My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-02-2017
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2017
>
08-02-2017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2020 11:25:33 AM
Creation date
8/28/2018 5:29:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Planning Commission
DOC TYPE
MINUTES
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 August 2, 2017 <br />Regular Meeting Page 3 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson inquired where the six-foot cedar fence would be located along the rear property <br />line. Mr. Stokka reviewed the location of the proposed cedar fence. Planner Sevald commented <br />on the City’s requirements regarding fences and buffers. <br /> <br />Commissioner Schiltgen commented on how this apartment complex would impact the school <br />district. He stated it was his understanding the school district was already aware of the proposed <br />development. Planner Sevald stated this was the case. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson believed the proposed rental rates were properly aligned. He then asked if <br />Mounds View had too many rental units. Planner Sevald was of the opinion the City could <br />support more rental units. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson asked if how many of the new tenants would need access to public <br />transportation. Mr. Stokka stated he did not have exact statistics but explained public <br />transportation was a good selling point and noted the closest bus stop was approximately one- <br />quarter of a mile from the proposed apartment complex. <br /> <br />Commissioner Schiltgen questioned if the developer was hoping to have access from Mounds <br />View Boulevard. Mr. Stokka explained he was not as familiar with Mounds View as the <br />Commissioners or the County and stated he would follow the recommendation from the experts. <br /> <br />Being that there was no quorum present, the Commission took no action. <br />_____________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Other Planning Activity <br /> <br />A. Discussion of amending Zoning Code to decrease the front yard setback for <br />covered porches <br /> <br />Planner Sevald stated within the R-1 Single-Family Residential zoning district, the minimum <br />front yard setback is 30’ for a house, including covered porches. An exception is if all of the <br />homes on the same side of the block have a greater setback (e.g. 50’+), then the minimum <br />setback shall be equal to the home with the least setback (e.g. 50’). The minimum front yard <br />setback for a patio or deck is 2’. <br /> <br />Planner Sevald explained recently, a resident has asked to build a covered porch onto the front of <br />their house. The house is setback 30’, as are adjacent homes. The requested porch is not <br />allowed. The resident has an option of applying for a Variance if there is a practical difficulty <br />unique to this property. Another option is to consider amending the Zoning Code to decrease the <br />setback for a covered (open) porch. He explained that with this request, staff found there to be <br />no hardship. <br /> <br />Planner Sevald reported in recent years, the City has granted two variances to allow a decreased <br />setback for a front porch. One was less than 30’ and one greater than 30’ from the front property
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.