HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-19-2003
Item No: 6
Meeting Date: November 19, 2003
Type of Business: Public Hearing
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: Kristin Prososki, Planning Associate
Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing and Consideration of a Variance to Allow
a Reduced Side-Yard Setback for a Second-Story
Addition at 8471 Fairchild Avenue NE; Planning Case
VR03-011
Introduction:
The applicant, David Przetycki, is proposing to construct a second-story addition above
his garage located at 8471 Fairchild Avenue. The home was built in 1981 and at that
time was constructed crooked on the lot, causing the northwest corner of the home to be
only nine (9) feet, six (6) inches from the side property line. Mounds View Zoning Code
requires that the living area of a home is ten (10) feet from the side property line. The
requested variance is for six (6) inches.
Discussion:
Setback requirements are addressed in Section 1104.01 of the Zoning Code. Each zoning
district is listed with the corresponding front, side and rear setbacks. In an R-1, Single
Family Residential district, the typical building setbacks are as follows: Front, thirty (30) feet;
Side, ten (10) feet; and Rear, thirty (30) feet. It is noted that sheds and garages, attached or
detached, can have side and rear setbacks of five (5) feet. The Code also addresses the
issue of “prevailing setbacks,” however, that is not applicable in this case.
The applicant desires to expand his home by constructing a 1,209 square foot second-story
addition above the garage. Under typical circumstances the addition would not require a
variance, however, one corner of the home encroaches into the side setback by six (6)
inches.
Variance Considerations:
For a variance to be approved, the applicant needs to demonstrate a hardship or practical
difficulty associated with the property that makes a literal interpretation of the Code overly
burdensome or restrictive. Minnesota statutes require that the governing body (the Planning
Commission, in this case) review a set of specified criteria for each application and make its
decision in accordance with these criteria. These criteria are set forth in Section 1125.02,
Subdivision 2, of the City Code. The Code clearly states that a hardship exists when all of
the criteria are met. The criteria are as follows:
a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply
generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape,
topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective
date hereof have had no control.
Setback Variance Report
8471 Fairchild Avenue
November 19, 2003
Page 2
The property is zoned R-1 and the property owner is seeking a building permit to
construct a second-story addition. The home was initially placed slightly crooked on
the lot, which is not typically the case. Most homeowners would not find an issue
with constructing a second-story addition, as the setbacks have already been
established by the first-story and in most cases would meet code requirements.
b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of
rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this
Title.
While the literal interpretation of the provisions of the Zoning Code would not
deprive the applicant of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same zone,
because of the way the home was placed on the lot, the applicant is unable to make
desired improvements.
c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the
applicant.
The applicant was unaware until recently that the entire home was not ten (10) feet
from the side property line and had nothing to do with the initial placement of the home.
d. That granting the variance requested would not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by this Title to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the
same district.
Granting the variance would not confer upon the property owner a special privilege in
that every property owner has the right to apply for a variance to improve the function
and livability of their home. Many improvements benefit the neighborhood in a broad
sense in that the reinvestment often triggers similar reinvestment in adjacent properties
and at the minimum motivates property owners to take a greater sense of pride in
property ownership.
e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the
hardship. Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship.
The applicant is requesting a six-inch variance, which is the amount that would allow the
proposed addition to match with the existing structure. This is the minimum variance that
would alleviate the hardship.
f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title or to
other property in the same zone.
Granting a variance to allow the addition to encroach six (6) inches into the side
setback would not be materially detrimental to the purpose and intent of the Zoning
Code given the placement of the existing structure. The six-inch encroachment
would not be noticeable from the street or even to the adjacent neighbor, as the
proposed addition will match the existing structure.
Setback Variance Report
8471 Fairchild Avenue
November 19, 2003
Page 3
g. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the
danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
The proposed addition should not have any impact on the supply of light or air to
adjacent properties, nor should it impact congestion of streets. The proposed
addition will not increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety or decrease
property values in the neighborhood. Quite possibly, improvements to the
applicant’s home may increase the value of neighboring properties.
Summary:
In order for the Planning Commission to approve this variance request, the above
criteria must be satisfied. Staff would take the position that the hardship criteria can be
justified and that the resulting improvement would be a benefit to the subject property
as well as to the neighborhood. Staff feels that this is a reasonable request.
Recommendation:
After holding the public hearing and taking testimony from staff, the property owner and
affected neighbors, the Commission can take one of the following actions related to the
request:
1. Approve the variance as requested. Resolution 743-03 is attached for the Commission’s
approval if that is the chosen course of action.
2. Deny the requested variance. To move forward with this option, the Commission should
direct staff to draft a resolution of denial with findings of fact appropriate to support the
denial.
3. Table the request. If additional information is needed before a decision can be rendered
or if more discussion is needed, the Commission can simply move to table the request
until such information has been provided. Because of 60-day requirements, the
Commission would need to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid
an inadvertent approval.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristin Prososki
Planning Associate
Mounds View Zoning Map
Photograph of Existing Home
Drawing of Home with Proposed Addition
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 743-03
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A SIX-INCH VARIANCE TO ALLOW A SECOND-STORY
ADDITION TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE-YARD SETBACK AT 8471 FAIRCHILD
AVENUE; PLANNING CASE NO. VR03-011
WHEREAS, the applicant, David Przetycki, has applied for a variance to allow a
second-story garage addition to encroach six inches into the side-yard setback at 8471
Fairchild Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as follows:
Lot 3, Block 1, Cedar Bay Estates,
Ramsey County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, Section 1104.02 of the Mounds View Zoning Code indicates that the
minimum side setback for a principal building is ten feet; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested a six-inch variance to construct an addition
above the garage; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied for a building permit for the expansion; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 1125.02, Subdivision 2 of the Mounds View
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission is to review a standard set of criteria, of which
all must be satisfied, in order to grant a variance to the Zoning Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents
regarding this proposal:
a. Planning Application
b. Zoning Map
c. Location Map
d. Photographic documentation
e. Staff Report
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
regarding the variance request on Wednesday, November 19, 2003.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning Commission
makes the following finding of facts related to this request:
1. The exceptional or extraordinary conditions relating to the variance request is
that the home was initially constructed crooked on the lot, which causes
limitations as to how the property can be improved.
2. The literal interpretation of the Zoning Code would restrict the property
owner’s ability to expand and improve upon the layout and functionality of the
home.
3. The applicant has not caused the condition which prompted the variance
request.
4. Granting the variance would not confer upon the applicant a special privilege.
5. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the
hardship.
6. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purpose of this Title
or to other property in the same zone.
7. The variance would not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent
property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or
increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially
diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mounds View
Planning Commission, based upon the above identified finding of facts, does hereby
approve the variance request to allow an addition to encroach six inches into the side
setback of the applicant’s property at 8471 Fairchild Avenue, subject to the following
restriction:
1. This variance applies only to the portion of the home on the north side of
the lot that currently exists nine feet, six inches from the side lot line.
Adopted this 19th day of November, 2003.
____________________________________
Gary Stevenson, Chairperson
ATTEST:
____________________________________
James Ericson
Community Development Director
(SEAL)
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
(612) 717-4000
Application For Advisory Boards and CommissionsApplication For Advisory Boards and Commissions
Group Applied For:
Full Name (Please Print):
Home Phone: Work Phone:
Address:
Years at this address: Years you have lived in Mounds View:
Email Address:
Qualifications You Want to have the Mayor and City Council ConsiderQualifications You Want to have the Mayor and City Council Consider::
Skills and Interests:
Employment, Occupation or Other Experience:
Memberships, Accomplishments or Other Qualifications:
Please state your reason for wanting to serve with this group:
Signature: Date:
[Your response to any of the above inquiries may be continued on the back of this form and you
may attach any other material that you would want the Mayor and Council to consider]
The City of Mounds View is committed to the policy that all persons shall have access to its programs, facilities and
employment without regard for race, creed, color, sex, age national origin or handicap.
Item No: AS-3
Meeting Date: Nov 19, 2003
Type of Business: Report
City of Mounds View Staff Report
To: Mounds View Planning Commission
From: James Ericson, Community Development Director
Item Title/Subject: Planning Commission Appointments
Discussion:
Chapter 401 of the City Code indicates that Planning Commissioners are appointed to three-
year staggered terms. Three terms expire at the end of this year:
• Mike Hegland
• Mari Scotch
• Herb Zwirn
While reappointments have been handled differently in the past, the currently the practice is
to reapply for appointment if the commissioner wishes to continue to serve on the Planning
Commission. Prior to the terms’ expiration, a notice is also published in the official
newspaper to advertise for the potential vacancies. All applications, including those from
sitting members, would be considered by the Mayor. Commissioners are appointed by the
Mayor with approval of the City Council.
Recommendation:
For those whose terms are nearing expiration, an application is attached if you would like to
continue serving on the Planning Commission. The application should be returned as soon
as possible.
James Ericson
Community Development Director