:�..�'a �l _ . :..':. r-.'i.'lu'd:�t.*�!'1 . ��-.'a ' r, � � 5072 Red Oak Drive � .�� ': i �.:_� �..,.� ,".it_: I. := .. _''. 7641 Edgewood Drive __ ._ ., t� : � . _. i_ I _ __ i_- :- 1. - . _ : _ - - -- ----� . �� }t� ,rr � �. ' __ _ � =_�`� � ! - r i, . ; � - _ �'_3 a� ..� rs a 7 - Z '. �,`-� _ ' - " _ _rf:� '�%� +'.�,�.� r=5 ' ��.:`-.--�...,..�-__-- - - -- — -- _ _ J '_ ` _" �" -' '-;� 1 � � � �'�� _ ,:- - _ : _ ��,�:� � . hy �4� I c� "."":'_''�'_ t �, t ,h I � t a.�..i,�ij4��t J jy�,� � �� L .' 1 ' .' iL.�, . �' � ;'� I Jy 1 .��.1 , L �ti'(d .:<' - -I : ( �C - ! GY �� l. ' _ i �,., 'l' ; I�,� ' u�� i� .,w . .. .� 1A-.�` .��Ir�.�'lirr.• '�; �� t � .'-' �- �.,� t.�.c: � i��, _ . � _ � � ' ,_ :'t t yy 3 y @� � 1 L�'� l I �� ' �'��,'1 �''' �f� � '�r'1{ 1 _� �;I5�li , . r � � �... I�• ,q !.� 'Y } 4 � r ' 11� � �1 .:A� .:�et}�e,0.�. . ii� ��II � � .� _�� r.� i� _�,` ��1 �}`_.�,_;� ,,� 1 j � �. {1 f 1� r � - � .�t !� �-j �. I � I TrJ "' j� a � , b � �z � � ��f�� ..�. . ,S� {ji l .F .Sl.1 �'% = 1 � _ � �;iC' .��?sT . � L G '✓' � . � .:. � t � � f � C L�� il�,,� ,�� r°. y 1€,` i�i'�.�5�. 530R1� �.,� - k... `�`;�� 4� I��';1" c . i H� �.�Jni1G l",} � - �� , 5T0RAG� � . �; _� f : E-� , w� i ;, ,�K�� } �'db ��6•7�e! i+ij.t �.�ww�doortajmni.tom -r�4�� '� t�a.; v.��;r� i21 r � i:� �'�r- j� -,. -, 3ub-7 t r ��, , d s1 ,h Z • 8 �S r �r¢""�" - � - ` 3 -,� �' �1 .,�.= - ;��, .� :x `. .. — .. °��s _ .�: ., . . » ._ . . �,.- � J-�`� i � �:r�� i � L ( • 1 1.� . •,� >. --=� 7660 Edgewood Drive 7965 Fairchild Avenue ) PODS - Moving and 5torage 5otuuons Clirk H?�re For �'e � . T `� . � Rarr�r� t�yr I j��P�r.? ��,,•`. WHAT SIZE DO I NEED? The following information will assist you in determining the appropriate size POD to rent which will best meet your needs. ❑12-foot POD ( 8X8X12) may hold the contents of approximately a 1200 square foot home. ❑16-foot POD ( 8X8X16 ) may hold the contents of approximately a 1500 square foot home. Note: The description above does riot include patio furniture or t/ie ca:tents of arz attic or basement and does not cor:sider o��ersized furniture. Interior Dimensions Length Width Height Square Feet Cubic Feet � - ��.� �� '. < .. � r ��--.... � -':.- , ,� � _' �� Door Opening: Width 6' 8" and Heigl:t 6' 4"for eiiher size. http://www.podsusa.com/size.htin 8x8x12 141 1/4" 90 1 /2" 96" 90 720" 8x8x16 189 1/2" 90 1 /2" 96" 120 960" 1 a��. i vi i 11/20/2003 Self Storage at Door to Door Storage: Self Storage, Selfstorage, Mini �torage, Moving �t... Yage t oi � " F . � Yf �V�. L � '. � - L � �� ; . ._ . f . . � ' .�-' J-=t. J ..1 ' % � J .r _.,.t� .x� -.°„2+= �r_�_ :1.� -_:.' � ' QT Dalivwring Con�entent Starage ta O�+Fer 2,7dd Citiea! ��+` �� ..�- .,��;:.�.:�.._.: --� �--�.;..3.:_..« �__, _�:�<:_ _x��.� >..:v.._._ :. - :.:�_. ..�.,�:_._..,�.w��- Self storage delivery in: Austin, Tx _ Atlanta, Ga _ Baltimore, Md _ Boston, Ma .. Chicago, II .. Dallas, Tx _ Kansas City, Mo .. Los Angeles, Ca _ Miami, FI _ Minneapolis, Mn . Orlando, FI .. Philadelphia, Pa .. Phoenix, Az _ Sacramenfo, Ca _ San Diego, Ca .. San Francisco, Ca Seattle, Wa _ Washington, D.C. �-� 1A/e Make St+�rage as Easy as 1-Z-3 DUOR WE DELtYER. � Y'•wn� Self Storage without Renting a Truck Door To Door Storage developed a revolutionary alternative lo traditional mini i storage. We deliver self storage containers directly to your door. You pack it up. , We pick it up and your done! Our affordable and convenient storaye containers eliminate the hassle and expense of having lo rent a moving truck, having to rush i around loading the truck, having to drive the truck to a mini storage building, having to unload tlie truck inlo a mildewed self storage unit, having to return the rental truck after an exhausling day, and then having to re-do all of this when you want your valuables back! Loading Made Easy Our self-storage containers set on the ground making thein easy to load. Our containers are specially designed to hold large ilems like couches, armoires and refrigerators. Our portable storage units are 8'x7'x5' and hold 1-% rooms of furniture, so you only use what you need. Conversely, our competitor only delivers enormous storage PODS O that may force-ieed you more storage space than you want. Using our competition, your valuables could end-up rattling around loose within a large and cumbersome moving POD T"". State-of-the�art Security Systems Unlike most moving storage companies, Door To Door Storage facilities have never had a break-in or a fire! We watch over your personal belongings like they are our own. Our storage space is equipped with stale-of-the-ari security sysiems including motion sensors, fire sensors and video moniiors. You can arrange to liave access to your goods up to 24x7; 365 days a year. Satisfaction Guaranteed Door To Door Storage is confideni that you will be satisfied with our self storage service thal we have a 40-point service guarantee (call or write for details). Door To 1'$�i6`$7� Request a Free and save 25°/a c first month! Enter zip code: � �` �'- .__:_-� _� `- _-_.t :;�.�:� ' �._ � � �=� CUSTOINER Pm a t�u_y pe 1't�ur dri�rer �r,�a= fr��nt dt�i�r 9 rr�ini I I n t�e li _?rat� I�! 'rf I i:��uld ��nh; ae [:3t��a r:r�(iiF�3fi�r 1 ;,,,�� ir3��_r, — -�' - - - MY ACCOtA�tT http://www.doortodoor.com/default.asp?source=GOTO&keyword�od 11/20/2003 Self Storage at Door to Door Storage: Self Storage, Seltstorage, Mini 5torage, Moving �t... t'age � or L Door Storage delivers portable on demand storage that is affordable and convenient. You Pack It Up. We Pick It Up! r`�^ .�� Creat R�as�ns t� Us� a�vr T�► Dc�c�r... ' YES! Competitive Prices YES! No Charge for Access YES! No Need to Leave Home! YES! No Worry Size Availability! YES! No Truck Rental or Driving! � YES! No Damp Concrete Floors YES! No Load/Unload Twice! YES! No Infested Storage Facilities! YES! No Limited Access Hours! YES! No Truck Deposits! YES! No Loading Ramps! YES! No Rushing to Load! YES! No Paying for Days not Used! YES! No Guessing on Space! YES! No Worry Security Features! YES! No Gas & Mileage Charges! Convenient Storage Services � Our Customer Comments r Moving to a New City? Order Boxes On-Line Now! � Door to Door Support Office � Request a Free Quote! moving and storage, moving storac�e, california self storage, self storage space, public self storage OO Door To Door Storage 2002, All Rights Reserved Door To Door Storage and You Pacl< It Up. We Pick It Up!(tm) are registered trademarks of Door To Door Storage, Inc.. PODS O and pod (tm) are the registered and registered service trademarks of PODS, Inc.. http://www.doortodoor.corn/default. asp?source=GOTO&keyv,�ord=pod 11 /20/2003 Door To Door Storage - Letter From the President rage i oi i > : �_ , -: - 1._� J` -,1 �a �.r� ,:.�F+ J.f._ s"> i. .F �..�-1-; o�Q � usa's Faate;t Growing Arivafe Ine. 50C Campanies...serving a+rer �,40LF c+ties! ,._::., - . ,. _ .. ...._, ,�, _.,. 'We lV�ak� Storage ns Easy as 1-Z-3 ;�usTOU; ��- � � -s�s-s�. r� i , ,,.t�, �iF� r i�t� � :� � �'�� ,T,: � �: [ - � ,_ F = [y_ j � ri ` �� f ��. ��:�. �� :: WE D�LiVER. First, we deliver specially designed, weather- resistant containers and packing suppiies to your home, apartment, or business. __-YOU PACK IT UP. Second, you pack your belongings at your leisure. For extra safety, you secure your container with your own lock. _ . ;1NE PICK IT UR. � E��° � �� y, Third, our professional drivers pick-up, transport, '`� '� and store your packed containers in our storage ;� center. We will retum your belongings when you are done storing anywhere in our delivery area. Convenient Storage Services F Our Customer Comments ; Moving to a New City? Order Boxes On-Line Now! i Door to Door Support Office � Request a Free Quote! oor To Door Storac�e 2002, All Rights Reserved � pR QICK HERI FREE C : 3 � : �. f-° - , �..1� _ UJ__ .�. . _. i� THE n�!rU35 tfinfpU�7� impre;.so�� G'y't f��l, friendfy _.?r re Ce fir ��j. '"'i�0 U 1 _ ."-v_f t�3Ci�:liU3f�f 3��d;,�,�� 3u_r�� mende�i. C:�,ng r�n33Upef=.,�i t�:rr�erur�_J..q http://www. doortodoor. com/easy 123.asp 11 /20/2003 � 1� �>_ [� ' � � .. --- : � : �_ :� r �--�_ ._ _� . � � _._. — - �— - — --- -�- _ _ _ _ _� __ __ _ _. . _ _ ., I, � ilikYlefs.,._�'�_�� a.,. _„ �pL;i � ' k Y ! �� ,y�,�..:i .��" i, _. ....�r, .-�— �.4 �au�� 5 Ft. L.��s t�L50 AVAILABLt 3U X 31 �2�j95 TEL. � I ��L�l..r� �ARP'��T � .oa �� c��9� �� , ��^��,�' ""Y ��,�,�F �� °� 1 �: �'p' u!� �,"��,y. ,i 4r � . °�t. ��. � f .?'.l°`Fi 1� . -fs, -t 7 t S tr . �tE J��-�' rr �. � I ' 1 C � t�� [ � � r�'�� +; � I '� s � t�� 9�'7 Ji� r�� y �d, � e� [�;. � (�� ; � "cz: s �' jUt''� a ;f � � act ��t i •_� .�: P �i �� .+ �� : _ : .._� -i� . :,lti _ T� � � � , l�' : E1CC�?T �� C,A�t.�''URT`�r, �~- r-e1GG '`�i � '� _��— � [NSTALLATION !,�ww ! „`�41 GC�NI�'ARE gTANaARD F�ATURE�: �.� cusTOr�n ��ICE� 6 BC1WS & B�iACE� ��'�' SIZES/CdLQRS FO�i ST��N�7H (7N YdLJ.Fi AVAILA�LE �N]� LEVEL I.A?�ID CALL YOUR k Trim For finished C`i7�C Appearance 29 Gaupe STEL'1_ DEALER J1L. L:.`7 X. � 12x2t $ fi05 16%21 � 795 1 q _i�a ess` _. iax�� 5 � 12z31 �95 x:l t �;t'i 9,� C�iAl.1G�F 12k3G S1'.'36 18xJG 519�5 ��x41 51390 lII%41 $1�90 �. 'I?��21 S A95 18K21 5 995 � 2 S?Y26 S 89S 1aK2fi Sf245 �2x31 .1t95 7tlx37 S14J'r �:l�U +�^ 12Y36 $1396 78M.�6 S1?45 72sd1 $1595 7�a41 S199D i r �. Raaf � TfI� STRQNGEST ,, � D�,LUX�. �-' � CARPOf�T X� ��!'x 1� (inngr P,LM. lC1NUS '�F � `� `f�lve��i'ted Frurne k �' CLUSi:i? Gh1NC,� �. �k Ancf�nrs ft�r �round installntion ---�-_.. ....._._..__ ._..__._.__.._...... 20x21 5 496 22Y..1 $1195 20�2fi 51�95 22x26 �1595 ,^0■91 51595 22r.31 51�95 20x36 S�6D5 .'2x36 52195 24x41 51400 :)r.A1 52340 20r21 51195 22x21 5!��S 2Ux26 51d95 :'2x2ti S11d5 =p%31 S1'SS 22x33 $2095 Zltx36 S.'.095 72x;ifl 52d45 20adi 52190 22x31 32i90 x4xz1 5iJe5.., �nxzr s�ess 2•tx31 52�95 :d�Xlfi :2495 ?4x11 52�90 ?dx3'I :�i i9� :4x�fi .14�5 2AX3�1 72395 21z36 $2795 :!4x34 $9f90 1��1C�j1�l� ,,,-1'. I',> Geu;.�1 .'1� �r'.0)' �'�/(117'�^i1:L r, F4. LC'=G+$ ;�� L'i'tlf �C'4"i� Prlrr�'.II'r ,n�i �,:r, i!n��r�h i�� .��..rny .:'� r,��.'�n! !m:�e.i nssrri�i',iy i��r;,ril uai,��cnr� :.nrl r�it�fr.R'n:rici - -- ' �--` f w _. � � L � . .- --- -�-- - --- -�� i : . . . , � -. � .- - -- ;_. ___:�,_ �� '._-.-- � ._..��._ - -� CITY OF CRYSTAL TEMPORARY STR UCTURES REPORT Charactei�istics: Temporary structures with metal or wood supports and canvas, tarp or membrane exterior; most generally used as carports or storage structures for recreational vehicles and household items. Cur�•e�it ordinaizce: 515.01, Subd. 8 Uses not provided for within zonin� districts. "Whenever in any zoning district a use is neither specifically permitted nor denied, the use shall be considered prohibited." "Temporary structures" are not specifically permitted in the current ordinance; therefore, enforcement to date is characterized by ordering the reinoval of such structures. This approach is the result of a fairly strict interpretation of the ordinance. Someone might argue that these structures, temporary or not, are "accessory structures," and thereby permitted by right. If treated as accessory structures, temporary structure placement and property coverage and setbacics would apply; i.e., located in rear yard only, no more than 15 feet in height, 3 feet from any lot line. Even if our current interpretation would be to consider such structures as "accessoiy structures," they would not be pernlitted in the front or side yards, which is generally where we find they have been placed. Buildiitg a�zd Fire Codes: The newly adopted State Building and Fire Codes now requires building permits for temporary structures to ensure they are adequate to handle dead and live loads, to ensure proper anchoring and to ensure property placement and separation from adjacent structures. (Note: These building and fire code requirements would be applicable only if such structures were pernlitted by local zoning code.) Other cities: Woodburv: Cloth, canvass, plastic sheets aizd ta�ps and si�nilar nzaterials.....af�e r�ot allowed as p��i�nary f�zaterials orz accesso�y structures. Exceptions: greenhouses, accessofy structures in. the u�°bafz i•esei�ve dist�•ict, agf°icultural buildings as defined by Miiznesota Statutes. The probation is driven by aesthetics ("unsightly materials"). � i _ � �. =�. � :_ - = - - �� _ � � � x �__ __ _ _ ;_ _ ,__ __ _ _., _. _� . ___ � __ _ . _ _ . __ __ _ � New Hope: Tarp membrane structures are not pernlitted within residential areas per ordinance. The accessory building requirements state that ...tlze same of� simzla�� quality buildiJag mate��ial shall be used in the accesso�y buzldi�zg as ii� tlze pr•i�acipal building. Additio�Zally, tlae exte��to�� appeara�zce a��d at•chitectui�al design of tl�e accesso�y buildifig a�•e to be si7nilar to that of tlze principal building. Exceptions include temporary structures for cormnercial use in garden centers or shopping centers for the selling of plant material. Mounds View: Temporary membrane/tarp structures are not allowed, and the code explicitly prohibits accessory buildings of tubular metal frame consti-uction. Accesso�y buildi�ags shall Jzave a weathe�° resistant, t�°eated or� fiizished exterior. Structures conaposed of tubular metal afad canvas oi� exposed plywood, paf�ticle board o�° similaf• materials slzall fzot be perinitted. The prohibition is driven by aesthetics. St. Louis Park: Not permitted. If they were to change the ordinance to permit them they be most lilcely be allowed in the rear yard only (but accessibility by vehicles to rear yards in St. Louis Park is difficult), would be required to secure a building permit similar to t11at for a shed and would contribute to the accessory structure square footage maximums. New Bri ng ton: These have not been an issue, to date. They are not specifically called out in the zoning ordinance. Robbinsdale: Membrane structures are considered accessory structures governed by the same standards (size, rear yard coverage, total sq. ft., etc.) They are permitted in rear and side ya1-ds with setbacics of 5 feet froin side lot lines and 1.5 feet from rear lines. They have contemplated regulating these structures, but they haven't had too many —"yet". With the small lot sizes in Robbinsdale, such accessory structures usually cause the allowable square footage to be exceeded. ___ . , _ _ - -. . � ____ . � PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting November 19, 2003 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., Novernber 19, 2003. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Stevenson, Scotch, Hegland, Zwirn, Miller and Song. Members Absent: Johnson (excused) Also Present: Community Development Director Ericson Index to Minntes Planning Case MA.03-001 Proposed Longview Estates Preliminary Plat Applicant: Martin Harstad Planning Case VR03-011 Applicant: David Preztyclti Location: 8471 Fairchild Avenue 3. Approve Minutes Page a. October 15, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Miller/Zwirn. To Approve the Planning Commission Minutes for October 15, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. - : ;�� - , �. :, : _ Mounds View Planning Commission November 19, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Public Hearing and Discussion to Review the Proposed Longview Estates Preliminary Plat. Community Development Director Ericson indicated this matter is a continued public hearing for Longview Estates. He then briefly reviewed the proposed plan indicating that there would be 15 lots, eight on Longview Drive and seven on Silver Lake Road. Director Ericson indicated that the minimum size requirements for a subdivision in a wetland zoning district are rnet with the proposed plan. He then said that half of the property is wetland and pointed out on the map provided the areas to be filled and recreated. Director Ericson indicated this request has not gone before Rice Creek Watershed District but he included the report from Rice Creelc on the previous proposed subdivision which was for 11 lots. Director Ericson indicated there are issues with regard to the property raised by residents at the first public hearing and those issues concern the hydrology of the area, alteration of the wetland, the water table, and proposed impact to surrounding properties if the wetland is built on. He then said that Rice Creek Watershed District and Council would review and would need to authorize any development or wetland alteration permit. Director Ei-icson indicated that the applicant has stated that the proposed mitigation plan satisfies Rice Creelc Watershed District criteria but a pennit has not been submitted to thein. He then said that Staff recommends that Mr. Harstad apply for a wetland permit from Rice Creelc when this request moves to Council. He further cominented that the City has the authority to approve or deny any alteration of any wetland so this has to go before Council with regard to the subdivision and the wetland alteration. Director Ericson indicated that all the concerns raised by residents would need to be addressed as well as the issue of the suitability of the soil for constructing homes. He then said that the City would need engineering reports to ensure that homes can be built there without causing issues for the newly constructed homes or the existing homes. Director Ericson indicated the City received a letter after the last meeting from a resident and that letter was included with the report. Director Ericson indicated that the Comprehensive Plan does designate this area as low density residential and the City anticipated the area having homes on it 30 years ago when the utilities were stubbed to the property. He then said that the utility stubs do not guarantee anything, however. � ; : -- z - Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting __� y . , November 19, 2003 Page 3 Director Ericson indicated that Staff is aslcing the Planning Commission for direction as to whether to draft a resolution recommending approval, denial or approval of a inodified plan. Director Ericson indicated that the Commission could make a recommendation for modification to the plan to Council but said the recommendation is not binding upon the developer or applicant. Chair Stevenson indicated that two years ago the Commission reviewed a plan for 11 lots and, at that time, made the determination that the most lots that would be considered would be eight. He then said that the Commission had recorrunended that Mr. Harstad could build if he were to go with the eight lots along Longview as those did meet the criteria. Cllair Stevenson indicated that the previous plan did not have the seven lots on Silver Lake Road but Mr. Harstad has gone with the Commission's reconnmendation with regard to the number of lots on Longview Drive. Director Ericson indicated that the City's code allows for eight lots on Longview Drive not considering any wetland issues. He then said that the previous plan had deep lots and the trees along Silver Lake Road would have remained. He further indicated that this plan reflects eight lots on Longview Drive and seven lots along Silver Lake Road all of which meet the minimum requiremezits not considering the wetland issues and Rice Creelc requirements. Corninissioner Miller aslced how it is possible to mitigate since tlus is all wetland. Director Ericson pointed out on the drawing provided the wetland area and the areas to be filled. He then said that, in relationship to the 7.14 acres, there is not a lot of area that would be filled and there are sufficient mitigation areas to accommodate for the filling. He further commented that Rice Creelc and the City would need to approve that plan but the inajority of the wetlands are left untouched. Director Ericson indicated that there would need to be a minimum of wetland alteration to approve the wetland alteration permit. He then said he is not qualified to assess whether the proposed runoff area is adequate but Rice Creelc Watershed District would malce the determination of requirements. Chair Stevenson corrunented that the property owner could talce out the trees along Silver Lalce Road even if there were no homes to be built along it so there is no guarantee that the trees would stay. Director Ericson indicated that with this 15-lot subdivision plan it is his understanding that most of the trees would be removed. He then said it would be his recommendation that any trees in the right of way remain except for those that need to be removed for driveway access. Commissioner Scotch indicated that the key issue with this proposal is the building on the wetland and the fear that once homes are built ihere it will be detrimental to the surrounding y _�.-- . r z . . _ _ ` -- - - _ - � _- .� _ , 1_ --.-r :. `__ _ _ __ _ ' - -- -----t---- - .�`---- -- - ._ .-1 Mounds View Planning Commission November 19, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 residents. She then aslced if there are any other areas of the City that were developed on wetlands and whether there was anything detrimental that came out of it. Director Ericson indicated that there was a house recently constructed south of this proposed development and there were issues with settling as wel] as the fact that a basement was not possible due to the soils. He then said that there is a risk that tl-Lings may not be done right and the City would need to talce that into consideration. Commissioner Miller indicated that FEMA does not consider the area a flood plain and aslced at what point FEMA does consider an area a flood plain. Director Ericson indicated that FEMA malces that determination. Commissioner Hegland indicated that the flood plain just ineans you need flood insurance but it does not mean the property cannot be developed. Director Ericson indicated that the City cannot issue building permits to construct in a flood plain but this is not an issue as this is not a FEMA flood plain. Commissioner Hegland indicated the issue is that he has met the requirernents for development for the property so then it becomes an issue of whether Rice Creek will allow it and whether there are any other issues the City needs to cover. He then said he is concerned about the effects on neighboring residents as well as the people purchasing these hoines. Director Ericson indicated there would be a long-tenn inaintenance bond on the project to malce the developei• responsible for hydrology issues that directly impact a neighboring property. Director Ericson indicated the City would need to malce sure that the development agreement spells out all the expectations so that all issues are addressed and all contingencies are covered. Director Ericson indicated that he has said that the request meets the criteria but that does not mean that the City has to grant approval. He then said that if, in certain situations, the density does not fit the specific piece of land because of environmental conditions there may need to be a scaling bacic of the development because of issues with the property and/or traffic. He further indicated that the City has the right to say it is too much even though minimum requirements are met. Chair Stevenson asked if there were findings of fact to warrant denying this request as there is linuted information at this point from Rice Creelc. Commissioner Scotch commented that development would be nice but the concern is how large and will there be water issues if it is allowed. Director Ericson indicated that whenever this moves forward the developer would have engineer reports and Rice Creelc would have an engineer report and so would the City to review and ':�; _ _'s —" I.i.—��...:;_ '. „�^ �"'� T .s_ . . .: . ""' "'. . ":�.—""' '__ t'• ..v""_?�,`_-�y.s._"' 1�2..}.�_' _'_.u: ___" G- � .__.�.�. „ " _..�� -. ._. _ ' "' _ '_'I Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 19, 2003 Page 5 ensure that the proposal would not negatively impact the surrounding area. He then said that there are teclmologies available today to assist with forecasting and predicting what would happen with water flow and provide a detailed hydrology analysis to ensure whatever is constructed on the site worlcs. Director Ericson indicated that the City created the wetland ordinance it did so to protect wetlands because they are critical for the coinmunity and the City does not want to rislc detriment to them. Commissioner Scotch aslced whether there was anything on the horizon for fixing Silver Lalce Road in the area where it dips. Director Ericson indicated that there would always be hills and valleys due to the soils out there but Ramsey County will be doins some repairs in the near future. Chair Stevenson commented that Woodcrest could not be developed because it sits on a floating bog and this is the same lcind of ground. Chair Stevenson indicated that Staff seemed to be saying two different things one is go ahead and deny tlus or modify it with the findings but the Commission was not given any findings for support of denial. Director Ericson indicated that findings were not provided at this time but said the Commission does not need findings to direct Staff to prepare a resolution recommending denial. He then suggested that some relevant findings would be the rislc to homes built there, the rislc to homes already existing and the impact of the hydrology on the surrounding neighborhood as well as the additional traffic and access points on Silver Lalce Road. Director Ericson indicated that Staff could develop findings to support approval as well as the Comprehensive Plan shows the area designated as single-family residential development. Steve Kuhl of 5176 Longview Drive indicated he and his wife have lived there since 1971 and are very familiar with the area. He then indicated that the house on the south end newly constructed was supposed io be constructed on the best ground in the area and they are having issues with settling. He further commented that there would be an issue with joining driveways to Silver Lalce Road and noted that when the road was constructed they went down 30 to 50 feet before they found ground good enough to make the street. Mr. Kuhl indicated that his lot has standing water during the spring melt and when there are notable rains. He then said he is very concerned about the envirorunental impact to developing the property because there are a lot of wildlife that live in the area, including the snowy owl he saw today. Sandy Kuhl of 5176 Longview Drive indicated that the list of those that were invited to come to the meeting and comment should have been longer as it seems there were some that would be _ ��. : 4=`��:: �" � _�== : � L ---- �� : _ .. : ,: _ . ------- ,y-�. _ � _ ,�_ : _ .�;.� ._ I ii---° - ' - - Mounds View Planning Commission November 19, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 6 interested that were not notified. She then said that Silver Lalce Road is being widened in New Brighton and, if that happens in Mounds View, she is concerned with adding driveway accesses to it. She further coirunented that she does not feel that tlus proposal is good for the safety and welfare of the residents. Ms. Kuhl comrnented that the name Longview Estates may not be appropriate if there are now to be lots on Silver Lake Road. Lil Ward of 5177 Red Oalc Drive indicated she is concerned with traffic and the wildlife but since she recently traveled Silver Lalce Road between H and H2 and found that is very washboard she is even more concerned with adding homes on Silver Lake Road. She then said that this is a wonderful piece of land as a swainp and it should not be built on. She further commented that she hopes the Commission takes into consideration that the area is a swamp and should not be built on. Dayton Ward of 5177 Red Oalc Drive indicated he agreed with everything that has been said and then added that the water table concern was not raised. He then said that he has water in his basement and his lot abuts Mr. Kuhl's. He further commented that the first proposal saved the trees and the trees are an asset to the City as well as a buffer from high winds and noise for the neighUorhood. Martin Harstad indicated he could address all the issues but the most important point is that the property could be engineered to be built upon. He then said that they are not proposing to come in and fill in all the wetlands and this is a very low quality wetland and that is because it is the acting storm sewer for the cormnunity. He further commented that they propose to treat water off of Silver Lalce Road and Longview Drive before it enters the wetland and that is not currently being done. Mr. Harstad indicated that the city of Blaine has proven that wetlands can be filled and built upon. He then said that he would not build houses on unstable land as his brother wants to build the homes and they have been in the conununity all of their lives. He further coinmented that the density is not high density as, if there were no wetlands on the property, he could have 30 lots and comply with the City's Code. Mr. Harstad challenged the Commission to point out an area of the City that has lots this large. He then said that he is aware of the fact that this is an environmentally sensitive area and he � respects that and intends to talce whatever precautions are necessary to ensure a quality developinent that does not negatively impact the existing residents. Mr. Harstad commented that this is considered an in fill project and in fill projects have issues as nobody wants to see the last wildlife or undeveloped area go. He then said that, if the City wants a parlc, they would be willing to sell the property to the City. He further commented that they have the right to develop their property and do what the City's zoning ordinances allow. He also commented that he should have coine in with the most density proposal first rather than the other way around. ._ ;. - _ s-�. _ _ _ _ ____ _ � Mounds View Planning Commission November 19, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 7 Commissioner Scotch indicated that this is not at all lilce Blaine as the property in Blaine was completely open and there were not the concerns with the existing homes. She then said that this is a smaller area with more wetland. Mr. Harstad indicated he recognized what has been said but they are all issues that they can worlc tl-uough. He then said he feels lilce he is apologizing for bringing this before the City but this is a seven acre piece of ground that his family owns and has owned and been paying taxes and assessments on for years and they would lilce to develop it. Commissioner Scotch commented that the area in Blaine was completely open and this is an already developed area. She then asked if Mr. Harstad could assure the City that there would not be issues with the new or existing homes if this plan goes foiti�vard. Mr. Harstad indicated he has not created the water problems that already exist but said he could assure the City with engineer's reports that there would not be additional water problems caused by his developinent. He then said that, if there were any issues after the development, he would agree to examine them under a microscope for the cause. Commissioner Hegland indicated that an engineering report is not a guarantee and there is no guarantee which is why the long-term maintenance bond would be required to fix any issues. He then said that the issues that have come up have not been addressed and, if there are water problems in the area as expressed, he does not think it is unreasonable to go overboard to make sure that further development does not malce it worse or further impact those with existing issues. Mr. Harstad suggested that the community needs a storm sewer as right now the City is allowing his property to be used as the stoi-m sewer. Commissioner Hegland asked if Mr. Harstad was willing to put the sewer in. Mr. Harstad indicated he would be treating the water piior to discharge to a wetland so he basically is creating a storm water system. Conunissioner Scotch aslced whether Rice Creelc had said that there was a need for a storm sewer. Mr. Harstad indicated that Rice Creelc said that the water needed to be treated before it flows into the wetland. Chair Stevenson indicated the Commission did not feel coinfortable two years ago with the water issues and the lilcelihood of issues even with 8 lots. Commissioner Zwirn aslced if the family has explored the option of donating the land and getting tax credits for it. He then said that he understand the interest of trying to gain froin this praperty but 15 years ago he sat on the League of Cities for insurance and had to deal with issues in Coon �, - -__�__ 3. � � ''_ _ =� -. _- "- - -- - _ 4 _-`-`-- ------' - �`- - - -- _---=-„ 1 �' Mounds View Planning Commission November 19, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 8 Rapids dealing with a developer who had all the engineering reports and guarantees but basements were collapsing. When it came time for the League of cities to do something, that developer suddenly lost all his credibility by not showing up to the ineetings, values to the property went down and residents were left with years and years of lawsuits because the cities did not go after the builder and he is still in business. Commissioner Zwirn indicated that this City has common sense and testimony from those that live in the area for over 30 years about the water in the area. He then said that he was really adamant about it with the 11 lot proposal, would reluctantly go with eight but now it is up to 15 and he feels that over saturation. He also indicated that the developer would be selling to someone and wallcing away and he does not feel there is any way the developer would stand up and deal with water in the Uasements and cracked basements should that happen. Mr. Harstad indicated that he took offense to the corrunents but respected the opinion of Mr. Zwirn. Commissioner Scotch indicated there were some issues with a prior development of Mr. Harstad's father that were not addressed. She then said the other thing is this is a different age and area compared to 10 or 15 years ago. She further commented that it would be nice to start out with a few homes and see how it goes. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he would like to make a motion to recommend denial of the proposal. Commissioner Miller said she feels the Conunission needs to send something more than a recoirunendation of denial. Scotch wanted to malce a reconunendation for 8 lots on Longview and no lots on Silver Lake Road. Commissioner Hegland indicated that Rice Creelc is concerned with water and runoff into the wetland and is not concerned with safety issues. He then said that he feels that the City needs inore infonnation than an old report from Rice Creek. Corrunissioner Zwirn indicated he would not go along with any development along Silver Lalce Road so he suggested recommending denial and letting Mr. Harstad bring another plan with more bacicup data forward for consideration. Conunissioner Hegland indicated that he would like to go as far as saying that the eight lots on Longview Drive meet the criteria and he thinks that is doable but the Silver Lalce Road lots are not. Director Ericson indicated that the ininutes would reflect what the Commission is more comfortable with. He then said that, if the recommendation is to deny the plan because the �v _:--� ;_: - Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting November 19, 2003 Page 9 Conunission is not comfortable with the intensity of the development on the site given the wetlands issues, Staff will draft a resolution recommending denial. Chair Stevenson indicated that the Coirunission is not comfortable with any more than the eight lots. Mr. Harstad aslced what the basis for the eight lots was and why that was the magic number. Chair Stevenson indicated the City does not know that eight would worlc and he doubts personally tliat the ground can support eight houses. Commissioner Hegland indicated that whether or not the property can support houses is an engineering question. He then said that the previous proposal was for 11 lots and the Conunission was not comfortable with that but did agree to the eight lots. He further commented that the Silver Lalce Road lots have more issues than just the wetland. Mr. Harstad indicated that his proposal meets the wetland zoning ordinance requirements as drafted. He then said he understands the eight lots on Longview because that is the number of lot that fit with the frontage requirements but he does not understand why there is an issue with the Silver Lalce Road lots if he meets the Ordinance requirements. He further commented that a townhome development north on Silver Lake Road was not denied because of a driveway hazard. Coinuiissioner Zwirn indicated the developer of the townhomes was dropped down to four from the requested six or eight due to the driveways. Mr. Harstad indicated that if the issue of limiting the numbers is due to water he would like to have an engineer's report that he can submit to the City for their engineer's review and detei7nination of whether or not the City is comfortable. He then aslced for guidance as to what he is doing wrong because his proposal meets the requirements of the ordinance. Chair Stevenson indicated there is an issue of buffer versus wetland and this is not buffer this is wetland. Commissioner Scotch indicated Mr. Harstad is building in a wetland. Mr. Harstad indicated that Rice Creelc has delineated the wetlands on the lot and he is proposing to build in the wetland buffer not the delineated wetland. Cliair Stevenson indicated that he did not feel that the land is a buffer. He then said he has wallced on the land and through the area when the parlc was put there 10 years ago and it is a wetland. He further commented that the Commission is not going to support more than what was supported two years ago. The Commission asked Staff to draft a resolution recommending denial of the request. . .;�- _: ..." l� -: :.-. .,-. .�. �:: . . 1_��_. .,�.: '�: � L�._ , �� :. `?�i :- �i. _ .. _� . _ _ _ _ ' _ _ . : ' . . . _ - ._' - '-_ -- � --"-°--___�.. . �_ _�'. ' - - " '-- �-- -' Mounds View Planning Commission Regular Meeting Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:14 p.m. November 19, 2003 Page 10 6. Public Hearing and Discussion Regarding Variance Request for 8471 Fairchild Avenue Planner Prososlci indicated that this case is a request for a six-inch variance to allow for a second story expansion, slightly less than five square feet of which would encroach. She then explained that the home was constructed slightly croolced on the lot and that has necessitated the vai-iance request. Coirunissioner Miller aslced how the home was built croolced on the lot. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 8:17 p.m. There were no residents present to comment. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: HeglandlStevenson. To Approve Resolution 743-03, a Resolution Approving a Six-Inch Variance to Allow a Second-Story Addition to Encroach Into the Side- Yard Setbacic at 8471 Fairchild Avenue. 7. 8. Ayes — 6 Nays — 0 Motion carried. Next Planning Commission Meeting: December 3, 2003 Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Corrunission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. (The meeting inunediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, 7im Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier , �r :/ .,;�; � _ _ __ _: ____ __ _ __ _ ___ _�___ _ - _ � �. ,. _ _ � � — __ � . Mounds View Planning Commrssion Regular Meeting TimeSaver Off Site Sec��etas�ial, Inc. .�F`'. �,: �I : t ::! .:":J . C!�... _ g:�.�: �'�'r �y7 ,.:f:; y , ,:tv'�� ,'��: i i: ;i '';:��,� :�� k' � : ' i� .. ��.iJ.�..'�L��fe��`uw�'911 n^k �� . -0f . ��v.I�::'I��1 '��•' .:4!:'":<i'�_ -' -�_.;Ji;�, . -�i "G-. �� YJ a �� : �� p�� ;. >k's:s>:�'?� �« November 19, 2003 Page 11 , ::� �: � ,_ � .. _ , , ._ MOiINDS VIEW PLANNING COMNIISSION December 17, 2003 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3 � Approve Minutes: November 19, 2003 Citizens Requests and Coinments on Ttems Not on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Special Planning Case SP-120-03 Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoiung Code to allow for an Adinitustrative Variance Approval Process 6. Special Plann�ng Case SP-121-03 Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoiung Code Pertaining to Temporary Outdoor Structures 7 �3 1 2 3 APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. Next Platu�ulg Commission Meeting: Ja��uary 7, 2003 Adjournment to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION Review Minutes: December 3, 2003 Staff Reports: a. Review Zoiung Code Provisions Relatulg to Tents Chairperson and Pla.iuung Corrmussioners' Reports \\'Crout\CorrvnDev�Planning Comnussion�PC ngendas�2003\12-03-03 PC A�;enda.doc Item No: 5 Meeting Date: December 17, 2003 Type of Business: Discussion City of Mounds l/iew Staff R� To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoning Code to Allow for an Administrative Variance Approval Process; Special Planning Case SP-120-03 Introduction: At the Planning Commission's last meeting on December 3, 2003, Staff made a presentation regarding an administrative variance approval process. Staff has researched this option due to the number of variance requests that the City receives. The process for an administrative variance is similar to the formal variance process, except that Staff makes the decision in approving or denying the variance instead of the Planning Commission. This process is allowed only for variance requests within certain limitations, suggested by the Planning Commission and ultimately decided by the City Council. In order to qualify for this process, a hardship must exist and the same variance criteria will be evaluated for each request. Discussion: The Planning Commission was generally supportive of the administrative variance approval process. Based on direction given to Staff during discussion at the previous meeting, Staff recommends the following guidelines: 1) Limits and Standards — Staff recommends that administrative variances be limited to setback variance requests in R-1 or R-2 districts. In addition, staff feels it is reasonable to require that the requested amount be within 25% of the code requirement. Below is a table displaying possible percentage limits and how many feet a request could deviate from code. For example, if the Commission chooses to limit the requests to variances within 25% of code, a applicant could request that a home be allowed to encroach up to two and a hatf (2.5) feet into the side setback. 10% 20% 25% 30% 30 ft front/rear setback 3 ft 6 ft 7.5 ft 9 ft 10 ft (side setback) 1 ft 2 ft 2.5 ft 3 ft 2) Application Review — Staff recommends allowing the Community Development Director to grant administrative variances. ,�,dminisfrative Varrance Repaf Cecember 17, r'00� Page 2 3) Requirements for Approval — Staff recommends that the approval process for an administrative variance have three steps. The first step is to be approved by Staff. After approving a variance request, staff recommends that the second step be that the adjacent neighbors are notified of the variance request and potential for being approved and that the neighbors be allowed to have 10 days to respond regarding the request. The last step before approval of an administrative variance request becomes final is to have the Planning Commission review the request. If at any level of the approval process any party disagrees with the variance being approved administratively, the request will be denied. If denied, the applicants would have the option of going through the formal variance process. An approval is not final until it has gone through the entire process. 4) Denial and Appeals — Residents can apply for a formal variance if Staff denies the request or if they disagree with the conditions imposed by Staff. 5) Fee Requirements — For a formal variance, Mounds View charges $150 for properties in R-1 and R-2 districts and $325 for properties in all other districts. For an administrative variance, staff recommends a$50 fee due to the reduction of the notification requirements and the decrease in the amount of Staff time required. Staff also feels that a$50 fee is reasonable because if the variance request is denied administratively, the applicant will be required to pay an additional $150 to apply for a formal variance. Recommendation: Staff is seeking input from the Planning Commission in regards to the proposed criteria. Based on the input from tonight's meeting, Staff will draft an ordinance for the Commission's review. If the Planning Commission finds the proposed ordinance satisfactory, the Commission can recommend that the City Council adopt the ordinance. Respectfully submitted, �� .t,o�.� Kristin Prososki Planning Associate � ��_. :- _�� ._ :4�: _�:_ � �: : __ � �= v of Mounds I/iew Staff R� �. �_ _: _ � ' Item No: 6 Meeting Date: Dec 17, 2003 Type of Business: Discussion To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Review Zoning Code Provisions Related to Temporary Structures Introduction: Staff is seeking guidance from the Planning Commission regarding a provision in the City's Zoning Code which implicitly prohibits temporary structures. From time to time, the City receives requests for temporary storage structures and up to this point has denied such requests as being inconsistent with the Code. There are situations, however, when allowing a temporary structure would be preferable to other alternatives. It is for this reason Staff is requesting the Planning Commission's feedback and direction on a possible code amendment. Discussion: The Zoning Code prohibits most "temporary" structures in Subd 1 of Section 1106.03, regarding accessory buildings as accessory uses within the R-1 zoning district. The pertinent language is as follows: `Accessory buildings shall have a weather resistant, treated or finished exterior. Structures composed oftubularmetal and canvas orexposed plywood, particle board or similar materials shall not be permitted. " This passage was added to the Zoning Code in 2000 with the adoption of Ordinance 664. The intent of this passage was to prohibit the often unsightly tubular metal framed membrane covered temporary structures as well unsightly plywood "shacks." The prohibition, however, prevents staff from allowing membrane structures on a temporary basis under certain conditions. Recent requests which would potentiallyjustify such a temporary "permit" include garage reconstructions and home remodels or reconstructions. Other requests are simply to provide winter coverage for boats, vehicles or personal belongings. (Examples of these types of temporary structures are attached for the Commission's review.) Another issue staff has observed that may further justify a code amendment relates to a growing storage phenomena—portable outdoor storage devices. Portable outdoor storage devices are delivered to homes or businesses for a specified period of time then hauled away when no longer needed. There are two nationwide suppliers of such devices—Portable On Demand Storage (PODS) and Door to Door storage. (Refer to the company flyers included with your December 3rd report.) Because our Code does not specifically address such storage units, they would either be treated as would any other accessory storage building or not permitted altogether. Due to the growing prevalence of this kind of temporary storage facility, staff feels it would be worthwhile to adopt policies or regulations to permit such structures on a temporary basis with conditions. - _ .. _ _ - - _ - :_ _ ._...: � — . �...�.ti�., :� �. _ _ _ _ . --- Temporary Structures Report December 17, 2003 Page 2 What do other Communities allow? The City of Crystal recently performed a study regarding temporary structures in response to the same issues Mounds View is experiencing. Mounds View participated in their survey and their survey results are attached. Some cities expressly prohibit such structures; some are silent on the issue and allow them, while other cities expressly allow them under certain circumstances. Ultimately, the City of Crystal opted to forbid such temporary structures. CITY REGULATION EXCEPTIONS Non-commercial Crystal Does not allow temporary structures greenhouses and seasonal tents, if under 120 s uare feet Fridley Not allowed. (They do not meet the minimum requirements of the Building Code. These structures, not being permanent and not being anchored cannot properly resist uplift caused by changing winds at higher velocities. Consequently, they have been known to be torn loose and blow onto neighboring, houses, cars, etc.) Maplewood Does not prohibit them. (Structures must comply wifh maximum square-footage requirements and setback requirements must be met too.) New Brighton PODS, temporary structures not allowed Permitted only if utilized (They have not yet prohibited temporary car during a construction ports and car tents.) project. Woodbury Cloth, canvass, plastic sheets and tarps not Greenhouses and allowed on accessory buildings accessory structures in an a riculture district New Hope Tarp or membrane structures not allowed in Temporary structures for residential districts commercial use in a (Siding shall be same or similar to principal Jarden center or shopping structure) center St. Louis Park Not Permitted. Robbinsdale Permitted. (Membrane structures not differentiated from permanent accessory structures.) _ .� �w- _ _ � � `.____�__ _: __ ___- ___ _ _ __ �� _ _ _ 7emporary Structures Report December 17, 2003 Page 3 Options: 1. Do Nothing. This option would maintain the status quo regarding temporary structures. They would continue to be prohibited ands their presence would constitute a violation of the Zoning Code. If observed or reports, the City would send a letter and provide residents with a reasonable time frame in which to remove the structure. 2. Amend the Code to Permit Temporary Structures in Certain Circumstances. The Zoning Code could be amended to add a provision by which temporary structures could be erected with a permit for a reasonable period of time not to exceed a certain duration. If this option is chosen, staff would suggest one month permits not to exceed three months in duration unless mitigating circumstances are present. Staff would support this option. 3. Amend the Zoning Code to Eliminate prohibition altogether. While staff would not recommend such an action, the code could be amended to eliminate the language added in 2000 and treat temporary structures as any other outdoor accessory building subject to the same setback requirements and maximum area requirements. Recommendation: Staff requests that the Planning Commission discuss these options and provide direction as to whether a Code amendment is appropriate, and if so, which of the two amendment options would be preferred and under what conditions, if any. Based on your direction, staff will prepare for your action a draft ordinance at your next meeting, January 7, 2004. < � Ct.,�'�.& ( .-1�.-��GlL. James Ericson Community Development Director Attachments: 1. Photographic Documentation 2. Temporary metal framed structure plan -') : _, . ,� ��: , . . - _ � _ � v� -_ __ . �:� �:. �� . , � _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . � Photographic Dcacumentation 'r� 4l^1iL:v�r1. t. a . . . . , v3=.'_:, .. .T"i.. T%M1,i_ . � . +"+ ��rj� . . � ��'S �� ,.� � � # ; .! , 1� , `.t;t_. ,.,� 'i f.,�:` ��i I �u �T { r 1,; � ,"�.. ��4 � � �r4 ✓ F '7:y ,,;� `:.✓�'�.��.Y'. I 1'_. �� ! I . ._�I ._ .. . �: i . .:� l :� �..• � x� 1�� . ' . .:i;, ' r � ' � ^ r� o,. . � ' � � �,� � b 6 _ _ -_ 1 -1 ,',1w 1 I- . .._ .. � . . _ �. . .. i . _. _ . � ..�.. . .�. i _r'�� " _" _.. �. �� . � . .._. 5072 Red Oak Drive �* ��M1 1 _ � { �.. y � 1. ,� �"`f .#;�Y � v-; � 1 1 ) i=f � '•'� 1 �� ' � �i ` t .— � .. ... � � . �.) __�_._ 7641 Edgewood Drive .� � � ; ._ � �. _ . �_ � _ __ ____ _ _ _ _ - - .__�_ __ _ � _ _ .. _ . � . - -----... � __ .. _ �_�` �'•,. k : 1 � , - - _ _ � --�: � _ _ _ = - - _ _ �='�-�' ,�' .:; . _; = , _ _ � - _-° _ -- .- - - -- - _ -. -� �� . ` a � .. _ �� _ : -- ' ` �„ � �`--r,�--"""��" _ ��' �. `` . f: �t'� .5rk+u � - ,"_z ; � � ��.r,,� 4�� _ �J �' < � "S �' �°'.,':,�;�"u' � � � �I .� 1r :4C� �: R �'� � = rs e ., � � � ,�I'� 4 � � i � 1 � �+ � �7 ,�. � �!' . . r -- � 4 ;' 1 ��` r`x' ,1 j I ds� �_�� ( t c-r� ':•y� i� .._ y. � r{ � �ti. x��° � � � �� 1 . � � ..� , � , i t� � �� 1�� ,.� � �� ' .}, �rr;��; i 1C't� 1�; I I � t 1 —.� `� .1� � � Y J3 �� i �7�` .r ! _ I � ! 1h�' � � I �°{ . .:ri � �1f I�� j " `! � � � _ �.'1 � � � � �I��-4 s�- V I s s,: � �'�� T� �� iyw ?.S � 1 '_.��.._' f L� ;t� i �' � � ,. r;`.�� T� `�; � ,. �. 4 ,.r �:�� 4;� � � I � � �� 4j � .,I � �� ) �� .� � SfORAC� � )'` 'y : W r-`�„ h'" � �� 1 3 � �_'`�I } - i 5 T (� R A fi f / � � �I rww,r.,r::,.o�.i - ;� -� � �� ; � { 1 FP4 3�+F�7721 � i r �� ;w-.v.coarrr..irv:,<<om I 1 �� i� � :� ,p } a - p �� • ' i-s�a-��u-��2z ,�,� � -- : ,# � __ �, , _ _� � :��a�-�� '�f �� _ �; t � � � ..:. . ry < �.�:.5 rc,� . i : :1 i� � F ` �'��°'�-�,� �� -�-� : , ' : l _..y„ �.ars { � i""r`',-"'''' '.`f '.�. .,.:-.-`s�-`�'�"�'x f � T ,: + � ��'' g F'i �r �?'� � C�i � � y �. � ,. _ _ — ; k lti � ' � ! t ?'.I I., '� �_ N �'�.�! � :}'� j f ` ' I_...._' __—..____".,�_. . .. _ _ .__,�'ss —' _ - , _..ru,w - -u ,,h�„_ ' .w ..a...�.._�: �� . 1 ::� 7660 Edgewood Drive 7965 Fairchild Avenue -_ __ ____ _ . , _ __ _ _ _-_ 4: _ i. _: -- � � � . ��_I:.� i I'� �i,il' � {I ��. -j l_` . .. � a�"�wE`��s y. y` - '._"._�:';. . �.� 14 �auge 5 Ft. LegS ,ALSU A��AILABL�: :?C? ?: 31 :•'�`.a`j5 TEL. r � DCJUBLE �ARP �,l �iT $ .00 14 Csrugc � wA T—nv—T CAR�." C]►RT S, I�"�Y � _ CUNIPARE gTANOAM�D FE{�TURES: PRICES � ��ws s� saAC�s iFOR S`f�i�N�i'H �� *' Trim Pnr Fisiished JI£�F� +�PPearancc �^'�"� 9 *�1�,'T�9,��r'k'^"��r z r i '� I'^,°�. � g�?i- � Il L. •.d � � � } /� tt�� 1 � ,� �.'�� j 1 s' �+a� � � a� �I i CJ �.� .r �� S�� q I ! � . -�� i� ' f t _,�� I �7,h1"� t . b ic �. ,� y.�,�� I `Yf� � _ j��fisli�t �(�f�,� � �J',�I �� v'�f' tS� � .�(. [�� {� — ��SkVt��B14n __� 'I� c�t .. .v, r c �.. ",� � _' .c'1. �:i'�b� �'�'�'it :. i�' .�,. �-J'.�`Vti'� k�'i�t?C.C�PT t--� ,' �y .vn_ � � `' f-RL� �' '� zE � �� [NSTAL[AT'I4N ;,��j �'�` ��il,.��,�, cusTOr�n SIZESICQLORS �N Y(7L1R ,q1rAILABLE LEV�L I.�a%ID CALL YOUR 2y c:,�U� srei_�_ DEALER � . (—� 12r2t 5 6P5 �&r2t :i 795 I IY , �ZxZU�.b HeS,. .,,1Hr.?.a :E_9'�5 �' i2z3i ?�iQ9:�� 'TTIx11 511-4,� f:iAU(il-. ?2P.7G 51:95 T7ix:16 51:185 '�wX41 51390 167[A7 51590 � r� i2�21 S fl95 10K21 5�95 �f L S?i�28 S 495 10x2G 512a5 � IZx31 $IiUS 7tlx31 514J5 ;�J�UC� 12z36 $1395 ]8x36 S17�:5 12x�i $i595 18xA.1 51990 �e Aucf�nrz for ground iustnllacion __---_–. .._....--_ ............_.. ... . . .UH.1 5 496 22Y.21 �1�95 :!aXT1 51:�95 znMZe st29s 22r.2fi b15D5 7Jx2f, 81A�3 ?it.91 $15y5 22x91 51995 2•1x31 5�035 2Ux38�� 516U5 .'.2x36 52795 C�tx36 52A95 ?OxA1 51900 :2xAY 52390 5'3x�t1 52990 241r21 51195 22xT1 SE:i95 ?4x?1 .°n159i 20x26 S1d95 «2z2F 51145 :'4x26 $19J5 2oxar s7��s szxs� 52095 :4%31 <.��4s 70z16 $7.On5 92x3f $2-045 �� :!1x.36 $2795 ?Oxdi ±719p 22xS7 3?i9(1 j :!Jx3S $919.� �'I IC STRC3IVGEST' 1lELUX£ cr�rzno�r ALI. fiINUS vf= C:L(�Sk:l} (;�'11L�UL-:` Qualiiy ,��ln 1 � �iC'�U;��' ;'i? 's��nr l4�nrr��!��i: u F'i.. Le_qs :"' :�r�u� �irni:rr u��ur�:n�j o+i ��.:al i!o��r;b.�! ,i�� i�..q,;�t..��.':n_!�!i:; .� � _�s5un�'ni.� unrv:vtd�� usr��rrv:,,:.nrl �^c�h,irrr:n-i , a � --�- — _ -,— a .: � � .. . ,. �:_ __, .:.. . . �_ . � - � u = _ _ _ ___ ___;_. . ..—. _ _ __ ________ __ _ ___ . _ . _ _ _ _ _. _ __ � � � , � I PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOU1vDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting December 3, 2003 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Miller at 7:00 p.m., December 3, 2003. 2. Roll Call . _� Members Present: Conunissioners Jolulson, Hegland, Zwirn, Miller Members Absent: Stevenson (excused), Scotch (excused), Song (excused) Also Present: Coinmunity Development Director Ericson Index to Miaiutes Planning Case MA03-001 Proposed Longview Estates Prelimiilary Plat Applicant: Martin Harstad Planning Case VR03-012 Applicant: Jim Thompson Location: 2817 Laport Drive Planning Case VR03-013 Applicant: Marlc and LeeArul Lolcen Location: 5072 Brighton Lane Page 2 3 � Special Planning Case SP-120-03 5 Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoning Code to Allow for an Administrative Variance Approval Process _ _ _`__ _ " _ i _ - - - - --- - - --- _ _- 4 Mounds View Planning Commission December 3, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 2 3. Approve Minutes a. November 5, 2003 MOTION/SECOND: Zwin�/Hegland. To Approve the Plaiuzing Commission Minutes for November 5, 2003 as Presented. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. 5. Consideration of Resolution 745-03, a Resolution Recommending Denial of the Longview Estates Preliminary Plat. Coinmunity Development Director Ericson indicated this item was discussed previously and the Commission is aware of the issues with it. He then briefly reviewed the request of Mr. Harstad for approval of the Longview Estates Preliminary Plat. Director Ericson read the findings of fact to support the denial: The proposed fifteen-lot subdivision is situated completely within a wetland zoning district; The minimum subdivision standards within a wetland zoning district are 125-foot wide lots with lot areas of 20,000 square feet; Approximately half of the 7.14 acre wooded parce] is delineated as wetlands; Approximately 20,320 square feet of wetlands would be filled to create the fifteen lots with a total anticipated alteration of more than 200,000 square feet of area within the wetland zoning district. Director Ericsoil indicated this matter is set for public hearing before the City Council on Monday, DecemUer 8, 2003. MOTION/SECOND: Jol�nson/Zwin�. To Approve Resolution 745-03, a Resolution Recommending Denial of a Preliminary Plat for the Proposed Longview Estates Major Subdivision. Commissioner Zwirn said he feels the findings of fact stand for themselves but added that he feels Mr. Harstad showed total disregard for the existing neighbors by not providing sufficient evidence that homes to be built could be supported on the site and no evidence that he would accept liability in tlle event that anytlung did happen. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion carried. _ � ._- . , ___ _ ___; � . � � _ .- � � : : -- - . .� - _ Mounds View Planning Commission December 3, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 3 6. Public Hearing and Discussion Regarding Variance Request for 2817 Laport Drive. Plaimer Prososki indicated that the applicant has requested an 8 foot variance to the curb cut requirements due to the fact that the contractor failed to oUtain a pernzit and the wark on the driveway has already been done. She then explained that the applicants were having issues with bacicing their trucic and fifth wheel trailer up the driveway due to the slope and it was causing dainage to their vehicle. The reason for the driveway improvement was to eliminate that issue. Plamier Prososlci indicated that Staff does not find a hardship in this instance and has provided a resolution for denial for consideration. She then read a section she would lilce to have inserted: Now, therefore, be it finally resolved by the P1aru7ing Commission that the applicant shall be notified of the right to appeal this denial to the City Council. The appeal shall be submitted in writing within 10 business days of the adoption of this Resolution. Mrs. Thompson of 2817 Laport Drive addressed the Commission and explained the issue with the slope of the driveway causing dainage to their vehicle. She then apologized for the contractor not pulling the permit and asked the Coirunission to consider allowing the variance to leave the driveway as it is since the worlc has already been done. Mrs. Thompson indicated that they have a close neighborhood and none of the neighbors have an issue with the driveway. Acting Chair Miller aslced whether the slope of the driveway was changed when it was paved. Mr. Thompson indicated that the driveway now slopes about two inches rather than the previous 10. He then aslced whether it was a big enough issue for the City to require that they remove the pavement. Coinmissioner Joluison indicated that other residents would want the same thing and that is why it is an issue. Commissioner Zwirn aslced whether the contractor had indicated they were to obtain the pennit. Mr. Thompson indicated he was told they would be getting the pernlit. When he found out they had not, he irrunediately caine to City Hall and applied for one and was told that the drawing did not meet code and a variance would be necessary to allow it. Commissioner Zwirn indicated the Commission needed to resolve the issue to the best result for the City and the applicant and, since the slope has been changed and the pavement tllat needs to be removed is only from the right of way to the street he would recommend that the applicant request that the blacktop coinpany do so at its own expense and that they provide fill or grading to maintain the same level as the remaining blacktop. _ _. . _ i__..._ L '`�_ l _ � _ _ . _- _ --- _- ' _ . u,�.- ' , _ ---- �a.� � �: _ �- �.�. s< -. _:_ � : : :. �� . — - z w::_ - ----� Mounds View Plann'rng Commission 1)ecember 3, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 4 Planner Prososlci indicated she had reached a representative of the coinpany and was told by him that they accept responsibility for the error and said it was due to a miscommunication. Mr. Thompson indicated he would lilce to keep the driveway as it is since it is done, but if necessary, he can have the pavement removed and grade it for grass or crushed rock. Acting Chair Miller indicated there are criteria that have to be met for the Plarniing Cominission to grant a variance and this case does not meet the criteria. Commissioner Zwirn assured the Thompsons that the City would work with them to negotiate resolution of this matter with the blacictop company. Acting Chair Miller aslced tl�at the language to be added to the Resolution be read. Planner Prososlci read the language. MOTION/SECOND: Zwin�/Jol-uison. To Approve Resolution 744-03, a Resolution Denying a Variance from the Maximum Curb Cut Width Requirement to Allow a Previously Constiucted Driveway Addition to Remain. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion cai��ied. 7. Public Hearing and Discussion Regarding a Request for a Side Yard Setback Variance at 5072 Brighton Lane. Planner Prososlci indicated that the applicant wishes to construct a second story addition over the garage but requires a sideyard variance to do so since the home is constructed on a small lot and the garage is within 8 feet of the lot line. She then indicated that Staff feels the hardship requirements can be met in this case as the lot is smaller than the City's minimum standards and the home is under the minimum square footage requirements. The front yard is sloped in such a fashion that expansion that way is not feasible and in the rear yard there is an existing decic and mature trees. The Commission agreed that this addition would be an improvement to the home and noted that there is no expansion of the footprint of the home and no expansion of the encroachment into the setbacic as the expansion is directly on top of the existing garage that is 8 feet from the property line. MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 746-03, a Resolution Approving a Variance to Allow for an Eight-Foot Sideyard Setback for a Living-Space Addition at 5072 Brighton Lane. Ayes — 4 Nays — 0 Motion canried. Mounds View Planning Commission December 3, 2003 Regular Meeting Page 5 8. Consideration of Possible Revisions to the Zoning Code to Allow for an Administrative Variance Approval Process. Planner Prososki aslced the Commission for feedbacic concerning Staff's proposal to establish an administrative variance approval process. Commissioner Hegland indicated he would lilce to incorporate a reporting process to keep the Coirunission infonned of what was approved. Commissioner Johnson indicated that he would only be in favor of Staff granting setbacic variances. The Commission questioned whether the fee should remain the same for administrative variances or be reduced. Community Development Director Ericson indicated that the fee buys newspaper notices and notification so a reduction in costs should be considered. The Commission directed Staff to proceed with a proposal for the Commission to review. Commissioner Zwirn indicated he was impressed with the research done on this and the information brought to the Commission to consider. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: December 17, 2003 10. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Plamung Commission, Acting Chair Miller adjourned the meeting at 7:45 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Jim Ericson Community Development Director Transcribed by: Joan Lenzmeier Ti»zeSaver Off Site SecT-etarial, Inc.