Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-2019 PC Packet PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA July 17, 2019 - 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Special Order of Business A. (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. Public Hearing; Resolution 1105-19, Approval of a Variance to allow a Second Driveway at 2809 Bronson Drive (Planning Case VR2019-003) 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: A. July 10, 2019 9. Next Planning Commission Meetings: A. Wednesday, August 7, 2019 B. Wednesday, August 21, 2019 10. Meeting Conclusion Item No: ___05A Meeting Date: July 17, 2019 Type of Business: Planning Case VR2019-003 City of Mounds View Staff Report To: Mounds View Planning Commission From: Jon Sevald, Community Development Director Item Title/Subject: Public Hearing, Resolution 1105-19, Approval of a Variance to allow a Second Driveway at 2809 Bronson Drive (Planning Case VR2019-003) Introduction The Applicants, Jason and Deborah Lanz, own the property at 2809 Bronson Drive, consisting of a single-family home and detached garage. Mr. Lanze proposes to build a second garage and driveway. Discussion Any garage, if to be used to store frequently-used vehicles, must be served by an improved driveway.1 Single-Family homes are allowed one driveway per property, unless a Variance is approved “in the interest of public safety.”2 Mr. Lanz’s Mother In-law lives with them, and has limited mobility. They would like to keep the existing driveway, as this is nearest to the home’s side-door. The existing garage is 20’ X 20’ (400 sq ft). The proposed second garage is 26’ X 36’ (936 sq ft), for a combined 1,336 sq ft. The City Code allows up to three Accessory Buildings with a combined 1,800 sq ft. The maximum size of any one, is 952 sq ft, unless a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is approved.3 The proposed garage is within size limits. One alternative to a Variance is to locate the new garage elsewhere on the lot (e.g. backyard) such that it is accessible by the existing driveway, or to replace or expand the existing garage. A second alternative is to approve the Variance under a condition that the existing (west) driveway be removed when no longer necessary, e.g. when its use does not meet the criteria of “in the interest of public safety.” This would be difficult to enforce. Similar Planning Cases; Planning Case Address Action Summary VR2011-007 6939 Pleasant View Dr Denied Applicant removed garage on south side of house, and built new garage and unimproved driveway on north side. After 1 City Code, Section 1106.03, Subd 1(h) (Accessory Buildings). Section 1121.09, subd 7(a) (Surfacing) 2 City Code, Section 1121.09, Subd 5(e) (Curb Cuts and Driveway Openings) 3 City Code, Section 1106.04, Subd 6 (Accessory Building exceeding 952 sq ft) Item 05A Page 2 of 6 street was reconstructed, applicant applied for Variance to allow second curb cut at original (unimproved) driveway, due to mobility limitations. PC denied for multiple reasons, including that the distance between house and new garage was result of the Applicant’s decision, and found no Hardship. VR2013-001 7900 Greenfield Ave Approved Variance approved for second driveway in 1994 due to mobility challenges, with condition that it be removed in ten years, or upon sale. House was sold, but driveway not removed. During street reconstruction, City was to remove second driveway access. Applicant requesting to keep second driveway due to mobility challenges of current owner. VR2014-004 7800 Groveland Rd Approved (PC Denial overturned by CC) Applicant applied for second driveway to serve second garage. Planning Commission Denied, finding no “public safety” reason to support request, and no unique circumstances of property. Applicant appealed, and the City Council overturned the Denial (e.g. approved the Variance). Analysis A Variance may be granted by the Planning Commission only in the event that all of the following circumstances exist:4 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. 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 4 City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 2 (Criteria for Granting a Variance) Item 05A Page 3 of 6 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. The intent of the City Code is to allow a second driveway if when “in the interest of public safety”. This reasoning can be unique to the property (e.g. avoid backing onto a busy road), and/or unique to the resident (e.g. proximity from driveway to home). In this case, it is the later. Summary The Applicant is proposing to build a second garage to be located in the east side yard, and is requesting a Variance to allow the existing driveway (second driveway) to remain, whereas the City Code limits single-family homes to one driveway. A Public Hearing Notice was published in the July 3, 2019 edition of the New Brighton-Mounds View Bulletin, and mailed to property owners within 350’ of the subject property. Recommendation Staff does not have a recommendation. It is Staff’s opinion that there is nothing unique about the property to warrant a second driveway. There may be unique circumstances related to the home’s residents to warrant a second driveway, but, this determination should be made by the Planning Commission based on the Applicant’s testimony. The Planning Commission is requested to conduct a Public Hearing, and consider the following options: 1. Resolution 1105-19, approving the Variance to allow a second driveway. 2. Resolution 1105-19, denying the Variance to allow a second driveway. 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 the 60-day requirements (Deadline: August 23, 2019), the Commission would need to act upon the request as soon as reasonably possible to avoid an inadvertent approval. A 2/3’s majority vote (5 of 7) is required to approve a Variance.5 Respectfully submitted, _____________________ Jon Sevald, AICP Community Development Director Attachments 1. Applicant’s Narrative and Site Plan 2. Aerial Photo 3. Site Photos 4. Resolution 1105-19, Approving Variance for Second Driveway 5. Resolution 1105-19, Denying Variance for Second Driveway 5 City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 1(b) (Organization and Meetings) Item 05A Page 4 of 6 Applicant’s Narrative and Site Plan Item 05A Page 5 of 6 Aerial Photo Item 05A Page 6 of 6 Site Photos 2809 Bronson Drive, existing (west) driveway (photo July 8, 2019). 2809 Bronson Drive, proposed garage and second driveway in (east) side yard (photo July 8, 2019). MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1105-19 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2809 BRONSON DRIVE (PLANNING CASE VR2019-003) WHEREAS, the applicants; Jason and Deborah Lanz, propose to build a second garage and second driveway on property located at 2809 Bronson Drive, legally described as: PID: 07-30-23-24-0068 EX N 225 FT; LOT 11 of SPRING LAKE PARK KNOLLS WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential, and guided Single- Family Detached in the Comprehensive Plan (2008). The City Code, Section 1121.09, subdivision 5(e) limits Single-Family uses to one curb cut access per property unless, upon application for a Variance of this restriction, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals finds that it is in the interest of public safety to waive such; and, WHEREAS, the Applicants’ Mother In-Law resides in the home, and has limited mobility. The intent of keeping the first (west) driveway is to allow the Mother In-Law to park on the driveway closest to the home’s side door. The close proximity, is in the interest of public safety; and, WHEREAS, City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 2 establishes the following criteria for granting a Variance (findings in italics): a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Title. Finding: The Variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Code. b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The Variance is related to the following: Resolution 1105-19 Page 2 of 3 Residential Goal 3: Encourage a creative approach to the use of land and related residential development. Policy c. The City will encourage the upgrade and expansion of homes by providing flexible standards that address the unique circumstances of expanding existing single dwellings. c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Title or the City Code. Finding: Retaining the second driveway is reasonable if temporary, and if to be removed once its need by a resident with limited mobility, is no longer necessary. 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. Finding: There are no unique circumstances to the property. There are unique circumstances to the property’s residents who have limited mobility. Allowing the Applicants to construct a second garage and driveway (east), while allowing the west driveway to remain, provides short proximity to the home’s side door entrance, and therefore is in the interest of public safety. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Finding: 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. Finding: The Variance request is the minimum variance, alleviating the 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission, based upon the above findings, the staff report, and in consideration of public testimony, Approves the request for a Second Driveway, with the following conditions: 1. The Applicant shall remove the first (west) driveway (that portion within the front yard) within one year of the date that its resident with limited mobility, no longer resides on the property. Resolution 1105-19 Page 3 of 3 2. The property owner shall provide an escrow to the City, equal to the cost of removing the west curb cut and apron, and restoring the curb. The escrow shall be paid at the time a permit is issued for the new (east) driveway. The City may hold this escrow in a non- interest bearing account, and refund it to the Applicant only when the Applicant removes the west curb-cut and apron, and restores the curb. 3. The property owner shall construct the second (east) driveway within one year of the date of this Variance, in compliance of City Code, Section 1125.02, Sub 5 (Lapse of Variance). Adopted this 17th day of July, 2019 ______________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chair Attest: ______________________________ Jon Sevald, Community Development Director (Seal) MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 1105-19 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE FOR A SECOND DRIVEWAY ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2809 BRONSON DRIVE (PLANNING CASE VR2019-003) WHEREAS, the applicants; Jason and Deborah Lanz, propose to build a second garage and second driveway on property located at 2809 Bronson Drive, legally described as: PID: 07-30-23-24-0068 EX N 225 FT; LOT 11 of SPRING LAKE PARK KNOLLS WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-1 Single-Family Residential, and guided Single- Family Detached in the Comprehensive Plan (2008). The City Code, Section 1121.09, subdivision 5(e) limits Single-Family uses to one curb cut access per property unless, upon application for a Variance of this restriction, the Board of Adjustment and Appeals finds that it is in the interest of public safety to waive such; and, WHEREAS, the Applicants’ Mother In-Law resides in the home, and has limited mobility. The intent of keeping the first (west) driveway is to allow the Mother In-Law to park on the driveway closest to the home’s side door; and, WHEREAS, City Code, Section 1125.02, Subd 2 establishes the following criteria for granting a Variance (findings in italics): a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this Title. Finding: The Variance is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City Code. The intent is for every single-family home to have one driveway, not two driveways. b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Finding: The Variance is related to the following: Resolution 1105-19 Page 2 of 3 Residential Goal 3: Encourage a creative approach to the use of land and related residential development. Policy c. The City will encourage the upgrade and expansion of homes by providing flexible standards that address the unique circumstances of expanding existing single dwellings. c. The applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this Title or the City Code. Finding: It is unusual for a single-family home in Mounds View to have two driveways, and more unusual for a non-corner lot, or a lot not on a busy road, to have two driveways. The proposed second driveway is unreasonable. 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. Finding: There are no unique circumstances to the property. The home has three entrances. It is the Planning Commission’s opinion that the Applicant has not exhausted all options for locating the proposed garage and driveway such that it may provide ease of access into the house, without the need to keep the original (first) driveway. e. The variance does not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Finding: The character of the neighborhood includes single-family homes with one driveway. The proposed second driveway is inconsistent with this character. f. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the practical difficulties. Economic conditions alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Finding: The Variance request is the minimum variance, alleviating the 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. WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission held a dully noticed Public Hearing on July 17, 2019; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the Mounds View Planning and Zoning Commission, acting as the Board of Adjustment and Appeals, based upon the above findings, Resolution 1105-19 Page 3 of 3 the staff report, and in consideration of public testimony, Denies the request for a Second Driveway. Adopted this 17th day of July, 2019 ______________________________ Gary Stevenson, Chair Attest: ______________________________ Jon Sevald, Community Development Director (Seal) DRAFT PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA Regular Meeting July 10, 2019 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112 ______________________________________________________________________________ 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Stevenson at 7:00 p.m. for July 10, 2019. ______________________________________________________________________________ 2. Roll Call Members Present: Commissioners Klander, Monn, Nelson, Rundle, and Stevenson. Absent and Excused: Commissioner Farmer and French. Also Present: Community Development Director Jon Sevald and Council Member Bill Bergeron. ______________________________________________________________________________ Index to Minutes Page VR2019-001 Variance Request to allow the combined square footage 2 of accessory buildings in a rear yard to exceed 20% and Variance to reduce the front yard setback for a detached garage AV2019-001 Review of an Administrative Variance to reduce the side 3 yard setback from 5’ to 3’ for a driveway Approval of Minutes 4 _____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Special Order of Business None. 4. Citizens Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda None. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission July 10, 2019 Regular Meeting Page 2 ________________________________________________________________________ 5. Planning Cases A. Public Hearing: Resolution 1102-19, Approval of a Variance to allow the combined square footage of accessory buildings in a rear yard to exceed 20%; and Variance to reduce the front yard setback for a detached garage for property at 2832 Sherwood Road (Planning Case VR2019-001). Community Development Director Sevald stated the property is located at the southeast corner of Sherwood Road and Groveland Road, subject to having two front yards. The lot is non- conforming because its size (9,470 square feet) is less than the 12,500 square feet required under the current City Code for a corner lot. The house is nonconforming because it is set back about 22’ from the Groveland Road property line, whereas a minimum 30’ is required. The City Code allows up to 20% of a rear yard to consist of Accessory Buildings. The proposed garage and breezeway are accessory buildings, and together will be 25%. The proposed 24’ X 28’ garage will be located in the rear yard. The front of the garage will be set back 22’, the same as the house, requiring a Variance to reduce the setback from 30’ to 22’. Staff recommended the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and approve the Variance as requested. Chair Stevenson opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. Chair Stevenson closed the public hearing at 7:04 p.m. Commissioner Monn asked if the proposed garage was taller than the home. Community Development Director Sevald explained the maximum height for a detached garage is 18’. Commissioner Monn questioned if the garage would be the same color as the house. Marsha Anderson, 2832 Sherwood Road, indicated the garage and house would be the same color. She reported the plans for the garage had not been finalized but noted she would be working on this if the variance is approved. Commissioner Monn inquired if the shed would be removed. Ms. Anderson stated the shed would be removed after the garage is built. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Nelson/Commissioner Rundle. To approve Resolution 1102-19, a Resolution Approving a Variance to allow the combined square footage of accessory buildings in a rear yard to exceed 20%; and Variance to reduce the front yard setback for a detached garage for property at 2832 Sherwood Road (Planning Case VR2019-001). Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. _____________________________________________________________________________ B. Resolution 1104-19, Review of an Administrative Variance to Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 5’ to 3’ for a Driveway, for Property located at 8405 Red Oak Drive (Planning Case AV2019-001). Mounds View Planning Commission July 10, 2019 Regular Meeting Page 3 ________________________________________________________________________ Community Development Director Sevald stated in June 2019, the applicant applied for a Zoning Permit to replace a dirt driveway, original to the house (1941). The request included a 0’ setback to match an existing concrete driveway in front of the garage (installed without a permit). The dirt driveway meandered some, but is generally within 1’ of the property line. The driveway permit was approved, pending compliance with a 5’ side yard setback, and provided options to apply for a Variance for a 0’ setback, or an Administrative Variance for a 3’ setback. In June, the applicant installed the driveway with a 5’ setback, and intends to widen it further, pending approval of this variance. Staff commented further on the practical difficult within the Administrative Variance request and recommended approval. Chair Stevenson thanked staff for providing the Commission with a thorough staff report complete with pictures. Chair Stevenson asked if the pad the car was sitting on along the garage went to the property line. Tim Rogers, 8405 Red Oak Drive, explained he bought the home on October 11, 2019 after going through a divorce. He stated he was surprised the City would be concerned about the existing pad but noted he would be willing to cut off two feet. He explained he was more concerned about squaring off the driveway. He discussed the location of a large oak tree and stated he did not want to have to cut this tree down. Commissioner Monn questioned why it would be necessary to have a Variance when a driveway could be completed closer to the home. Mr. Rogers commented this would require him to cut down the large oak tree. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Rundle/Commissioner Nelson. To approve Resolution 1104-19, a Resolution Recommending Approval of an Administrative Variance to reduce the side yard setback from 5’ to 3’ for a driveway, for property located at 8405 Red Oak Drive (Planning Case AV2019-001). Ayes – 4 Nays – 1 (Monn opposed) Motion carried. Community Development Director Sevald reported a super majority was required to approve an Administrative Variance. He explained the applicant could apply now for a regular Variance. _____________________________________________________________________________ 6. Other Planning Activity None. ______________________________________________________________________________ Mounds View Planning Commission July 10, 2019 Regular Meeting Page 4 ________________________________________________________________________ 7. Reports A. Upcoming Planning Cases & Activity Community Development Director Sevald discussed upcoming planning cases. B. Staff Updates Community Development Director Sevald provided the Commission with an update from staff. He reported the Council approved the Crossroad Pointe development on Monday evening. C. Council Updates Council Member Bergeron provided the Planning Commission with an update from the City Council. He commented on a letter that would be sent to the Second Judicial Judge regarding the Charter Commission. He reported at the Council worksession a thorough report was given regarding the 2020 census. He indicated the SBM Fire Department budget was being discussed. He commented on the closing dates for Crossroad Pointe and explained construction would begin this fall. Commissioner Monn questioned what was going on at the Skyline Motel property. Council Member Bergeron discussed the Police Department training that occurred at the Skyline Motel. He noted the Fire Department would be conducting training on this property as well, once the asbestos was removed from the building. Commissioner Monn requested further information on what was going on with the Charter Commission. Council Member Bergeron encouraged Commissioner Monn to read the minutes from the previous Charter Commission, Council worksession and City Council meetings. City Administrator Zikmund commented further on the Charter Commission situation. He explained the Council was reacting to an unexpected resignation from a Charter Commission member, and possibly two or three additional Charter members unless some changes were made. He reported at the June worksession meeting, the Council discussed at length, the situation and directed staff to draft a letter to the Chief Judge asking for his assistance to remove a Charter Commission member. He indicated a second letter would be sent to the Charter Commission to keep them apprised of the situation. He commented it has not been since 2002, that the Charter Commission has had a full compliment. City Administrator Zikmund discussed the City’s efforts to digitize all public records and noted it would take some time to complete this task. He updated the Commission on the high-speed chase that occurred in Mounds View. He commended Chief Harder and his officers for their efforts on behalf of the Police Department. Mounds View Planning Commission July 10, 2019 Regular Meeting Page 5 ________________________________________________________________________ D. Planning Commissioner Reports None. 8. Approval of Minutes June 19, 2019. MOTION/SECOND: Commissioner Monn/Commissioner Rundle. To approve the Minutes of the June 19, 2019 regular Planning Commission meetings as presented. Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 9. Next Planning Commission Meeting: A. Wednesday, July 17, 2019 B. Wednesday, August 7, 2019 ______________________________________________________________________________ 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Stevenson adjourned the meeting at 7:49 p.m. ______________________________________________________________________________ Respectfully submitted, Jon Sevald Community Development Director Transcribed by: Heidi Guenther TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.