Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-15-2004 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION December 15, 2004 -- 7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approve Minutes: November 17, 2004 4. Citizens Requests and Comments Relating to Planning and Zoning Issues Not Already Present on the Agenda CITIZENS: BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, AND GIVE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE MINUTES 5. Planning Case MI2004-002 Lot Line Adjustment (Minor Subdivision) Request between 8265 and 8281 Spring Lake Road Applicant: Neil Rudnitski 6. Code Amendment Regarding Driveways 7. Set the Planning Commission’s 2005 Meeting Schedule APPLICANTS: YOUR ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS REQUESTED. PLEASE NOTIFY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AT 763-717-4020 IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND. 8. Next Planning Commission Meeting: January 5, 2005 9. Adjourn to Agenda Session AGENDA SESSION 1. Review Minutes: December 1, 2004 2. Staff Reports 3. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners’ Reports Item No: 5 Meeting Date: December 15, 2004 Type of Business: Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Consideration of a Lot Line Adjustment (Minor Subdivision) Between 8265 and 8281 Spring Lake Road; Planning Case MI04-002 Introduction: Neil and Jill Rudnitski, property owners of 8265 Spring Lake Road, have applied for a lot line adjustment (Minor Subdivision) for the north property line shared with 8281 Spring Lake Road. The Rudnitski home, which was constructed in 1998, was not constructed in accordance with the survey and approved plans. Rather than maintaining the five-foot garage setback and ten- foot living space setback, the builder shifted the stakes after the initial inspection which caused the driveway to be built on the property line, the garage at a 1.6 foot setback and the living space at a 5.7 foot setback. The adjoining property owners (Ken and Michelle Mackey) did not notice the encroachment and staff had no reason to believe the staked location had been altered upon construction. At some point, the property owners of 8281 and 8265 Spring Lake Road realized the discrepancy and came to an agreement to shift the lot line to the north to correct the setback deficiency. Using the northwest corner as an anchor, the lot line is proposed to pivot eight feet to the north along the east line, as indicated on the attached boundary exhibit prepared by Pioneer Engineering. In so doing, the house and garage achieve setback conformity. Discussion: According to the Mounds View City Code, a minor subdivision is a division of land less than two acres in area in which only one additional lot is created. The definition also includes lot line adjustments, even though no new lots (such as with this request) may be created by the adjustment. Both lots are zoned R-1, Single Family residential and the minimum lot size for an interior lot (8281 Spring Lake Road) is 11,000 while the minimum lot size for a corner lot (8265 Spring Lake Road) is 12,500 square feet. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for low density residential. The Rudnitski property is currently 17,424 square feet. The proposed lot line adjustment would add an additional 872 feet to the Rudnitski property, bringing it to 18,296 square feet. The adjoining property, owned by Ken and Michelle Mackey, would be decreased to 20,908 square feet, well in excess of the minimum requirement for an interior lot. After the adjustment, the shared lot line is shifted 3.5 feet closer to the Mackey’s home resulting in a 12.5 setback to the Mackey garage. Park Dedication Requirements Every subdivision of land is ordinarily subject to park dedication requirements. The City Council adopted Ordinance 745 earlier this year however which provided for some flexibility in determining what—if any—dedication would be required. Because no new lots are created by this subdivision and no additional development would occur, no dedication will be required. Rudnitski Subdivision December 15, 2004 Page 2. Easements Usually with every subdivision of land, the City requires that drainage and utility easements be dedicated around the perimeter of the lot. Given that both of these lots re pre-existing and that just one of the lot lines is being adjusted, dedication of easements will not be required. Public Notice. Public notice is not required for this request. Given that no new development will occur, a public hearing or public notice was not warranted. Both subject property owners have received a copy of the report and support the approval of the subdivision request. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Commission approve Resolution 779-04, a resolution recommending approval of a lot line adjustment (minor subdivision) of 8265 and 8281 Spring Lake Road, with stipulations. _____________________________________ James Ericson Interim City Clerk/Administrator Attachments: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Survey of Subdivision 4. Resolution 779-04 Zoning Map Photographic Documentation - Front Photo looking east toward front of properties. The yellow string represents the existing property line. Photographic Documentation - Back View of the rear yard looking west. Yellow string represents the surveyed property line. EXISTING CONDITIONS Aerial View of Subject Area MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 779-04 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (MINOR SUBDIVISION) BETWEEN 8265 AND 8281 SPRING LAKE ROAD; PLANNING CASE MI04-002 WHEREAS, Applicant Neil Rudnitski representing property owners Neil and Jill Rudnitski and Ken and Michelle Mackey, has requested approval of a lot line adjustment (minor subdivision) between 8265 and 8281 Spring Lake Road, property zoned R-1, Single Family Residential, legally-described as follows: The West 218 Feet of the North 53 Feet of Lot 34 and the South 27 Feet of the West 218 Feet of Lot 35, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey County, Minnesota And The West 218 Feet of the North 100 Feet of Lot 35, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 89, Ramsey County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the applicant requests approval of a lot line adjustment to the common lot line between the two lots; and, WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Certificate of Survey (entitled “Boundary Exhibit”) Attached to this resolution as Exhibit 1, for the lot line adjustment showing the common lot line anchored in place at the northwest corner and shifted to the north 8.0 feet along the east property line; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the applicants’ request for a lot line adjustment 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 lot line adjustment is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 745 relating to Park Dedications, no park dedication fee shall be required for this lot line adjustment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of the lot line adjustment (minor subdivision) between 8265 and 8281 Spring Lake Road subject to the following stipulations: Res. 779-04 Page 2 1. The applicants shall arrange to correct the Boundary Exhibit to reflect that it is a “Certificate of Survey” as required by City Code. 2. The applicant shall arrange to record new property deeds with Ramsey County within 60 days of Council approval and provide the City with proof of recordation. Failure to do shall cause the approval to become null and void. 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 15th day of December, 2004. __________________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: ______________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director (SEAL) EXHIBIT 1. Proposed Lot Line Adjustment Item No: 6 Meeting Date: Dec 15, 2004 Type of Business: Action City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: James Ericson, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Review City Code Language Pertaining to Driveways, Driveway Setbacks and Curb Cuts, Consideration of Resolution 780-04 Introduction: On September 13, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance 752, an ordinance striking language from the Code that--up to that point--had allowed for driveway setbacks up to up one foot from a property line in single and two-family residential districts, as long as the adjoining property owner indicated consent in writing. In addition to eliminating the one-foot setback, the ordinance established a mechanism to allow for administrative variances for driveways that had been previously granted a one-foot setback. The language adopted by the Council was the same language recommended by the Planning Commission. During the review and consideration of Ordinance 752, it became apparent that the regulations for driveways and curb cuts were confusing and difficult to administer due to the various amendments that had been adopted over the years. The Planning Commission suggested that upon completion of the setback issue, the regulations of driveways and curb cuts in general be addressed. On November 17, 2004, the Planning Commission discussed the remainder of the driveway and curb cut requirements and determined that further amendments would be appropriate to eliminate confusion and to become more consistent with other sections of the Municipal Code. The primary issue for consideration would be to eliminate the “protected status” of non-conforming driveways and curb cuts. Discussion: The primary regulation of driveways occurs in Section 1104.01, subdivision 4b, with the language extending protection to nonconforming driveways and curb cuts as follows: (2) Driveways in existence as of the date of enactment of ordinance 620 and which do not conform to the provisions of this subsection, may continue subject to the provisions of Section 902.02, subdivision 2. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 642, 1-10-00) Subpart 2 above indicates simply that nonconforming permanent driveways installed prior to 1998 may remain in place, may be altered, expanded or replaced so long as the driveway or curb cut does not pose a significant public safety hazard. Staff’s position is, if the driveway or curb cut can be made conforming in association with a street improvement project or driveway replacement, why preclude that as a possibility? Driveway Report November 17, 2004 Page 2 At the November meeting on this subject, the Commission agreed in principle to the proposed changes as long as there were considerations provided to permit a property owner to make certain repairs and improvements without instigating a complete replacement. Two examples were raised which the proposed amendments will address: 1. A property owner with a partial concrete driveway wishes to extend or expand the concrete without having to improve the whole length of the driveway. 2. A property owner with a nonconforming driveway wishes to install a “Tee” or perpendicular extension without having to make the whole driveway conforming. In both of these examples, the property owner seeks to make partial improvements to the driveway. The proposed amendments would allow for this, as the intent is to not preclude property owners from making improvements, but rather to encourage bringing the driveway or curb cut into compliance if possible. Only under a total reconstruction scenario or street improvement project would the driveway or curb cut need to be brought into compliance—if possible. If it is not possible to achieve compliance or to reduce the extent of the nonconformity, the Director of Public Works and/or the Director of Community Development may permit the nonconformity to remain unaltered. If the noncompliance can be corrected but the property owner disagrees, he or she may appeal the decision to the City Council. The Council would either support staff’s decision or grant the appeal. If the Council sides with staff, the property owner could lastly apply for a variance (administrative variance if the driveway or curb cut had received previous City approval) to seek final permanent approval based on hardship. Summary: The current language pertaining to non-conforming curb cuts and driveways is confusing and difficult to administer. Allowing a nonconforming condition to persist without any regard for its justification makes little sense. The intent of the existing code was to allow nonconforming uses to remain so long as they were installed prior to a date certain five years ago and did not pose any hazard or danger. Staff feels the nonconformities should be corrected unless it would be impractical or cause undue hardship in the process. Please review the draft ordinance attached to Resolution 780-04. If the draft language is acceptable, the resolution can be approved and staff would then present the ordinance for City Council consideration. If minor changes are necessary, these can be incorporated into the attached resolution or draft ordinance. If modifications of a substantial nature remain necessary, staff will make the modifications and bring the resolution back for your consideration in January. _____________________________________ James Ericson Community Development Director MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 780-04 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CODE AMENDMENT TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING NONCONFORMING DRIVEWAYS AND CURB CUTS WHEREAS, current City Code regulations related to nonconforming driveways and curb cuts are confusing, difficult to administer and inconsistent with Chapter 1123 of the Zoning Code relating to nonconforming uses; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the pertinent Chapters and Sections of the City Code and has determined a code amendment should be adopted to clarify the requirements and to promote the reduction or elimination of nonconforming driveways and curb cuts when possible and practicable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of an amendment to the Mounds View Municipal Code substantially similar to the following: See Exhibit A. 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 15th day of December, 2004. _____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST: _____________________________________ James Ericson, Community Dev. Director (SEAL) EXHIBIT A. DRAFT ORDINANCE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 902, 1104, 1121 AND 1125 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO NONCONFORMING DRIVEWAYS AND CURB CUTS THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Section 902.02 of the Mounds View Municipal Code pertaining to driveways is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and deletions struck out:: 902.02: PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION: Subd. 1. Driveway Construction: No person shall construct a driveway without first obtaining a permit pursuant to the provisions set forth in Chapter 1006 of this Code. (1988 Code §44.05) (Ord. 640, 10-11-99) Subd. 2. Existing, Non-conforming Driveways: Permanent-surfaced driveways which do not conform to the City Code as of October 11, 1999, may be rebuilt, reconstructed or replaced in the same manner, fashion and location as before unless the location of said driveway poses a significant public safety hazard. If a requested building permit is denied due to the presence of such a public safety hazard, the applicant may appeal the decision in writing to the City Council. For the purpose of this subdivision, a permanent surface shall mean bituminous, concrete or brick. (Ord. 640, 10-11-99) Consistent with the provisions of Chapter 1123, driveways that do not conform to the requirements of the City Code may not be replaced or reconstructed without bringing them into compliance. (Minor maintenance and alterations may be permitted.) Driveways which cannot be brought into compliance without undue hardship, as determined by the Director of Community Development, may be improved, replaced or rebuilt however in no case may the extent of the nonconformity increase as a result. If a requested permit is denied due to noncompliance, the property owner may appeal the decision in writing to the City Council. Draft ordinance Page 2 SECTION 2. Subdivision 4b(2) of Section 1104.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to driveways is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and deletions struck out: (2) Driveways in existence as of the date of enactment of ordinance 620 and which do not conform to the provisions of this Chapter subsection, may continue subject to the provisions of Section 902.02, subdivision 2. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98; Ord. 642, 1-10-00) SECTION 3. Subdivision 4c(4) of Section 1104.01 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to parking lots is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and deletions struck out: (4) Parking areas in existence as of the date of enactment of Ordinance 620 and which do not conform to the provisions of this Chapter subsection, may continue subject to the provisions of Section Chapter 1123.02, subdivision 1b. (Ord. 620, 7-27-98) SECTION 4. Subdivision 5f of Section 1121.09 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to curb cuts is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and deletions struck out: 5f. Curb cuts in existence as of 10/11/99 that do not conform to this subdivision may remain in existence unless deemed by the Director of Public Works to be a danger or public safety hazard. Notices to abandon a curb cut may be appealed in writing to the City Council. 5g. In conjunction with street improvement projects or in conjunction with individual driveway replacement projects, nonconforming curb cuts shall be made conforming to whatever extent practicable. If, in the opinion of the directors of public works and community development, a nonconforming curb cut cannot be made conforming without undue hardship or disruption to the property, the curb cut may remain in existence, unchanged. Decisions regarding curb cuts may be appealed in writing to the City Council. SECTION 5. Subdivision 6 of Section 1125.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code pertaining to Administrative Variances is hereby amended with the proposed additions underlined and deletions struck out: a. Types: Residents seeking relief from the Zoning Code may request an administrative variance, provided that: (1) The property is zoned R-1 or R-2; and (2) The request concerns setbacks; and (3) The variance amount is within twenty-five (25) percent of code requirements, except as provided in Subd. 6a(5) below; and (4) Approval of the variance does not result in a setback of less than five (5) feet, except as provided in Subd. 6a(5) below; and or (5) The request is related to a pre-existing, non-conforming driveway or curb cut was previously permitted at a setback up to one-foot from the property line. Draft Ordinance Page 3 SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its publication in the official City newspaper. PUBLIC HEARING, INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on this ____ day of ___________, 2005. SECOND READING and ADOPTION by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this _____ day of ___________, 2005. Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: __________________________ Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk / Administrator Approved as to form: ______________________ Mounds View City Attorney (SEAL) Item No: 7 Meeting Date: December 15, 2004 Type of Business: Commission Business City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate Subject: Consideration of Resolution 778-04, a Resolution Setting the Planning Commission’s 2005 Meeting Schedule. Introduction: The Planning Commission establishes its meeting schedule each year by resolution. Discussion: The meeting schedule proposed for 2005 represents the usual first and third Wednesday of every month. There do not appear to be any conflicts with holidays that would fall midweek. The proposed meeting schedule is consistent with the Municipal Code as well as the Commission’s own Bylaws. Recommendation: Approve Resolution 778-04, a resolution establishing the 2005 meeting schedule of the Planning Commission. Respectfully submitted, Kristin Prososki Planning Associate Attachment: 1. Resolution 778-04 MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 778-04 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE 2005 MEETING SCHEDULE OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission intends to hold two regular meetings per month during the year 2005; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission will meet, unless otherwise noted or herein, on the first and third Wednesdays of each month, or as amended; and, WHEREAS, the schedule of meeting dates shall be established and posted to provide an orderly system for use by the Planning Commission, staff and general public. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Exhibit 1, attached hereto, is the Planning Commission’s official meeting schedule for the year 2005. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that if the Planning Commission is required to or desires to hold special or emergency meetings, such meetings will be held in accordance with State law, Code requirements and Commission Bylaws. Adopted this 15th day of December, 2004. ____________________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chairperson ATTEST ____________________________________ James Ericson, Community Development Director (SEAL) City of Mounds View Planning Commission Meeting Schedule Regular Meeting Dates EXHIBIT 1. Applications and all supplemental information shall be submitted three weeks in advance of the scheduled Planning Commission meeting. For additional information on submittal requirements, please contact the Community Development Department at 763-717-4020 Exhibit 1 of Resolution 778-04 Approved 12-15-04