06-10-81 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINU7ES City Counc9l June 10, 1981 The foregoing resolution was du7y seconded by Mrs. Sca7ze, l~yes (5) Flanson, Scalze, Fahey, Forsberg, Nardini. Nayes (O). Resolution declared adopted. This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 6, Pages 208 and 209. Public The City Planner explained to the Council that proposed Ordinance No, 174 Hearing would a11ow the setback of a building to be the average of the setbacks Proposed of the adjacent buildings, For example, if the setback of one building Ordinance were 30 feet and the setback of the ather were 10 feet, the required No. 174 setback for the 6uilding between the two would be 20 feet. Councilman Fahey s•tated that the only problems he could foresee w9th this ordinance would be on residential property. The Planner pointed out that the ordinance "may" be applied by the Counci7, and Council has the option to turn down any requests made under this ordinance. Mrs, Nardini asked if the Council could handle any situations of this type undar the variance portion of the City's ordinance. Mr, Fahey pointed out that with a variance, a hardship must be proved. Mr. Forsberg stated that he did not like the idea of an old structure setting a precedent for a new structure. Mayor Hanson stated that there are many instances where the Council should take a look at the circumstances. Mr. Fahey stated that there are circum- stances where the Counci7 may not want to use this ordinance. However, Fahey stated that he was not opposed ~o having some f1ex~ibility. P4a,yor Hanson asked the Planner what would happen in a situation u~here a non-conforming use would be an adjacent structure. The Planner rep1ied that non-conforming uses shou1d not be considered under this ordinance. Mrs. Scalze stated that the more she thinks about th9s proposed ordinance, the more she feels it could give the City more trouble than it is worth. Council discussed the fact that with an ordinance of this type a request would only need a 3/5th's vote of the Council for approval, and under a variance request, passage would require a~/5th's vote of the Council. The City Planner informed the Council that they could set up a procedure for requests under this proposed ordinance and also add stipu7ations to the or~inance. Mr, fahey introduced the following resolution and movecl its a~option: RESOLUTTON N0. 81-6-279 - CLOSING THE PUBLIC HFARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE N0. 74 Page -5-