Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-2013 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA August 7, 2013 -- 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: July 9, 2013 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already on the Agenda. (Before speaking, give your full name and address for the record.) 5. Planning Cases A. MU2013-001 Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for an 1,140 Square Foot and 21-foot Tall Oversize Garage Address: 2917 County Road H2 Applicant: Peter McIntyre 6. Other Planning Activity None 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. Wednesday, August 21, 2013 B. Wednesday, September 4, 2013 8. Review Minutes: A. July 24, 2013 9. Staff Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases 10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioner’s Reports 11. Meeting Conclusion PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 24, 2013 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. for July 24 , 2013. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Carvelli-Yu, Elofson, Rundle, Schiltgen, and Stevenson. Absent and Excused: Commissioner Love and Smith. Also Present: Planning Associate Heidi Heller. ______________________________________________________________________________ 3. Special Order of Business Chair Stevenson recognized Holly Smith for her past three years of service on the Planning Commission and wished her well on behalf of the City of Mounds View. She noted Holly was moving out of state. Index to Minutes Page Approval of Minutes 1 Renewable Energy Code Amendment 2 County Road 10 Corridor Discussion 2 _____________________________________________________________________________ 4. Approval of Minutes June 19, 2013. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Schiltgen/Commissioner Carvelli-Yu. To approve the Minutes of the June 19, 2013 regular Planning Commission meeting as slightly amended. Mounds View Planning Commission July 24, 2013 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 5. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Planning Cases None. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Renewable Energy Code Amendment Planning Associate Heller explained the Planning Commission has been reviewing the Zoning Code in regards to renewable energy system installations. The systems include solar energy, geothermal systems and wind energy conversion. Staff was recommending that this portion of City Code be updated to help promote renewable energy systems and not hinder or make it difficult for a property owner to install a system. Associate Heller reviewed the revised Ordinance language in detail, which included the three renewable energy systems and recommended Commission discuss and approve the new Chapter for City Code. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Carvelli-Yu/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution 986-13, a Resolution Recommending a New Chapter to City Code, Chapter 1128 regarding Renewable Energy. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ B. County Road 10 Corridor Discussion Planning Associate Heller stated the County Road 10 corridor was the Council’s priority this yea r and the Planning Commission has been asked to review the Zoning Code in order to better promote and accommodate development along County Road 10. She indicated the focus of the Commission has been on creating a PUD Corridor Overlay District and reducing the acreage size requirements for the projects on the corridor. Signage requirements to only allow shorter monument style signs in the overlay district were discussed. She suggested that since the Commission liked the idea of monument signs, they should consider amending the sign code so it would affect all properties, rather than just redevelopment sites. She reviewed the proposed language for a PUD overlay district in further detail with the Commission. Mounds View Planning Commission July 24, 2013 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Chair Stevenson stated if only monument style signs were allowed in the corridor, would building mounted signs be allowed. Associate Heller stated there were two different allowances within the Code for wall signs and ground signs. Chair Stevenson supported the ground sign language, but recommended having this be a City- wide change and not just along the corridor. Commissioner Carvelli-Yu questioned if the Code addressed dynamic display signs. Associate Heller indicated electronic and dynamic display signs were addressed within the sign code, and the allowed size of dynamic signs is limited. Discussion ensued regarding sign setbacks along the corridor. Chair Stevenson recommended a five foot setback be used along the corridor. Associate Heller thanked the Commission for their input this evening. She commented she would research size examples of existing signs and report back at a future meeting. 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. August 7, 2013 B. August 21, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Review Minutes: A. July 9, 2013 The Commission discussed the July 9 , 2013 meeting minutes. 9. Staff Updates A. Upcoming Planning Cases Planning Associate Heller discussed upcoming planning cases. Chair Stevenson noted he would not be in attendance at the August 7, 2013 meeting. She reported Keith Cramblit was appointed to the open position on the Planning Commission and would begin attending meetings in August. She noted the City purchased the Robert’s Sports Bar property on Monday. She explained this property along with Taiko’s would be demolished and graded for future redevelopment. Mounds View Planning Commission July 24, 2013 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ 10. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports None. 11. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:54 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Item No: 5A Meeting Date: August 7, 2013 Type of Business: Planning Case City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing - Consideration of a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for an Oversized Garage at 2917 County Road H2; Planning Case MU2013-001 Introduction: The applicant, Peter McIntyre, is requesting approval of a conditional use permit and a variance for an oversize detached garage on his property at 2917 County Road H2. The applicant wants to expand his existing 840 square foot garage and make it 10 feet deeper, to 30’w’x 38’d, (1,140 square feet). The applicant has submitted plans for a garage larger and taller than what the City Code allows without a planning action. The City limits the size of accessory buildings, whether attached or detached from the house, to a maximum of 952 square feet. Any single building larger than 952 square feet must get City approval of a conditional use permit. The garage the applicant is proposing would be 1,140 square feet. The applicant is also requesting to be able to build the garage addition the same height as the garage currently is, which no longer meets the Zoning Code. The garage height met the Zoning Code at the time it was built, but is now considered legal non-conforming. If a structure is non-conforming, it can be maintained and repaired, but not expanded without a variance. Conditional Use Permit Discussion Requirements: Section 1106.03, Subd. 1: This part of the Code limits the height of an accessory building, the number of accessory buildings, the backyard coverage ratio of accessory buildings and specifies roof style and pitch. 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 garages exceeding 952 square feet. The garage must 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. Discussion: The request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct the 1,140 square foot garage satisfies the requirements as stated in Section 1106.03 and 1106.04, Subdivision 6 of the Mounds View Zoning Code. The proposed garage meets all City setback and accessory building coverage requirements, and the Commission will decide on the height. The City Code limits backyard building coverage to 20% of the yard area. The expanded garage and the additional existing 308 square foot accessory building would total 1,448 square feet which is below the maximum of 1,800 square feet limit, and have approximately 5% coverage of the backyard area. 2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request August 7, 2013 Page 2 The applicant wants to expand the existing garage by adding 10 feet to the rear for a workshop. The expansion would not change the appearance of the garage from the front. CUP Considerations: Chapter 1125 of the Zoning Code requires that the Planning Commission review and address any potential adverse effects of a conditional use that include, but are not limited to, the relationship with the Comprehensive Plan, geographical area involved, potential depreciation, the character of the surrounding area and the demonstrated need for such a use. Staff has addressed each of these potential adverse effects below. Relationship with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as low-density residential, as well as the surrounding area. The Comp Plan encourages the development and maintenance of residential areas to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. W ith this project, the applicant would be creating a garage workshop. The Geographical Area Involved. The applicant’s home is located on a large lot in a residential area on County Road H2. Depreciation. The proposed garage expansion would benefit the subject property both in a practical sense by providing additional indoor storage and workspace, as well as in an economic sense, as the addition would increase the “value” of the property. Increased property values are a benefit to everyone. The Character of the Surrounding Area. The applicant’s neighborhood is entirely single-family residential. The homes in this area are a variety of styles and ages, but the immediate area properties all have large lots. The garage expansion would be into the backyard and not change the look of the front of the garage. This is a larger property at 106 feet wide and 375 feet deep (0.89 acres), so the total accessory building coverage will only be about 5% of the backyard area. The expansion of 10 more feet to the rear of the existing garage will not be very noticeable. The adjacent property also has a 1,152 square foot oversize garage. The Demonstrated Need for Such a Use. The applicant is proposing to expand his existing garage into a 1,140 square foot garage by adding a 10 foot addition in the rear to create a workshop. Both the applicant and his wife have hobbies that require a lot of storage space. Variance Discusssion The applicant built the existing garage in 1993, and the 21 foot height met the Zoning Code at the time. The Code has since been amended and the maximum height for accessory buildings was changed to 18 feet. The applicant has requested a variance so the height of the expanded garage area can be the same as the existing garage, rather than the back 10 feet being a different height. The access to the second floor storage area is on the exterior rear of the garage, and the doorway would have to be much smaller if the roof was three feet shorter. 2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request August 7, 2013 Page 3 The Zoning Code states that the Planning Commission may issue a variance to provide relief to the landowner in those cases where the Code imposes practical difficulties to the property owner in the use of the property owner’s land. This is true for all variance requests. State statutes require that the governing body 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. 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 these regulations. The zoning code limits the height of buildings in order to maintain visual consistency throughout neighborhoods. This garage is already 21 feet tall and allowing the expanded area to continue the same height will visually and practically make more sense than having only the rear 10 feet of the garage be a different height. The 21 foot height met the Zoning Code at the time it was built. b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. While the Comprehensive Plan does not specify design or size criteria for buildings, it does support improvements to and the maintenance of properties. c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Title or the City Code. The property owners have hobbies that require a lot of storage, and want to keep the exterior of their yard looking neat by being able to store their things inside. 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. This existing garage is a height that previously met the Zoning Code, but because the Code was recently amended, it is now a non-conforming structure. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The applicant’s neighborhood consists of large, almost one acre size lots, and the applicant has a 2-story house, so the height and garage size does not feel overwhelming to the property or the neighborhood. The expanded garage will have no effect on the look of the property from the street. f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. The 21 foot height variance is the minimum variance needed to alleviate the practical difficulties since the garage already exists. 2917 County Rd H2 CUP & VR Request August 7, 2013 Page 4 g. The Planning Commission 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 has no suggestions for conditions. The Planning Commission may add conditions as they see applicable. Public Hearing: As with any requested variance, this application requires a public hearing. Staff mailed notices to all property owners within 350 feet of the applicant’s property and a notice was published in the Sun Focus newspaper on Thursday, July 25, 2013. Recommendation: After taking testimony from staff, the applicant and affected neighbors, the Commission may take any of the following actions below related to the requests. Staff recommends approval of this conditional use permit and variance. 1. Recommend approval of the CUP as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution 985-13 that approves the conditional use permit if the Commission chooses this action. 2. Approval of the Variance as requested. Staff has prepared Resolution 987-13 that approves the variance if the Commission chooses this action. 3. Choose to deny the conditional use permit or variance. If the Commission chooses this option, Staff would need direction from the Planning Commission to prepare a resolution of denial with findings of fact to support the denial. 4. Table one or both of the requests. If the Planning Commission needs more information before making a decision or if they decide that there is need for more discussion, 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, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial View 3. Site Plan 4. Photos 5. Resolution 985-13 for CUP 6. Resolution 987-13 for VR Zoning Map * Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential County Road H2 N Garage N Aer ial View County Road H2 Site Plan Photos View of front of property View of backyard area - garage would still look the same (door & stairs would be rebuilt), would only be 10 feet further into the backyard Neighbor’s 1,152 square foot garage 2nd accessory building on property MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 985-13 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A 1,140 SQUARE-FOOT GARAGE AT 2917 COUNTY ROAD H2; PLANNING CASE MU2013-001-CU-1 WHEREAS, property owner Peter McIntyre has applied for a conditional use permit to expand the existing detached garage to 1,140 square foot garage; and, WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 2917 County Road H2, is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: Lot 93, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota PIN: 06-30-23-12-0124 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 proposed garage would be 1,140 square feet, thus requiring City approval of a conditional use permit; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing regarding this request on August 7, 2013; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Zoning Map b. Aerial View c. Site plan d. Photographic documentation e. Staff Report 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. The proposed oversized 1,140 square foot garage satisfies the zoning 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 to improve the quality, appearance and attractiveness of housing units and residential property in general. Resolution 985-13 Page 2 3. The proposed garage would not be out of place given the character and geography of the surrounding area involved. 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 recommends approval of the conditional use permit for the 1,140 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 expanded garage area shall be designed and maintained to provide a uniform appearance with the existing garage. 3. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) shall become null and void if the work for which the CUP was granted is not completed within one year from the date of approval unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete the work has been granted by the City Council. 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 7th day of August, 2013. _____________________________________ Paul Schiltgen, Vice Chair ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 987-13 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A THREE (3) FOOT HEIGHT VARIANCE FOR THE 10’ X 30’ EXPANDED AREA OF AN EXISTING DETACHED ACCESSORY BUILDING AT 2917 COUNTY ROAD H2; PLANNING CASE MU2013-001-VR-1 WHEREAS, the applicant, Peter McIntyre, property owner of 2917 County Road H2, has applied for a three (3) foot height variance for the 10’ x 30’ expanded area of an existing detached garage that is currently 21 feet tall; and, WHEREAS, the subject property, located at 2917 County Road H2, is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: Lot 93, Spring Lake Park Knolls Addition, Ramsey County, Minnesota PIN: 06-30-23-12-0124 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial View 3. Photographic Documentation 4. 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 restricts 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 August 7, 2013; 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. Resolution 987-13 Page 2 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 2917 County Road H2, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision: 1. The existing 21 foot tall garage met the Zoning Code when it was built in 1993, and the owner only wants the 10’ x 30’ expanded area to have the same height as the rest of the garage. 2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant will add a significant improvement to his property and can store more items indoors. 3. The applicant owns several vehicles and other tools and equipment that could be stored indoors. He will be able to maintain his property by being able to store most or all of his items inside. 4. The applicant’s lot is almost an acre in size, which is larger than most in the city. 5. The existing taller garage does not appear to be an overwhelming size for the neighborhood or the applicant’s property. 6. The three (3) foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant’s practical difficulty since the garage already exists with a 21 foot height. 7. The Planning Commission may impose conditions upon the premises as may be necessary to comply with city standards and to minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission, based upon the above findings, approves the variance request of Peter McIntyre, property owner of 2917 County Road H2, to allow a three (3) foot height variance for the garage. Adopted this 7th day of August, 2013. ________________________________ Paul Schiltgen, Vice Chairperson ATTEST: ________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL)