04-28-2014 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Commercial Vehicle Report April 28, 2014 Page 2 The Council indicated that they did not support increasing the number of commercial vehicles on a property and would limit the number of tires on such vehicles to no more than six. All other parking and nuisance code requirements would apply unchanged. The Council had considered the possibility of instituting a permit or license for such vehicles but ultimately felt it to be unnecessary. Based on the discussions referenced on the previous page, staff has prepared an ordinance which would provide for the changes noted below: ® Increase allowance for commercial vehicles from "E" to "G" classifications ® Limit number of commercial vehicles at a residential property to no more than one ® Regardless of the weight classification, no commercial vehicle shall have more than six wheels ® Exempt pick-ups and passenger vans from definition of commercial vehicle In addition, the following changes were added subsequent to the first reading Update the definition of "truck" in Section 802.01. Revise the truck parking regulations in Section 802.07 Feedback: After including a brief article in the Spring edition of the Mounds View Matters, staff has received feedback from residents who've expressed opposition to expanding the allowance of commercial vehicles in the City and our neighborhoods. (One resident indicated that she was here in 1981 and voted against the ordinance then and she remains opposed to this day.) It may be true that there are more residents who work from home today than did in 1981, so reviewing the Code relating to commercial vehicles to ensure the requirements continue to satisfy the community's needs is certainly warranted, however any changes made should be made with the entire community in mind. For this reason, the Council decided to hold a public hearing on April 14, 2014, regarding the proposed changes and published notice in the official city newspaper, The Sun Focus, to solicit feedback from a wider audience as part of its approval process. (A public hearing is not otherwise required for an amendment of this type.) Recommendation: If the City Council supports the revisions as shown in Ordinance 886, it may move approval of the second reading and adoption. If additional information is needed or subsequent changes are deemed necessary, the Council may choose to postpone action until such time that the ordinance is in the desired form. If the Council does not support the changes as presented, it may move to deny the ordinance. Approval, if that is the desired course of action, would require a roll call vote.