My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-24-85 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1985
>
07-24-85 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2014 2:47:11 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:50:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTL'S <br />CiCy Council <br />July 24, 19f35 <br />I-P <br />Distri.ct <br />(Cont.) <br />'.L'hose setbacks are: <br />Pront Yard - 40 f:eet; <br />Side Yard - 15 feet on any side and 40 1.`eeY. <br />on the si.de yard abutti_ng a publ~i.c >Creet; <br />Rear Yard - 20 f'eet; <br />Yards abutting residenti.al.ly zoned proper.ty - <br />40 f:eet. <br />9'he Pl.anner pointed out that the buildi.ng coverage would be 35% of <br />the Lot regardless of what the setbacks are. The Planner stated that a l5 <br />foot side yarci setbacl< woul.d eli.mi.nate a drive isle around Che side <br />of a buiLding. <br />f4r. Pahey stated that this could be cover.ect in siCe plan revi.ew. <br />Blesener poi.nted ouC that the City is requi.ri.ng blactctop or concrete <br />as well. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze commented that in five years someone coulct start driv:ing <br />over the grass, <br />Pahey sCated that he saw no reason for increasing the setbaclcse <br />Pahey commenCed that the matter of the drive isle can Ue handl.ed in <br />building review and can be controlled with the placement of the <br />bu3.lding on the loL. <br />Blesener felt that Che L-I setbaclcs allowect Lor more flexibility. <br />Scal.ze stated that the Counci.l wi.l]. have to be aware oL the need f.or <br />dri.ve i.sles and require Chem if necessary. <br />Nagovsky sCaCed that drive isles are necessary for fire protection. <br />Nagovsky did not feel that the 15 foot side yard setbaclc would make <br />any di.fEerence, The 13ui1ding Inspector sCated that any plans without <br />provision for a dri.ve isle would be turned down because of fire <br />protecti.on needse <br />Mr. f~lesener i.ntroduced the following resoluti.on and moved its adoption: <br />RGSOLUTION N0. F35-7-359 - INSTRUC'f.ING TIIE CITX <br />ATTORNCY TO REDRAFT SECPION 918.050 C. l., 2., <br />AND 3. OF ORDINANCG ~0. 256 WI'CH REGARD TO <br />SI;T[3ACKS <br />'fhe foregoing resoluti.on was duly seconded by ~fr. Pahey. <br />Ayes (5) Pahey, 131esener, Scalze, Nardi.ni, Collova. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />Thi.s resolution appears in ResoLution 13001< No. 12, Page 364. <br />Page -£3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.