Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Apr•il 27, 1988 <br />Text Blesener~ explained that under the pr•oposed text amendment a limited <br />Amendment number• of homeowner•s woul d be al l owed a r~easonabl e use of thei r• pr•operty. <br />Or•dinance For~ example, the Neamy pr~oper•ty could be divided without the need for~ <br />No. 297 r•emoval of 4 1/2 feet of the existing Neamy gar•age as would be r~equired <br />(Cont.) under~ cur•r~ent Or~dinance. Blesener• pointed out that once the 4 1/2 feet <br />of garage were removed, and the new lot line in place, the Neamy's <br />would be allowed to build to within 5 feet of the new lot line, or• <br />replace the 4 1/2 feet of gar•age which was removed. Blesener~ pointed <br />out that this doesn't make sense. <br />Scalze pointed out that the or•dinance offers the same r~ights and privileges <br />to ever•yone in the City. <br />Collova r•eported that Mr•s. Becker• contacted him and r~epor~ted that she <br />i s i n favor~ of pr~oposed Or•di nance No. 297. <br />Mr~. Fahey intr•oduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 88-4-160 - CLOSING THE <br />PUBLIC HEARING 0~1 PROPOSED ORDINANCE N0. 297 <br />The for~egoing r~esolution was duly seconded by Mr•s. Scalze. <br />Ayes (5) Fahey, Scalze, LaValle, Collova, Blesener•. <br />Nays (0). <br />Resolution declar•ed adopted. <br />This r~esolution appear•s in Resolution Book No. 19, Page 164. <br />Mr•. Blesener intr~oduced the following or~dinance and moved its adoption: <br />ORDINANCE N0. 297 - AMENDING SECTION 905.050 <br />OF TNE LITTLE CANADA, MINNESOTA ZONI~IG ORDINANCE <br />REGARDING SIDEYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS IN R-1, <br />SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS <br />The for•egoing or•dinance was duly seconded by Mr•s. Scalze. <br />Ayes (5) Blesener~, Scalze, Collova, Fahey, LaValle. <br />Nays (0). <br />Or~dinance declar~ed adopted. <br />Text Fahey opened the public hear~ing on pr•oposed text amendment allowing <br />Amendment accessor•y r~esidential apar~tments for• cer•tain businesses. Fahey noted <br />Or•dinance that the Planning Commission tabled action on the pr~oposal for• fur•ther• <br />No. 298 consider~ation. <br />Agenda Fahey asked if ther~e was anyone fr•om the gener~al public pr•esent wishing <br />Item No. 10 to comment on this matter~. Ther•e was not. <br />Page -13- <br />