Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-2012 PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA May 2, 2012 -- 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes: March 21, 2012 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. VR2012-002 and VR2012-003: Variance Requests to Allow Adjacent Driveways to Remain with Zero Setbacks Address: 5045 Eastwood Road Address: 5046 Rainbow Lane Applicant: Blaine & Mary Fyksen Applicant: Gordon & Marilyn Davis 6. Other Planning Activity None 7. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. May 16, 2012 B. June 6, 2012 8. Adjourn to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: a. April 18, 2012 2. Staff Reports a. Upcoming Planning Cases 3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports 4. Meeting Conclusion PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting April 18, 2012 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 April 18, 2012. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Cramblit, Meehlhause, Miller, Rundle, Schiltgen, Stevenson and Smith. Absent and Excused: None. Also Present: ______________________________________________________________________________ Planning Associate Heidi Heller. Index to Minutes Page Approval of Minutes 1 VR2012-001. Consideration of a Variance Request to Allow an 2 Accessory Building to Exceed the Allowed Height of 15 feet Discuss Code Amendment for Dynamic Display Signs 3 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Approval of Minutes March 7, 2012. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the Minutes of the March 7, 2012 regular Planning Commission meetings as slightly amended. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. Mounds View Planning Commission April 18, 2012 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. VR2012-001 Consideration of a Variance Request to Allow an Accessory Building to Exceed the Allowed Height of 15 feet as Measured at the Midpoint of the Roof (Pre-November 2009 Zoning Code) Planning Associate Heller indicated the Planning Commission was being asked to reconsider a variance to allow an accessory building to exceed the allowed height of 15 feet at 8027 Woodlawn Drive. The Planning Commission and City Council both denied this variance. The City Council has rescinded their denial and decided that the applicant should adhere to the zoning code that was in effect in 2007 when the building permit was issued. She explained the applicant built a garage slightly different than the plans submitted to the City. The applicant took several years to complete the building and therefore following under a previous City Code. Associate Heller commented the applicant did add dormers to the garage which would be addressed by the building official and a modified permit would have to be issued and paid for. However, this was not the issue being discussed this evening. Associate Heller stated the applicant was requesting a 9 inch variance which differed greatly from the previously requested 5 foot variance. She explained that the several comments received from the neighbors generally supported the garage. Commissioner Cramblit noted the 12:12 pitch of the garage does not match the house. Tim Downing, 8027 Woodlawn Drive, explained that the older portion of the home does match the 12:12 pitch, but the newer portion does not. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Tom Carlson, 8051 Woodlawn Drive, supported the Downing’s and their detached garage. He did not object to the height or size of the garage. Dan Larson, 8046 Woodlawn Drive, did not object to the garage. He felt it blended in fairly well given its location and the size of the Downing’s lot. Commissioner Cramblit asked if the applicant said at the previous Planning Commission meeting that the old garage would be torn down. Mr. Downing stated this was not the case. His long term plan was to build a new attached garage in the place of the old front garage. Mounds View Planning Commission April 18, 2012 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Commissioner Meehlhause asked if the new garage would be used to store vehicles, and if so, how is it going to be accessed. Mr. Downing stated the front garage has a door on the front and back and he is able to drive through his current garage into the backyard for vehicle storage. The new front garage would be moved over so there was room to drive around the side of the garage to reach the backyard. Commissioner Meehlhause stated driving through the yard on a regular basis to the rear garage would require an improved driving surface. Commissioner Meehlhause questioned if the applicant was aware of the conditions for approval within the Resolution. Mr. Downing stated he did not have the exact dates, but was aware staff had created conditions for approval. Associate Heller reviewed the conditions and deadline dates with Mr. Downing. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Meehlhause/Commissioner Schiltgen. To approve Resolution 959-12, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Nine (9) Inch Height Variance for a Detached Accessory Building at 8027 Woodlawn Drive; Planning Case No. VR2012-001. Chair Stevenson requested the three conditions for approval be read aloud for the record. Associate Heller read the conditions. 1. The applicant must receive approval from the Building Official for a new building permit for the garage as it is actually built by July 1, 2012. 2. The applicant must pay the additional permit fees for the new building permit by July 1, 2012. 3. The applicant must complete the exterior of the garage by October 1, 2012. Ayes – 6 Nays – 1 (Cramblit) Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity A. Discuss Code Amendment to Dynamic Display Signs Planning Associate Heller informed the Commission that in 2009 the City added a section for dynamic display signs into the sign code. She explained that the code was again in need of an amendment. She noted a business in Mounds View wants a dynamic display wall sign since they do not have a ground sign. The current sign code specifically states that dynamic display signs Mounds View Planning Commission April 18, 2012 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ can be located on ground and freestanding signs. The intent of the City Council when adopting the current code was not to disallow dynamic display signs on buildings. Associate Heller reviewed the language changes with the Commission and recommended approval of Resolution 960-12 if the Commission was comfortable with what staff proposed. Chair Stevenson questioned if the code was inconsistent since there were two different sign time lengths, four or eight seconds. Associate Heller stated billboards had to be eight seconds and all other signs were four seconds. She indicated the building sign would have a four second time limit. Chair Stevenson did not object to any of the changes presented by staff. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Cramblit/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution 960-12, a Resolution Recommending Approval of Amendments to Chapter 1008 of the Mounds View City Code about Dynamic Display Signs; Special Planning Case No. 185-12. Ayes – 7 Nays – 0 Motion carried. ______________________________________________________________________________ 7. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. May 2, 2012 B. May 16, 2012 ______________________________________________________________________________ 8. Adjournment to Agenda Session There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:32 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Item No: 5A Meeting Date: May 2, 2012 Type of Business: Public Hearing City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Heidi Heller, Planning Associate Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Variance to allow Driveways with Zero Setbacks at 5045 Eastwood Road & 5046 Rainbow Lane; Planning Cases VR2012-002 and VR2012-003 Introduction: The applicants, Blaine & Mary Fyksen, property owners of 5045 Eastwood Road, and Gordon & Marilyn Davis, property owners of 5046 Rainbow Lane, are requesting variances to allow their driveways to remain combined. The City Code requires a five foot setback for driveways without a variance. Discussion: 5045 Eastwood Road and 5046 Rainbow Lane are corner lots and both homes were built in 1955. The homes have detached garages located next to each other that access County Road H. The Davis’ driveway is mostly concrete and the Fyksen’s is asphalt. They have been combined together with no separation for many years. Both owners are going to replace the driveways since they are in poor condition, but driveways must be brought into compliance with current Zoning Code requirements when replaced. The Fyksens and the Davis’ want the driveways to remain combined because they are then able to turn vehicles around and drive forward out of the driveway rather than backing onto County Road H. Sunnyside Elementary School is on County Road H, almost across the street from the Davis’ house. County Road H is a fairly busy road, particularly during the morning and evening rush hours and school start and ending times. It is difficult and dangerous to back out of any driveways onto County Road H. It is even hard to stop on County Road H, then back into the driveways because of the amount of traffic and pedestrians in the area. According to the submitted site plan, the property owners are proposing to leave a four foot separation at the top section of the driveways, and would only connect approximately the bottom half of the driveways. 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: 5045 Eastwood & 5046 Rainbow Driveway Variances Report May 2, 2012 Page 2 a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of these regulations. The zoning code requires driveway and parking setbacks for aesthetics and to provide separation and some sense of privacy between neighbors. The zoning code primarily deals with aesthetics and size limitations, not safety. b. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. While the Comprehensive Plan does not specify design criteria for properties, 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 applicants are asking for the driveways to remain combined for safety reasons. 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. The unique feature of these lots is the amount of vehicle and pedestrian traffic on County Road H, and their close proximity to an elementary school. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The driveways have been combined for many years, so there will be no change to the existing 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. The 5 foot variance is the minimum variance needed since that is what the Zoning Code requires for a driveway setback. 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. Zoning permits will be required for the additional asphalt area that connects the driveways together. 5045 Eastwood & 5046 Rainbow Driveway Variances Report May 2, 2012 Page 3 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, April 19, 2012. Recommendation: Staff recommends holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the applicant and the public. The Commission may take one of the following actions related to the request: 1. Approve the variances as requested. Resolutions 961-12 and 962-12 are attached for action if the Commission so chooses. 2. Deny the requested variances. The Commission should direct staff to draft resolutions of denial with findings appropriate to support the denials. 3. Table the request. If the Planning Commission needs more information before making a decision or if they decide there is a need for more discussion, the Commission can simply move to table the request until such information has been provided. Respectfully Submitted By, Heidi Heller Planning Associate Attachments: 1. Zoning Map 2. Aerial Photos 3. Photographic Documentation 4. Statement from Applicants 5. Proposed Site Plan 6. Resolution 961-12 7. Resolution 962-12 ZONING MAP * Properties not indicated with a designation are zoned R-1, Single Family Residential Statement from applicant – Cory Mathiowetz N County Road H Aerial View Garages 5046 Sunnyside Elementary School 5045 Photographic Documentation County Road H 5045 Eastwood garage & driveway 5046 Rainbow garage & driveway Sunnyside Elementary School Combined driveway Statement from Applicants Proposed Site Plan MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 961-12 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A DRIVEWAY WITH A ZERO SETBACK AT 5045 EASTWOOD ROAD; PLANNING CASE VR2012-002 WHEREAS, the applicants, Blaine and Mary Fyksen, property owners of 5045 Eastwood Road, have applied for a variance to allow their driveway to have zero setback; and, WHEREAS, 5045 Eastwood Road is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: Twelve Oaks, Lot 8, Block 3, Ramsey County, Minnesota PIN 07-30-23-44-0075 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 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 May 2, 2012; 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 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 5045 Eastwood Road, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision: Photographic Documentation Driveway/parking area concrete extension running along the side of garage Resolution 961-12 Page 2 1. The general intent of the Zoning Code is create physical separation between driveways for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property owners. 2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is improving the property. 3. The applicant’s are requesting this variance only for safety reasons, which are not often addressed by the zoning code. 4. The unique feature of this property is the high amount of vehicle and pedestrian traffic on County Road H, and its close proximity to an elementary school. 5. The driveways have been combined with zero setbacks for many years, so there will be no change to the existing character of the neighborhood. 6. The 5 foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant’s practical difficulty since that is what the zoning code requires for driveway setbacks. 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 Blaine and Mary Fyksen, property owners of 5045 Eastwood Road, to allow a driveway to have a zero setback, subject to the following: 1. The applicants must receive a zoning permit for the entire driveway area prior to its replacement. Adopted this 2nd day of May, 2012. _________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chair ATTEST: __________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL) MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 962-12 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A DRIVEWAY WITH A ZERO SETBACK AT 5046 RAINBOW LANE; PLANNING CASE VR2012-003 WHEREAS, the applicants, Gordon and Marilyn Davis, property owners of 5046 Rainbow Lane, have applied for a variance to allow their driveway to have zero setback; and, WHEREAS, 5046 Rainbow Lane is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, and is legally described as follows: Twelve Oaks, Lot 9, Block 3, Ramsey County, Minnesota PIN 07-30-23-44-0076 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 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 May 2, 2012; 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 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 5046 Rainbow Lane, and makes the following findings of fact related to its decision: Photographic Documentation Driveway/parking area concrete extension running along the side of garage Resolution 962-12 Page 2 1. The general intent of the Zoning Code is create physical separation between driveways for aesthetics and a sense of privacy for the property owners. 2. The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that the applicant is improving the property. 3. The applicant’s are requesting this variance only for safety reasons, which are not often addressed by the zoning code. 4. The unique feature of this property is the high amount of vehicle and pedestrian traffic on County Road H, and its close proximity to an elementary school. 5. The driveways have been combined with zero setbacks for many years, so there will be no change to the existing character of the neighborhood. 6. The 5 foot variance is the minimum variance required to alleviate the applicant’s practical difficulty since that is what the zoning code requires for driveway setbacks. 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 Gordon and Marilyn Davis, property owners of 5046 Rainbow Lane, to allow a driveway to have a zero setback, subject to the following: 1. The applicants must receive a zoning permit for the entire driveway area prior to its replacement. Adopted this 2nd day of May, 2012. _________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chair ATTEST: __________________________________ James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL)