My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-02-1996
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
10-02-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/26/2018 11:14:15 AM
Creation date
7/26/2018 11:14:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Minutes
Date
10/2/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
• Mounds View Planning Commission October 2, 1996 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 13 <br /> ordinance includes non-residential uses in an <br /> R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 or R-5 District listed as <br /> conditional uses such as nursing homes, <br /> churches, etc., except for governmental and <br /> public utility buildings and structures needed <br /> for public health, safety and welfare, which <br /> shall be a minimum of one acre and she noted <br /> that this was not Dan Moon's request, but was <br /> her suggestion and reminded the Planning <br /> Commission that they felt they should leave it <br /> in. The last section that was discussed was <br /> non-conforming continuance of use which says <br /> that if you have a parking lot that does not now • <br /> meet the setbacks, you can keep using it, <br /> restripe or resurface, etc. (which does include <br /> grinding it up and relaying it) and keep it the <br /> same size. <br /> . At this time the Planning Commission thanked <br /> Ms. Sheldon for taking the time to clarify some <br /> of the confusing sections of the Code and <br /> bringing them to the Planning Commission for <br /> discussion. <br /> Director Sheldon went on to discuss the item 9. Staff Report <br /> regarding the liaison relationship to City <br /> Council and requested the Planning <br /> Commission's feelings regarding this issue. It <br /> was the consensus of the Planning <br /> Commission that a member of the City Council <br /> should be present at all Planning Commission <br /> meetings to report on the activity of the <br /> Commission because they feel the Commission <br /> goes into more depth and detail and that the <br /> Council should be apprised of those details and <br /> "digging work" that is involved. The <br /> Commission also felt that if there are liaisons, <br /> there should be fair treatment of the <br /> Commissions. Commissioner Stevenson noted <br /> that he has been on the Parks and Recreation <br /> Commission for almost ten years and a Council <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.