Minutes - 2006/08/14 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council August 14, 2006 Regular Meeting Page 5 was that one property owner’s actions should not impact what another property owner can do with their property. He stated that the issues go both ways and perhaps there should be responsibilities for the property owners with the pool. He stated that perhaps the approach should be to require the fence for the pool to be setback from the property line, not the retaining wall. Councilmember Flaherty stated his concern is the safety issue. He stated he is fine with the setback requirement for the pools. He stated the Council should consider the fence setback requirement to ensure safety. City Attorney Alsop stated that the citizens need to know what to expect when they are applying for a permit, and without specific language in the ordinance, there is no specific direction for Staff or for residents. He stated someone would be impacted, whether it is the pool owner or the property owner with the retaining wall. Mayor Marty asked if the pool requirements should be reconsidered. Director Ericson replied that Staff is not necessarily suggesting rewriting the pool ordinance. He stated that the City must determine who should be responsible for the setback, the pool owner or retaining wall owner. Mayor Marty mentioned that there are more aboveground pools being built since they are more affordable and perhaps the City does need to consider the pool issue. City Attorney Alsop asked if there should liability for the owners of the property adjoining the property with the pool. Councilmember Thomas replied that there was no liability for the neighboring property owners and there is no clear direction for the City from a legal standpoint. Mayor Marty noted the Amundsens have met their obligations with a 6-foot fence. Councilmember Thomas stated that the Council and Staff should look at the pool ordinance, which needs to be considered because it could potentially depreciate the value of homes. Councilmember Stigney asked about 1103.08, Subdivision 5 and asked about the finished construction definition. Director Ericson explained the finished construction and how the finished side of the fence should face out. Councilmember Gunn noted that the requirements regarding ground cover in the statutes states that the area must be re-vegetated six months after construction, but in Section B it is contrasting. Director Ericson stated Staff is investigating the issue in the building code. He stated he is comfortable amending the ordinance to state the six-month requirement to establish ground cover, weather permitting. MOTION/SECOND: FLAHERTY/MARTY. To postpone discussion of Ordinance 773, an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Code Relating to Landscaping, Fences and Retaining Walls until after review of the ordinance regarding pools.