Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> MINUTES <br /> City Council <br /> (Cont'd.) <br /> January 2~1, 1900 <br /> Councilman Fahey suggested adding the sentence "This does not intend <br /> to prohibit the legitimate and timely restoration of antique vehicles" <br /> to section N. on page 19. <br /> P1r. Nielson stated that on page 23 paragraph 1. the word "white" <br /> would be changed to "yellow". <br /> Under paragraph o. on page 23 Nielson stated that he would add the <br /> requirement of curbing around metal buildings and that the curbing <br /> need not be concrete, but can be asphalt. Councilman Fahey stated <br /> that the Ordinance should provide that the asphalt be kept in a <br /> state of repair. <br /> Councilman Fahey suggested that the words "and an.y required curbing" <br /> be added to the second line of the paragraph E. Piaintenance after <br /> the words "the parking space" on page ?_3. <br /> Nielson stated that the words"loading berth" on page 27 would be <br /> defined. Ne will take the definition from the existing ordinance. <br /> Nielson stated that paragraphs A. and Q. under 903.000 LAND <br /> RECLAMATION on page 20 will be pulled out and will be replaced with <br /> a reference to the existing ordinance. <br /> Nielson stated that under paragraph G. on page 2S the wording under <br /> section 1. will be changed to "for each building one (1) loading <br /> berth or one (1) berth for each 10,000 square feet of floor area". <br /> Nielson will also add a point 3. under paragraph G, which will <br /> deal with determining number of loading berths required for fractions. <br /> Nielson reported that on page 29 under D. 3. the words "Planning <br /> Commission" will be replaced with "Coi,incil", and the order of <br /> points 3. and 4. will be reversed. <br /> Nielson stated that the question of regulating off-street parking <br /> was brought up, and this should be addressed in a separate ordinance. <br /> Nielson also stated that page 32 of the proposed 7_oning Ordinance <br /> does provide a penalty for those not complying with setback requirements. <br /> Council had some discussion about 'the ratio of tvao family dwellings <br /> to single family dwellings in a single block. The proposed 'Zoning <br /> Ordinance is setting a ratio of 2 in 10. <br /> Councilwoman Sca1ze brought up the subject of side yard set backs. <br /> Council and the Planning Commission previously suggested a 5 foot <br /> side yard set back requirement on one side of the dwelling and a 10 <br /> foot side yan°d set back requirement on the other side of the dwelling. <br /> There was discussion as whether the City should then require at least <br /> 15 feet between structures. It was decided 'to leave the side yard <br /> set back requirement at 10 feet on each side as the City presently <br /> requires. <br /> Page -6- <br /> <br />