Laserfiche WebLink
� '� � ; ((�`� �� l,� ' . . <br />� , � �. �� <br />Too Ildounds Vtew Planning Commission . <br />Fe°o�ne Pamela Sheldon, Community Development Direc�or � <br />Su6jeci: Setbacks for Paricing Lots, and Lot Area Requirement for Non-Residential Uses <br />P(arining Case I�o. SP-008�96 <br />Dateo October 7, 1996 <br />l�eeiing of Octobec 9, 1996 <br />Isswe <br />Ivit°. Danny D. I�Ioon, a property owner in iviounds View, has requested that the Zoning Code be <br />amended to require a minimum 15 %ot setback between parking tots and property Iines, when the <br />parking lots are for churches or any c�mmercial uses, and these uses abut residential uses. At <br />your meetings on September 18 and October 2, the Planning Commission reviewed draft <br />ordinances which would address this request, as weIi as esiablish a minimum loi size for non- <br />residential uses in residential districts and clarify some ambiguous pravisions in the Zoning Code. <br />Itecomrraer�dation <br />Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopi Resolution No. 474-9b recommending to <br />ihe City Council adoption of Ordinance No. 590 amending the Mounds View Zoning Code, Title <br />1100, Sections 1102.01, 1104.0 i, 1104.02, 1 I Ob.04, 1107.45, 1109.04, 1110.04, 112 i.09, <br />l 12i.11, and 1123.02. <br />I)iscussion <br />The proposed ordinance shows changes from the existing Zoning Code b,y underlinging%(new <br />wording) and striiceouts (wording to be deleted). 'To aid the Plannim� Conramis�ior� in its <br />review, r�oa°dang which is �ew from yoar meeti�ng on October 2 meetiaag is shaded. �'his is <br />the only wardeng �o�a need to �°e�vie�r iiyou vvani to see th� ch�mges sinc� o�r last <br />diseuss�on. Sections b, 7 and 8 of the ordinance are also new but have just been added so the <br />minimuen lot size requirement of one acre tracks through the districts. <br />The proposed ordinance wouid: <br />a add a definition of "principal building" <br />� clarify that the setbacks in the table in 1104.01 Subd. 3 pertain to principai builciings <br />� clarify when and how front setbacks for ne�r✓ residences in ihe It-1 and R-2 districts shall <br />t�e adjusted based on the setbac�CS of existing resider�ces in the same biock <br />