Laserfiche WebLink
Mounds View City Council December 12, 1983 <br />Regular Meeting Page Three <br />-------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br />on the property, and so forth, but showing <br />nothing that would indicate a kitchen was planned. <br />Councilmember Hankner stated she did not feel the <br />City was responsible, as they have followed the <br />procedure as set forth. <br />Mayor McCarty stated he felt Mrs. Chaika may have <br />been a victim of circumstance, and had coimnunica- <br />tion problems with her contractor, but he stated <br />that if the Council had approved the request, it <br />would be a violation of the code. He did recommend <br />waiving the fees Mrs. Chaika had paid for the <br />rezoning. <br />Motion/Second: McCarty/Doty to waive the refund <br />the rezoning fees paid by Mrs. Chaika for the <br />Planning Commission hearing. <br />5 ayes 0 nays <br />Councilmember Linke asked that Staff note with this <br />particular contractor that there were problems, and <br />keep it in mind when it is time for him to renew <br />his license. <br />Mayor McCarty closed the regular meeting and opened <br />the next public hearing at 7:52 PM. <br />There were no comments from anyone present. <br />Mayor McCarty closed the public hearing and reopened <br />the regular meeting at 7:52 PM. <br />Director Johnson presented an amendment to 40.04 <br />Sub D(2), regarding the positioning of solar <br />devices, and stated Staff recommends it be <br />added to the ordinance language. <br />Mayor McCarty stated he had spoken with the Chairman <br />of the Planning Commission and that there are some <br />issues before the Planning Commission at this time <br />that require changes to Chapter 40 as soon as possible. <br />He stated, however, that Roberts Rules allows only <br />two amendments to any ordinance, and that in reviewing <br />the proposed ordinance, he came up with over 48 changes <br />to be made. He reviewed some of those changes with <br />the Council and questioned how some of the criteria <br />was established, <br />Director Johnson explained that areas were in the code <br />originally and were not changed in the review, and he <br />believed some of the areas may have been drafted in <br />1974. <br />Motion Carried <br />6B. Public Hearing <br />Adoption of <br />Ordinance No. <br />352 <br />