01-27-88 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES City Council Jan. 27, 1988 Paving Of The Planner• also noted that the pr•oposed amendment does not define Parking paving by listing materials that would be acceptable in order to Lots (Cont.) avoid leaving an acceptable material from the list. The Planner stated that the amendment pr~ovides for• Building Inspector~ r•eview of the mater~ial to be used for• paving. The Planner~ noted that this is how most other cities handle this issue. Scalze noted that at the Planning Commission meeting it was stated that unpaved par•king lots in the City would be ar•andfather~ed in if this or~dinance amendment is adopted. Scalze noted that ther~e ar•e a number• of development who wer•e r~equir~ed to pave, but these developments have not done so. The Planner• noted that these developments ar~e illegal non-confor•mina and would not be gr•andfather~ed in. Only legal non-confor~ming development, those that wer~e not r~equired to pave under• the existing or•dinance, would be gr•andfather•ed in. Fahey stated that he feels a development should not be r•equir•ed to pave its par•king lot unless that par~king lot has 5 spaces. Fahey did not feel that duplexes should be r•equir~ed to pr•ovide cur~b and str~i pi ng. The Planner noted that the City can exempt duplexes fr•om cur•bing and striping or set up a different set of performance standards for multi- family development, such as bituminous curbs or no curbs. Fahey felt that most newly developed duplexes will pave r~egar~dless of whether• or• not pavi ng i s r•equi r~ed under~ the or~di nance. Scalze stated that she would like to see duplexes r~equir•ed to pave their~ par~king ar•eas. 6lesener~ agreed, but felt that cur•bing and str•iping of duplex par~king ar•eas shoul d not be r•equi r•ed. LaValle asked the maximum amount of spaces allowed befor•e a handicapped par~king space is r~equir•ed. The P1 anner~ r~epl i ed that the State r~equi r•es al l commer~ci al to have at least one handicapped par~king space, and then the r•atio is 1 handicapped space for• ever~y 50 par•king spaces. However•, if a business has 51 par~king spaces, then 2 handicapped par•king spaces ar~e r•equir•ed. The Planner~ was unsur•e about r~esidential r•equir~ements. Mr~. Fahey intr•oduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 88-1-22 - APPROVING THE ADOPTIOPI OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE N0. 292 AS ORIGINALLY SU6MITTED BY THE CITY PLANNER IN FIIS REPORT DATED JANUARY 20, 1988 REQUIRING THE PAVING OF PARKING LOTS I~IITH FIVE OR MORE PARKING SPACES Page -3-