My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-18-1996
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
09-18-1996
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2018 3:21:21 PM
Creation date
7/31/2018 2:14:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
9/18/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
115
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 <br /> Page 3 <br /> September 11, 1996 <br /> side, rear = 20 feet if abutting residential districts <br /> = 10 feet if abutting non-residential districts <br /> (increase from five feet) <br /> In I-1 front = 30 feet (decrease from 40 feet) <br /> side, rear =20 feet if abutting residential districts <br /> = 10 feet if abutting non-residential districts <br /> (increase from five feet) <br /> • establishing a minimum lot size for non-residential uses in residential districts <br /> The current Code allows for a number of non-residential uses in the residential districts <br /> with approval of a conditional use permit. There is no specific minimum lot size for these <br /> uses, however, and therefore the minimum lot size for the district in general is used. Staff <br /> is recommending that a minimum lot size of at least one acre be established. A survey of <br /> the existing churches in Mounds View shows the smallest site in use is 1.5 acres. An <br /> alternative way of dealing with this issue is to set a maximum for the amount of <br /> impervious coverage on a site (building and paving). <br /> • <br /> • clarifying the provision regarding front yard setbacks in the R-1 and R-2 district where <br /> the existing setbacks in the same block differ from the minimum required <br /> The current Code requires that the required setback be adjusted if existing residences in <br /> the same block are at a different distance than the minimum setback. The present <br /> language makes this provision difficult to administer. Staff is suggesting that it be clarified <br /> that we are to use the residences for the entire block on the same side of the street, and <br /> that the minimum distance for any one residence be used as the minimum required. <br /> Otherwise, if an"average" is used, the question must be asked why the new structure must <br /> •- - •. • •• . - • -. - . • - • - • - s • - in the same block. <br /> See Section 2, item a. at the top of Page 2, in the attached ordinance. <br /> • prohibiting accessory buildings in front of principal building <br /> • clarifying placement of accessory buildings in side yards which abut streets <br /> The current Code would allow an accessory building to be placed in the front yard, or on <br /> corner lots, in both the front and side yard to within five feet of the property line. Our <br /> practice, however, is to prohibit accessory buildings between the principal building and the <br /> front property line. We also require accessory buildings to use the same setback <br /> • requirement as the principal building when a side yard abuts a street. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.