PCMin_83Jun6 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~iiNTDS PLAiTiTIi3G COiu~ISSI0i1 T•~I+;TIi1G JUi~L 6, 1983 . PAGD 2 no objection to its construction. Drina Olson viewed the property and felt there would be no objection to its placement. Don :Mead moved, seconded by s.rma G1sen, that the variance be granted. Don ~:ead recommended to Mr. .3oemer that exact measurements be made titihen brought before the City Cou;zcil. The manufactured homes issue was again discussed before the Planning Commission. Since Carl Dale, City Planner, has been engaged to update parts of the zoninb ordinance and because of his expertise in the area, Chairman Stefanson °elt that ~Yir. Dale should make provisions in the ordinance so the manufactured homes issue cou7_d be resolved, i~ianufactured homes cannot be precluded unconditionally frori the City but controlled conditions could be set forth. Erma Clson advised that the metropolitan Council and State law clearly prohibits a cit~r from restricting the location of manufactured homes from any residential classification districts within its jurisdiction so long as those homes are in confor^n_ance with i-iinnesota Statutes and comply t~2th other applicable zoning ordinances. Chairman Stefanson and Don riead suggested that Carl Da1.e be advised to contact the City Attorney to write an amendment to the City ordinance regarding manufactu~°ed homes sand then incorporate the new ordinance into the zoning ordinance rewrite. Don read moTred adopt~_an of riesolution 83-6. Tre motion wa.s seconded bar Annotte Geistfeld. .i~SOLUTI01 R3-6 • ii.r,SOLUlI0i1 ~'u~Olu"~.Eiu"DIT~[G TriE FALCON HEIGHTS CITY COUdCIL AUTHGRIZ; CA~~,L D~ EI~~D 'I'ID CITY ~TTOttidLi TO P~~.F,DaIi" a~ a~I1D.y~i1T TC Tiii; P1,.ES~dT SOrI~G Oii.DItiA1Ci~ ri.t.GAtDliria ."tl~UFdC TUIiDD %:Oi-;S . Councilmember Ciernia advised that the Planning Commission's :resolution 83-~ to eigage Car~_ Dale t,. comp?_ete the updating of the Falcon cieights .zoning; ordinance had been approved. The Planni ng Commission rev-i owed and discussed the ~ay 17th m.nu~",~s of tho Ci+_zens Development Committee. Tine Planning Commission felt t?~.at it is part of their charter to be involved in overall city planning and as part of th~.t it should be involved in the planning process z,•ith the City Council, Planner and :~ei~hborhood Development Committee concerning the Larpenteur/ Snelling develepmen+,,. +1cTf-er City rec~uoste~ the posting of tn*porars- sign to be placed o;n the private business property located on the corno~ of ya.rpsntet~r and Snelling avenues. Tine property is owned by ~~al_lse~;e Golf but ~+ ower CitzT had receive~a permissi on from the o~;ner for placement of the sign. u . Stillman teas not in. attendance. after considerable discussion, Don ead moved, seconded b`r Helen ssros,;n, that tha variance be denied for the followi ng reasons: (1) adver~ti s_t~, signs, are beir_ig eliminated in accordance Tf~_th ordinance, and (~) such approval wou.:d set a precedent. •