Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission June 7, 2000 <br />Regular Meeting Page 29 <br /> <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson stated that the applicant had previously provided traffic projections for the <br />peak traffic hours at a specific store size. He requested the applicant bring this information for <br />review at the next meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Cunningham stated that he would provide this information to staff, to allow for the <br />Commissions review prior to the meeting. He extended his appreciation to the Planning <br />Commission members for their time and perseverance in this process. <br /> <br />Chairperson Peterson stated that the public forum for issues pertaining to Highway 10 would be <br />held on July 11th . He indicated all citizens were welcome to attend this meeting. <br /> <br /> <br />7. Discussion Regarding an Ordinance to Amend the Zoning Code Pertaining to Sheds <br />and Accessory Buildings. <br /> <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated that the need to revise the City Code with regard to the <br />conditional use permit process pertaining to sheds and oversize garages has been discussed for <br />some time. At their last regular meeting, the City Council directed staff and the Planning <br />Commission to examine the Code, provide recommendations for revisions, and present an <br />ordinance amendment for the Council’s review. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson stated that rather than attempting to draft an ordinance without <br />preliminary input from the Planning Commission, staff compiled some questions for discussion <br />regarding how these issues should be approached. He explained, for example, if 216 square feet <br />is the limit over which a conditional use permit is required, should it be higher? If so, how much <br />higher, and at what point should a conditional use permit be required? <br /> <br />Commissioner Laube stated that in reviewing the staff report, he had thought that staff might go <br />back through the files for the last two to three years, and provide the Commission with an <br />average, in terms of the smallest and largest requests that have been granted for conditional use <br />permits for sheds. He explained that this might provide a better idea of where to begin this <br />process. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Ericson advised that without going through this research, the average request <br />increases every year, for example, the average for the year 2000 is 400 square feet per shed. He <br />stated that staff could examine the files, and provide this information without great difficulty. <br /> <br />Commissioner Hegland stated that the reason for this examination is that 400 square feet was not <br />sufficiently large enough. Planning Associate Ericson explained that if the maximum limit <br />allowed for a shed is raised to exceed 400 square feet, this would encompass the requirement for <br />a single car garage size, and if they allow a 450 or 500 square-foot shed, why would they <br />prohibit two garages? He pointed out that for a larger lot, they might wish to completely <br />eliminate the conditional use permit provision for a shed, for example, if a property owner has