Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View Planning Commission July 21, 2004 <br />Regular Meeting Page 4 <br />________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch expressed concern about what was being stored there. Mr. Bauer stated in <br />their business, they were not allowed to keep finished goods or raw materials outside because <br />they would rust and would be unable to sell them. <br /> <br />Commissioner Zwirn asked if there would be any empty containers that held hazardous material <br />outside. Mr. Bauer replied they would not do that. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated even though Mr. Bauer indicated that nothing other than containers were <br />going to be stored there, he asked what kind of Codes were they facing with outdoor storage. <br />Planner Prososki replied what they were proposing to store outside was allowed, but if the <br />Commission wanted to specify exactly what can be stored outdoors, they could do that. <br /> <br />Commissioner Scotch replied she would like to see that type of a condition. Planner Prososki <br />replied she would add language to limit the storage to wooden pallets and plastic storage <br />containers. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller asked how often CUPs are reviewed. Planner Prososki replied they are not <br />reviewed again unless there was a time period set forth in the original CUP. <br /> <br />Chair Stevenson stated as long as the proper wording was added to the conditions, he believed <br />they could approve this tonight. <br /> <br />Commissioner Miller requested the language limiting the outdoor storage to pallets and empty <br />containers be added to the beginning of condition 2. <br /> <br />MOTION/SECOND: Hegland/Zwirn. To Approve Resolution 767-04, a Resolution <br />Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit to Allow for Outdoor Storage at 2159 <br />Mustang Drive; Planning Case No. CU2004-003. <br /> <br /> Ayes – 6 Nays – 0 Motion carried. <br />______________________________________________________________________________ <br /> <br />6. Consider an Amendment to the Zoning Code Regarding Driveway Setback <br />Requirements <br /> <br />Planner Prososki explained that driveways in residential zoning districts are permitted at five- <br />foot setbacks to the lot lines. The City Code provides an exception for a one-foot setback as <br />long as the adjoining property owner consents by signing a statement to that effect. She advised <br />that the City Council reviewed this section of Code at their June 7, 2004 worksession meeting <br />and agreed that a code amendment should be processed. <br /> <br />Planner Prososki noted the Code references dealing with driveway setbacks and explained if the <br />one-foot provision is eliminated, all that need be done is to strike the language highlighted. If the <br />Commission agrees with the City Council that an administrative variance process is appropriate, <br />additional language would need to be added to Chapter 1125.