Laserfiche WebLink
Item No: 9H <br />Meeting Date: Feb 14, 2005 <br />Type of Business: CB <br />Administrator Review : _____ <br />City of Mounds View Staff Report <br />To: Honorable Mayor and City Council <br />From: James Ericson, Community Development Director <br />Item Title/Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance 755, an <br />Ordinance Amending Chapter 1120 of the Mounds View <br />Zoning Code Relating to Building Height Restrictions in <br />a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District. <br /> <br />Introduction: <br /> <br />As the City Council is aware, there is an inconsistency in the Zoning Code relating to building <br />heights in Planned Unit Development (PUD) districts. The intent of the PUD district and <br />corresponding provisions is to provide maximum flexibility regarding setbacks, density and <br />design for site-specific projects in return for preservation of open space, environmental <br />considerations and other beneficial public purposes. <br /> <br />Discussion: <br /> <br />Chapter 1120 of the City Code addresses Planned Unit Developments and provides for the <br />processing of such development types. The stated purpose and intent can be found in the <br />first paragraph of Chapter 1120. In addition to the opening statement, the Code encourages <br />specific actions and identifies ten criteria for consideration. The last provision states the <br />following: <br /> <br />Subd. 10. To allow variation from the provisions of this Title, including setbacks, height, lot <br />area, width and depth, yards, etc. (1988 Code §40.24) <br /> <br />As stated above, the PUD process was intended to provide flexibility regarding building <br />height as it was for other variables. But later in the PUD code, a conflicting passage is <br />present: <br /> <br />Subd. 12. Building Height: Height limitations shall be the same as imposed in the <br />respective districts. <br /> <br />This apparent inconsistency was discovered when the City processed the Mermaid Planned <br />Unit Development. There had been some discussion of a taller hotel and there are still plans <br />for a possible expansion. Rather than preclude such an expansion where appropriate, staff <br />supports adding language to the Code which simply reaffirms the intent and purpose of the <br />Code. <br />