Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission June 3, 2009 <br />Regular Meeting Page 2 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br /> <br />5. Planning Cases <br /> <br />None. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Other Planning Activity <br /> <br />A. Code Amendments <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller stated there are several zoning code suggestions that staff has <br />identified as needing to be updated. Staff wanted to bring these code suggestions before the <br />Planning Commission to receive their input. She stated after the Planning Commission approves <br />these amendments, they would be brought before the City Council. She stated the first <br />amendment would be to remove the word “decks” from allowed encroachments (Chapter <br />1104.01 Subd. 5c). The city code currently has the word decks in this list, but the code has a <br />specific setback requirement for decks. As such, the City should remove it from this section. <br /> <br />The Planning Commission agreed on removing this language. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller stated the next amendment is to change and clarify accessory building <br />maximum height. Staff felt it would be easier to understand and verify if the zoning code would <br />reflect language such as 16 feet at the highest peak, rather than as it is now. Staff is proposing <br />language of “the height shall not exceed 16 feet of the principal structure, whichever is less, as <br />measured at the highest peak.” <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller suggested it should be higher than 16 feet. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller stated that it could be higher than 16 feet and indicated Mounds View <br />currently has some structures that are higher than the 16 feet at the peak because of how the <br />height is currently measured. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated some structures currently are over 15 to 16 feet but indicated that the <br />height should be limited. He suggested a limitation of no more than 20 feet. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Roberts stated the issue has arisen when residents with motor <br />homes or sailboats need larger buildings. He suggested that the Planning Commission set a <br />height limit for the accessory building to use as a guideline. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated he was comfortable with 20 feet. <br /> <br />Planning Associate Heller indicated other cities code use 20 feet or the height of the primary <br />structure, whichever is less. <br />