My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1990/04/02
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
Agenda Packets - 1990/04/02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:47:12 PM
Creation date
7/25/2018 6:41:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
4/2/1990
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
4/2/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br /> PAGE THREE <br /> MAY 22, 1989 <br /> Minnetonka - prohibits more than 4 vehicles per unit to be <br /> parked or stored outside R-1 and R-2 property <br /> excluding vehicles of occasional guests. <br /> - vehicles in front yard must be on paved or <br /> gravel surface. <br /> - all vehicles, watercraft or other items stored <br /> outside on residential property must be regis- <br /> tered to or owned by a resident of the <br /> property. <br /> Apple <br /> Valley - prohibits more than 4 vehicles stored or <br /> parked outside R-1 and R-2 property except <br /> when a permit is issued and then the maximum <br /> is 6. <br /> Burnsville - limits number of vehicles on R-1, R-2 and R-3 <br /> property to the number -that may be garaged and <br /> parked on driveways. Also, no more than 2 <br /> items of major recreational equipment are <br /> allowed. <br /> (IIIWhat Do We Do? <br /> This memorandum proposes no solutions. We have tried to <br /> identify the issues, describe current laws and list some <br /> options for changing the code. We now ask your direction on <br /> the following questions. <br /> 1. Do you wish to continue to follow our current <br /> enforcement practices or become more aggressive? If <br /> you want us to be more aggressive, are there any <br /> parameters, e.g. fewer or no warnings, shorter <br /> warning periods, etc.? <br /> 2. Is the current code satisfactory or do you wish to <br /> tighten the code? If you wish to tighten it up, in <br /> what areas? <br /> Your direction would be appreciated. <br /> DFP/MJS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.