My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-18-2006
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
10-18-2006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2018 10:18:16 AM
Creation date
8/30/2018 10:17:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
10/18/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
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
<br />Accessory Building Report <br />October 18, 2006 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Attached to this report is a table illustrating the results of a survey taken of neighboring and <br />nearby communities as to what their respective cities allow for accessory buildings. It can be <br />seen that Mounds View’s allowances tend to be more generous than other communities to the <br />extent that we have been told the reason some people have moved to Mounds View is to <br />benefit from larger and multiple garages and storage buildings. <br /> <br />Design Requirements: <br /> <br />The Zoning Code and Building Code do not regulate or require design guidelines for <br />accessory buildings less than or equal to 952 square feet. Only the size, height and setbacks <br />of the building are controlled. In an effort to prohibit substandard and temporary buildings, <br />the Code was amended to introduce certain basic restrictions but actual design guidelines are <br />absent from the Zoning Code. It is only when the structure exceeds 952 square feet that the <br />structure is required to exhibit a uniform design and appearance with the dwelling unit. <br /> <br />Questions: <br /> <br />1. After four years of “experience” with the increased accessory building allowances, is there <br />a need to re-examine the allowances and perhaps adopt more stringent controls regarding the <br />size, height and number of such accessory buildings? <br /> <br />2. If so, should the City Council establish a committee of residents, appointed and elected <br />individuals to determine the most appropriate changes? <br /> <br />3. Should the City adopt design guidelines for ALL accessory buildings rather than just those <br />in excess of 952 square feet? <br /> <br /> <br />Recommendation: <br /> <br />Please review the attached City Code requirements regarding accessory buildings. After <br />discussing the regulations in open forum, staff is hopeful some of the above questions can be <br />addressed via a recommendation to the City Council. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />_____________________________________ <br />James Ericson <br />Community Development Director <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.