08-14-2006 CC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council June 26, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 5 is the Council’s ability and responsibility to maintain neighborly relations and the code should 1 help encourage friendly neighborly relations. 2 3 Councilmember Stigney replied that decks do require railings, and using the same analogy 4 toward retaining walls will require too many things. Mr. Amundsen said his point is that the 5 Council does legislate safety issues. 6 7 Mayor Marty said he would like to table the discussion and have Community Development 8 Director Ericson, City Attorney Riggs, and the Planning Commission take another look at the 9 code. 10 11 Councilmember Thomas said sending this to the Planning Commission is too much, that Staff 12 should be able to complete changes. Councilmember Gunn said she likes Councilmember 13 Thomas’ suggested amendment. 14 15 MOTION/SECOND: THOMAS/MARTY. To postpone action on the Adoption of 16 Ordinance 773, an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code Relating to Landscaping, Fences 17 and Retaining Walls, until the July 24, 2006 meeting 18 19 Councilmember Flaherty asked if July 10 would allow enough time, Community Development 20 Director Ericson responded the last meeting in July will be sufficient. 21 22 Ayes – 5 Nays – 0 Motion carried. 23 24 B. Public Hearing to Consider a Rezoning Request Submitted by Integra Homes 25 Relating to the Properties at 2901 and 2925 County Road 10 and the West 26 Half of 8060 Groveland Road to R-3, Medium Density Residential 27 28 1. Community Development Director Ericson explained to the Council that Ron 29 Lillestrand requests approval of re-zoning for the site of a proposed townhome 30 development. He stated the development originally entailed 21 town home units and 31 that the Planning Commission recommended denial of the request based on several 32 factors, including density, privacy issues, an impact on adjoining properties, and lack of 33 guest parking. 34 35 Director Ericson stated that the developers have re-submitted a re-development application for a 36 simple re-zoning request. He stated the developers have reduced the density to 19 units, 37 reconfigured the layout of the town homes, added guest parking, and changed the width and 38 internal configuration of the driveways. 39 40 Director Ericson explained the Planning Commission had difficulty with the application because 41 they questioned if it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the County Road 10 42 corridor and the City’s vision of how the area should be redeveloped. 43 44