Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-05-2016 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA October 5, 2016 - 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Special Order of Business (none) 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, please give your full name and address for the record.) 5. Planning Cases A. (Continued) Consider Resolution 1055-16, a resolution approving/denying a Variance for a 30’ front yard setback at 7790 Eastwood Rd; Planning Case VR2016-04 6. Other Planning Activity A. (None) 7. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity B. Staff Updates C. Council Updates D. Planning Commissioner Reports 8. Approval of Minutes: September 21, 2016 9. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. Wednesday, October 19, 2016 B. Wednesday, November 2, 2016 10. Meeting Conclusion Item No: ___5A Meeting Date: Oct 5, 2016 Type of Business: Planning Case VR2016-04 City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Planner Item Title/Subject: Continued: Consider Resolution 1055-16, a resolution approving/denying a Variance for a 30’ front yard setback at 7790 Eastwood Rd; Planning Case VR2016-04 Introduction The applicant (Value Homes, LLC) is requesting a Variance to reduce the front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ to construct a single-family home at 7790 Eastwood Rd. The minimum front yard setback in the R-1 district is 30’ unless homes on the same side of the street have a greater setback (54’ in this case). The request is due to the hardship of a private drainage easement reducing the developable area of the lot. The Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on September 7, 2016, and continued the Hearing on September 21, 2016, taking no action. Discussion The property at 7800 Eastwood Rd was subdivided into two lots in March, 2016. The north lot includes an existing home, and the south lot is the subject property (7790 Eastwood Rd). After the subdivision was approved, the developer conducted a Title Search, which revealed two private easements: (1) a 10’ wide sidewalk easement in the SE corner of the lot; and (2) a 30’ wide surface drainage & storm water easement along the south property line. The two easements are for the adjacent property, Silver Lake Commons apartments. As part of Silver Lake Common’s Development Review in 1997, the City required the apartment owner to obtain a drainage easement from 7800 Eastwood Rd. At that time, there was concern that expansion of the apartments would negatively affect the natural drainage flow from properties north of the apartments (1940 aerial photo suggests a drainage ditch flowed through these properties). An easement was obtained, but a storm water retention pond was never constructed within the easement, nor was a sidewalk. Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 2 Prior to the Title Search, neither the developer nor the current property owner (Value Homes) knew about the easements. For a Minor Subdivision, a Title Search is not required prior to plat approval, but prior to recording the plat at Ramsey County (City Code, Section 1202.01, Subd 2(b). Due to the private drainage easement and the 54’ front yard building setback requirement, the developable area of the lot is significantly reduced. Analysis City Code, Title 1100, Chapter 1104, Section 1104.01, Subdivision 3(a): Yard Requirements; Where principal buildings in existence on lots within the same block on the same side of the street have front yard setbacks different from those required, the minimum front yard setback for any new principal buildings shall be the minimum front yard setback in existence for any one lot. In no case shall the front yard setback be less than thirty feet (30’). For purposes of this subsection a, a block shall be defined as that group of lots lying along a street between the two closest intersecting streets, except that where the length of the street frontage between the two intersecting streets is greater than fourteen hundred feet (1,400’), the block shall be the lots within six hundred and fifty feet (650’) on either side of the lot in question, or to an intersecting street whichever is less. Homes on the west side of the street are set back between about 54’ and 60’. The adjacent home (7800 Eastwood Rd) is set back 59’. If the Variance were approved, the proposed home may look inconsistent because of the shallower front yard, but the 30’ front yard setback would be consistent with minimum requirements elsewhere in the R-1 District. On the east side of the street, homes are set back between about 45’ and 77’. City Code, Title 1100, Chapter 1125, Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 includes the seven criteria for granting Variances. A Variance may be granted only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist: a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Title. b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Title or the City Code. Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 3 d. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owner of the property since the enactment of this Title has had no control. The unique circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. g. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this Title or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. The condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Staff’s analysis of the seven criteria is listed in Resolution 1055-16. In summary, the practical difficulty (criteria c & d) is that the private 30’ wide drainage easement significantly reduces the developable area of the lot. The private easement was created by an agreement between the adjacent Silver Lake Commons Apartments owner (MSP Real Estate) and the previous owner of the subject property (Mary Larson) in 1997 in response to the City’s approval of a Site Plan Review for the expansion of the apartments. Although the private easement is a result of the City’s requirement of the apartment’s owner, the City has no authority to require that the easement be changed or vacated. If the Variance is approved, the front yard setback would be reduced from 54’ to 30’. The proposed home would have a front yard depth about half that of other homes on the same side of the street (criteria e), but would still comply with the minimum 30’ front yard setback found elsewhere in the R-1 District (criteria f). If the Variance is denied, the owner could choose an alternative floor plan that would fit within the lot’s developable area. The developable area as-is, measures approximately 64’ wide X 58’ deep, and is triangularly shaped. After the developer (Kayak Properties) of the 2016 subdivision conducted the Title Search revealing the easement, the developer contacted the owners of Silver Lake Commons Apartments (Mounds View Family Housing), requesting that they vacate the private easement, which they chose not to do. Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 4 Public Comments A Public Hearing Notice was published in the New Brighton / Mounds View Sun Focus on August 19, 2016, and mailed to 31 property owners within 350’ of the subject property. Staff received an email from a resident on Eastwood Rd opposed to the Variance because the proposed home with a reduced setback would look out of place, and because the existing wooded yard blocks noise and lights from properties along Mounds View Blvd (Co Rd 10). During the September 7th Public Hearing, one resident on Sunnyside Rd spoke in opposition to the Variance because the reduced front yard setback would not be in-line with surrounding homes, and was opposed to the removal of trees on the lot. The subject property is heavily wooded. City Code, Chapter 1127 includes regulations for Tree Preservation and Landscaping. The City Code encourages, but does not require the preservation of “high value” and “specimen” trees within the R-1 Single- Family Residential district. Summary The applicant is requesting a Variance to reduce the front yard setback from 54’ to 30’, to construct a new home. The property includes a 30’ X 172’ private drainage easement along the south property line. The lot’s developable area is limited due to the private drainage easement and larger front yard building setback. Recommendation Staff request that the Planning Commission further discuss the application, and take action. A Public Hearing was conducted on Sept. 7th and Sept 21st. It is the Chair’s discretion whether to accept additional comments from the public. Staff recommends approval of the Variance contingent upon complying with the conditions in Resolution 1055-16. It is Staff’s opinion that the Variance request is reasonable considering that the location of the private drainage easement greatly reduces the developable area of the lot. The Planning Commission is requested to consider the following options: Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 5 1. Resolution 1055-16, approving the Variance is attached if the Commission chooses this action. A 5/7’s vote is required (2/3’s of the full Commission 1). 2. The Planning Commission may choose to deny the Variance. An alternative Resolution 1055-16 is attached, supporting denial. A majority vote is required, assuming a quorum is present (quorum = 4/7’s of full Commission). 3. The Planning Commission may choose to table the request, stating its reason. The City has administratively extended its review of the application from 60-Days to 120- Days (Nov 25, 2016), consistent with MN Statute §15.99, Subd 3(f). MN Statute §15.99, Subd 2(b): “When a vote on a resolution or properly made motion to approve a request fails for any reason, the failure shall constitute a denial of the request provided that those voting against the motion state on the record the reasons why they oppose the request. A denial of a request because of a failure to approve a resolution or motion does not preclude an immediate submission of a same or similar request.” Respectfully submitted, ________________________ Jon Sevald, AICP Planner Attachments 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Photo of Neighborhood with front yard building setbacks (approximate to roofline) 3. Site Photos 4. Email from Lon Stigney, 7841 Eastwood Rd 5. Resolution 1055-16 (APPROVAL) 6. Resolution 1055-16 (DENIAL) 7. Applicant’s Narrative (with Certificate of Survey) 1 City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 4(f) Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 6 Zoning Map Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 7 Aerial Photo of Neighborhood with front yard building setbacks (approximate to roofline) Planning Case VR2016-04 October 5, 2016 Page 8 Site Photos Figure 1: Eastwood Rd, looking south from 7800 Eastwood Rd (fence at right). Red line is approximately in front of subject property, 7790 Eastwood Rd (8-29-2016) Figure 2: Eastwood Rd looking north. Red line is approximate front of subject property, 7790 Eastwood Rd. (8-29-2016) From:Stigney, Lon To:Jon Sevald Subject:VR2016-004 Date:Tuesday, August 23, 2016 3:41:57 PM Dear Jon, My home address is 7841 Eastwood Road which falls within the 350 feet of this proposed variance. Me and my wife are against this proposal for a variety of reasons. First we would hate to see the buffer of trees that are there presently be removed for they deaden the noise from highway 10 and also block the lights from the nearby housing project. But the main reason is that we believe that this variance for this project would be way to cramped between the two existing properties and way out of place of the present street view that now exists. The code that is in place is there for this very reason. It should not be tweaked to help a particular party who subdivided a parcel of property in the hopes that the city would change the code for their own financial gain down the road. We ourselves own a double property lot like others here in Mounds View. Because of this the city has a nice wooded feel too it that makes Mounds View an very enjoyable place to live. We believe this variance would open the door for others to do the same. Especially outside builders or a new property owner who would just want to make a quick buck by selling of odd acreages and attempting to squeeze other houses in other deemed inappropriate areas. Sincerely, Lon Stigney TR Director Cornerstone Assisted Living & Memory Care 3750 Lawndale Lane N | Plymouth, MN 55446 763.550.0333 fax: 763.390.1888 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential client information. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you're not the addressee or the employee or agent responsible to deliver this e-mail to its intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination, distribution, disclosure, copying or taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Elim Care, Inc. Providing Senior Housing and Healthcare in the Spirit of Christ's Love MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1055-16 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 30 -FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A NEW HOME AT 7790 EASTWOOD RD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2016-04 WHEREAS, property owner, Value Homes, LLC, has applied for a variance to allow a house to encroach approximately 24’ into the required 54’ front yard setback at 7790 Eastwood Rd; and, WHEREAS, 7790 Eastwood Rd is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: That part of Lot 77, SPRING LAKE PARK HILL VIEW, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 77; thence South 00 degrees 40 minutes 10 seconds East (assumed bearing) along the east line of said Lot 77 a distance of 113.58 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described, said point to be hereafter referred to as “Point A”; thence South 88 degrees 21 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 178.65 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 77 and said line there terminating. Subject to an easement for public drainage and utility purposes over, under and across the north 5.00 feet, the east 10.00 feet, and the southwesterly 10.00 feet of the above described property. And subject to an easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across that part of the above described property which lies westerly of east 114.04 feet thereof. PIN: 06-30-23-44-0077 WHEREAS, City Code Title 1100, Chapter 1104, Section 1104.01, Subdivision 3(a) states; Where principal buildings in existence on lots within the same block on the same side of the street have front yard setbacks different from those required, the minimum front yard setback for any new principal buildings shall be the minimum front yard setback in existence for any one lot. In no case shall the front yard setback be less than thirty feet (30’). For purposes of this subsection a, a block Resolution 1055-16 October 5, 2016 Page 2 shall be defined as that group of lots lying along a street between the two closest intersecting streets, except that where the length of the street frontage between the two intersecting streets is greater than fourteen hundred feet (1,400’), the block shall be the lots within six hundred and fifty feet (650’) on either side of the lot in question, or to an intersecting street whichever is less. WHEREAS, the 7700 block of Eastwood Rd is approximately 1,400’ in length, and the principle building on the same block and same side of the street with the smallest front yard setback measures approximately 54’ (7880 Eastwood Rd, based on 1991 building plan, Permit #91-218), and thus the minimum front yard setback for all lots on the west side of this block, including the subject property, is 54’; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Views 3. Site Photos 4. Staff Report 5. Applicant’s Narrative and Certificate of Survey 6. Resident Comments WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner’s control; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing regarding this request on September 7, 2016 and continued on September 21, 2016; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria that must be satisfied in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code are satisfied and finds there to be sufficient practical difficulty with regard to the property located at 7790 Eastwood Rd, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision: Resolution 1055-16 October 5, 2016 Page 3 1. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code regarding front yard building setbacks is to provide a sense of privacy and separation between the building and the public right-of-way. The proposed home to be located on the subject property will maintain a 30’ front yard setback, consistent with minimum standards elsewhere in the R-1 district. 2. The Variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (2010); Goal 4: “Encourage residential infill and redevelopment that supports the City’s housing goals and maintains residential character.” The parent property (7800 Eastwood Rd) was subdivided into two lots in March 2016, creating the subject property (7790 Eastwood Rd), with the intent of constructing a new home. 3. The applicant (Value Homes, LLC) proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner for a single-family residence. 4. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from circumstances over which the property owner had no control. The current property owner (Value Homes) and immediate past owner/developer (Kayak Properties) were not aware of the private 30’ wide drainage easement at the time the property was subdivided in 2016. The private drainage easement is unique to this property. 5. The Variance to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ will result in a front yard half the depth as others on the west side of Eastwood Rd. However, a reduced setback will allow construction of a vacant lot for a new single-family home, maintaining the residential character of the neighborhood. 6. The Variance request is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties created by the private 30’ wide drainage easement. The Applicant’s Narrative includes a Certificate of Survey, dated “May XX, 2016”, which shows a proposed home encroaching 26’ feet into the private easement (24’ foundation + 2’ overhang). A Variance reducing the front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ will still leave a 2’ encroachment into the private easement, thus, the home plan will need to be adjusted to avoid any encroachment into this easement. 7. The Board of Adjustment and Appeals may impose such conditions upon the premises benefited by a variance as may be necessary. Such conditions are included below: The applicant (Value Homes, LLC) shall clearly disclose to the purchaser of the to-be constructed home that there exists two private easements along the south side yard property line for; (1) a 10’ wide sidewalk (Doc. No. 1172686); and (2) a 30’ wide drainage area (Doc. No. 1172687). Resolution 1036-15 October 5, 2016 Page 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the Variance request of Value Homes, LLC, for a reduced front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ at the property located at 7790 Eastwood Rd, subject to the following: 1. The applicant (Value Homes, LLC) shall clearly disclose to the purchaser of the to-be constructed home that there exists two private easements along the south side yard property line for; (1) a 10’ wide sidewalk (Doc. No. 1172686); and (2) a 30’ wide drainage area (Doc. No. 1172687). 2. If within one year after granting the variance, the work as permitted by the variance has not begun, then such variance shall become null and void unless an extension of time has been requested by the applicant and granted by the Planning Commission. Such extension shall be requested by the applicant in writing, and submitted to the City at least 30 days before the expiration of the original variance. Adopted this 5th day of October, 2016. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1055-16 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A 30-FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A NEW HOME AT 7790 EASTWOOD RD; MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CASE VR2016-04 WHEREAS, property owner, Value Homes, LLC, has applied for a variance to allow a house to encroach approximately 24’ into the required 54’ front yard setback at 7790 Eastwood Rd; and, WHEREAS, 7790 Eastwood Rd is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: That part of Lot 77, SPRING LAKE PARK HILL VIEW, Ramsey County, Minnesota, which lies southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Lot 77; thence South 00 degrees 40 minutes 10 seconds East (assumed bearing) along the east line of said Lot 77 a distance of 113.58 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described, said point to be hereafter referred to as “Point A”; thence South 88 degrees 21 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 178.65 feet to the southwesterly line of said Lot 77 and said line there terminating. Subject to an easement for public drainage and utility purposes over, under and across the north 5.00 feet, the east 10.00 feet, and the southwesterly 10.00 feet of the above described property. And subject to an easement for drainage and utility purposes over, under and across that part of the above described property which lies westerly of east 114.04 feet thereof. PIN: 06-30-23-44-0077 WHEREAS, City Code Title 1100, Chapter 1104, Section 1104.01, Subdivision 3(a) states; Where principal buildings in existence on lots within the same block on the same side of the street have front yard setbacks different from those required, the minimum front yard setback for any new principal buildings shall be the minimum front yard setback in existence for any one lot. In no case shall the front yard setback be less than thirty feet (30’). For purposes of this subsection a, a block Resolution 1055-16 October 5, 2016 Page 2 shall be defined as that group of lots lying along a street between the two closest intersecting streets, except that where the length of the street frontage between the two intersecting streets is greater than fourteen hundred feet (1,400’), the block shall be the lots within six hundred and fifty feet (650’) on either side of the lot in question, or to an intersecting street whichever is less. WHEREAS, the 7700 block of Eastwood Rd is approximately 1,400’ in length, and the principle building on the same block and same side of the street with the smallest front yard setback measures approximately 54’ (7880 Eastwood Rd, based on 1991 building plan, Permit #91-218), and thus the minimum front yard setback for all lots on the west side of this block, including the subject property, is 54’; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Views 3. Site Photos 4. Staff Report 5. Applicant’s Narrative and Certificate of Survey 6. Resident Comments WHEREAS, the purpose of the variance provision in the Zoning Code is to give relief to property owners when the strict enforcement of the zoning code requirements imposes a hardship thereby restricting the improvement of property due to practical difficulties brought about by unique or extraordinary features of the physical property that are beyond the property owner’s control; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing regarding this request on September 7, 2016 and continued on September 21, 2016; and, WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria that must be satisfied in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the criteria as identified in Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View Municipal Code ARE NOT satisfied and finds there to be insufficient practical difficulty with regard to the property located at 7790 Eastwood Rd, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision: Resolution 1055-16 October 5, 2016 Page 3 1. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning Code regarding front yard building setbacks is to provide a sense of privacy and separation between the building and the public right-of-way. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed 30’ minimum front yard building setback within the R-1 district is in harmony with the City Code. 2. The Variance request is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (2010); Goal 1: Preserve the identity and maintain and improve the quality and appearance of existing neighborhoods. h. The City will consider the subdivision of existing large lot single- family residential lots on a case-by-case basis. The City will use such reviews to ensure that new development is consistent with city needs and compatible with surrounding development. The City approved the Minor Subdivision of 7800 Eastwood Rd in 2016 (i.e. large single-family lot), creating two lots including the subject property (7790 Eastwood Rd), with a front yard setback consistent with residential lots on the west side of the block, and consistent with the City Code, and the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission has determined that the developable area of the lot is sufficient in size for a single-family home. Further, it is the applicant’s responsibility to design a house plan that will fit within that developable area of the lot. 3. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner for a single- family residence. 4. Unique circumstances apply to the property which do not apply to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from circumstances over which the property owner had no control. The current property owner (Value Homes, LLC) and immediate past owner/developer (Kayak Properties) were not aware of the private 30’ wide drainage easement at the time the property was subdivided in 2016. The private drainage easement is unique to this property. 5. The Variance to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ will result in a front yard about half the depth as others on the west side of Eastwood Rd. The reduced setback is inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood. 6. The applicant has not demonstrated that the proposed house plan (plan dated May 10, 2016) is the only house plan that could be built on the lot, and therefore has not exhausted all possibilities for fitting a single-family home on the lot without encroaching into the private drainage easement, and in compliance with Resolution 1036-15 October 5, 2016 Page 4 the minimum Floor Area Per Dwelling requirements (City Code, Chapter 1100, Section 1104.02); Subd. 4. Minimum Floor Area Per Dwelling Unit: a. Single-Family Dwellings: The minimum first floor area for each dwelling unit type shall be as follows: (1) One (1) story dwelling 960 square feet (2) Two (2) story dwelling 780 square feet The applicant proposes a split-entry home with an upper level (first floor) measuring 1,027 sq ft in area, and a lower level measuring 926 sq ft in area (plans dated, May 10, 2016). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above findings, denies the Variance request of Value Homes, LLC, for a reduced front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ at the property located at 7790 Eastwood Rd. Adopted this 5th day of October, 2016. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) -DRAFT- PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting September 21, 2016 Mounds View City Hall 2401 County Road 10, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for September 21, 2016. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners French, Klander, Klebsch, Schiltgen, and Stevenson. Absent and Excused: Commissioners Love and Rundle. Also Present: Planner Jon Sevald and Council Member Gary Meehlhause. ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page VR2016-004 Variance Request for a 30’ Front Yard Setback 2 MA2016-001 Preliminary Plat Request for Steil Addition 4 Planning Commission Quorum 4 Approval of Minutes 5 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Special Order of Business None. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ -DRAFT- 5. Planning Cases A. Continued Public Hearing: Consider Resolution 1055-16, a Resolution approving/denying a Variance for a 30’ front yard setback at 7790 Eastwood Road; Planning Case VR2016-004 Chair Stevenson removed this item from the table. Planner Sevald stated the applicant (Value Homes, LLC) is requesting a Variance to reduce the front yard setback from 54’ to 30’ to construct a single-family home at 7790 Eastwood Road. The minimum front yard setback in the R-1 district is 30’ unless homes on the same side of the street have a greater setback (54’ in this case). The request is due to the hardship of a private drainage easement reducing the developable area of the lot. It was noted the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on September 7, 2016 but a quorum (2/3’s or 5 of 7 members) was not present to approve a Variance and therefore the Public Hearing was tabled. Staff reviewed the request in further detail and recommended the Commission close the public hearing and approve the variance with conditions. Chair Stevenson understood this home was at the end of the block and not in the middle. He asked if the 30’ setback was the minimum. Eric Olestad, Value Homes, LLC, stated if the setback was more than 30’ the home would have to have a tuck under garage and the price of the home would increase. He then reviewed a map of the lot noting the location of the proposed driveway and home. He explained that if the 54’ setback was required he would not be able to build a home on the site. Chair Stevenson questioned what the unique circumstances were on this lot. Mr. Olestad discussed the easement on the property and explained the easement would not be going away. Commissioner Klebsch asked if a smaller house could be built on the property. Mr. Olestad indicated if a smaller house was built, it would potentially become a rental. Chair Stevenson encouraged the applicant to save as many trees on the lot as possible and inquired how many trees would be lost. Mr. Olestad reviewed the trees that would be saved in order to keep the lot wooded and private. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:16 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Klander. To approve Resolution 1055-16, a Resolution Approving of a Variance for a 30’ Front Yard Setback at 7790 Eastwood Road; Planning Case No. VR2016-004. Ayes – 3 Nays – 2 (Klebsch, French) Motion failed. Commissioner Klebsch asked if the Planning Commission should make a motion to deny the Variance request. Planner Sevald requested the Planning Commission proceed in this manner. -DRAFT- MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Chair Stevenson. To Table Action on the Variance for a 30’ Front Yard Setback at 7790 Eastwood Road; Planning Case No. VR2016-004 to the October 5, 2016 Planning Commission Meeting. Ayes – 2 Nays – 3 (Klebsch, Klander and French) Motion failed. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klebsch/Commissioner French. To approve Resolution 1055-16, a Resolution Denying of a Variance for a 30’ Front Yard Setback at 7790 Eastwood Road; Planning Case No. VR2016-004. Commissioner Schiltgen expressed frustration that the Planning Commission did not have a full complement of the Planning Commission to take action on this item. Commissioner Klebsch did not believe Items E and F were being met with the variance request. She wanted to respect the comments presented by the neighbors on this block and believed the variance request could be minimized. Ayes – 2 Nays – 3 (Stevenson, Schiltgen and Klander) Motion failed. Mr. Olestad discussed how his plans for the home would have to change noting the price would have to increase dramatically if the 54-foot increase was required. He stated he was only proposing to build a 2,000 square foot home. He provided further comment on the concerns expressed by the neighbors. Commissioner Schiltgen requested further information on the 60-day rule. Planner Sevald explained State Statute would allow the City to extend this request from 60 days to 120 days in order for the Commission to review the matter again in October with a full membership of the Planning Commission. Chair Stevenson questioned how the Commission should proceed at this time. City Administrator Ericson explained the Commission has taken no action either for or against the Variance at this time due to the fact none of the votes have passed. He stated it wouldn’t be inappropriate for the Commission to reconsider tabling action on the Variance. Commissioner Schiltgen supported the Variance being tabled and wished staff had proposed the 120 days from the start of the meeting. City Administrator Ericson commented the Planning Commission could elect to take no action on the Variance and this direction would be forwarded to the City Council as such. He recommended that the item be extended to 120 days in order for proper action to be taken on the matter. Chair Stevenson supported the Commission taking no action on this item and recommended the item be extended to 120 days. -DRAFT- Mr. Olestad offered a final comment to the Commission stating his proposed home would be in alignment with the other homes on the street and only the garage would be slightly forward. Chair Stevenson questioned if the Planning Commission required any additional information from staff prior to October 5th. No additional information was requested. Staff was directed to bring this item back to the Planning Commission on October 5th. _____________________________________________________________________________ B. Consider Resolution 1056-16, a Resolution recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat of Steil Addition; Planning Case MA2016-001 Planner Sevald stated the applicants Tim and Kelly Steil own two adjacent properties that back up to each other. The Steil’s are requesting to move the common property line, thereby increasing the size of their backyard at their residence at 7255 Hidden Hollow Court. No new lots or roads will be created. Because the two lots involved exceed 2-acres combined, a Major Subdivision is required. Staff reviewed the request in further detail and recommended the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request. Tim Steil, 7255 Hidden Hollow Court, thanked the Commission for considering his request. Chair Stevenson questioned if a park dedication fee would be required. Planner Sevald explained park dedication fees are only due if a new lot was created. This did not apply with the Steil’s request. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klebsch/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution 1056-16, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Major Subdivision at 7255 Hidden Hollow Court; Planning Case No. MA2016-001. Ayes –5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Planning Commission Quorum Planner Sevald stated at the September 7th Planning Commission meeting, there was not a quorum present to approve a Variance. Staff reviewed the City’s quorum and voting requirements in detail with the Commission. ______________________________________________________________________________ -DRAFT- 7. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity Planner Sevald discussed upcoming planning cases. B. Staff Updates Planner Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff. He invited the Commissioners to attend an upcoming planning workshop in St. Paul. He reported former Planning Commission member Jean Miller had passed away. C. Council Updates Council Member Meehlhause provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City Council. He discussed the proposed HRA levy and noted a preliminary property tax levy had been approved. He provided comment on the MNPASS project and sound walls being proposed for I-35W. He invited the Commission to attend the candidate forum on Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at City Hall at 6:00 p.m. He encouraged the public to participate in Northeast Youth and Family Services; A Taste of Northeast fundraiser on Thursday, October 6th from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at Vadnais Heights Commons. He reported on Sunday, October 9th the Festival in the Park would be holding a Craft Fair at the Mounds View Community Center from 1:00 to 5:00 p.m. He noted the Mounds View Lion’s would be holding their Annual Spaghetti Dinner on Thursday, October 13th from 4:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the VFW in Spring Lake Park. Lastly, he noted the YMCA’s Fall Family Festival would be held at the Community Center on Saturday, October 29th from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. D. Planning Commissioner Reports None. 8. Approval of Minutes July 20, 2016. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klander/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve the Minutes of the July 20, 2016 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. September 7, 2016. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Klander/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve the Minutes of the September 7, 2016 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented. -DRAFT- Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. Wednesday, October 5, 2016 B. Wednesday, October 19, 2016 ______________________________________________________________________________ 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 8:03 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ Respectfully submitted, Jon Sevald Planner Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.