Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council March 11, 2002 <br />Regular Meeting Page 6 <br />Planner Atkinson indicated the amendment to the Ordinance is being proposed by the Planning <br />Commission because it was discovered that the combined area for accessory structures was not <br />great enough for larger properties in the City. He further explained that the Code currently <br />allows 1400 square feet of accessory structures and the Planning Commission is recommending a <br />change to allow 1800 square feet. <br />Mayor Sonterre closed the public hearing at 9:36 p.m. <br />MOTION/SECOND: Quick/Marty. To Waive the Reading, Introduce the Reading and Approve <br />Ordinance 693, an Ordinance Amending Section 1106.03 of the Mounds View Zoning Code <br />Pertaining to Accessory Structures. <br />Ayes - 4 Nays - 0 Motion carried. <br />B. First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance 692, an Ordinance Amending <br />Section 1006.06 of the Mounds View City Code Pertaining to Development <br />Controls. <br />Planner Atkinson indicated this amendment to the Code was initiated by Staff and explained that <br />Staff is attempting to clarify the intent of the existing Code by clarifying what types of <br />construction needs to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and Council and which types of <br />construction requires a development contract. <br />Council Member Marty noted the Ordinance referred to all new construction and expansions and <br />existing construction for single and two family dwelling units. He then commented that this <br />statement ruled out most of the City. <br />Planner Atkinson indicated the building permit process would cover single family and twin <br />homes. He further explained that Staff feels it is unnecessary to take the smaller construction <br />projects all the way through the process. <br />Mayor Sonterre noted if the proposal met all the criteria for zoning and lot sizes an <br />administrative approval would be given and, if not, the proposal would go before the Planning <br />Commission. <br />Council Member Marty asked for clarification of the last underlined portion indicating this <br />requirement may be waived by City Council if no public improvements are planned or proposed. <br />Planner Atkinson indicated that sentence gives discretion as to whether it is necessary to enter <br />into a development contract and further explained there may be simple projects that would not <br />need a development contract. <br />• <br />