My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-24-91 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
07-24-91 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:09:49 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:54:00 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.
/
21
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JULY 24, 1991 <br />CLOSED Mr. Collova introduced the following resolution and <br />SESSION moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 91-7-241 - APPROVING A CLOSED SESSION <br />FOLLOWING THE MEETING TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION AS <br />REQUESTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Blesener. <br />Ayes (3) Collova, Blesener, Scalze. <br />Ayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />GARDNER Collova asked the status of the Gardner Bros. sign. <br />BROS. SIGN <br />The City Administrator reported that he would research <br />this with the City Attorney and provide the Council <br />with an update. <br />FENCE AT Scalze asked the status of the fence at 60 East Little <br />60 LITTLE Canada Road. <br />CANADA ROAD <br />The City Planner pointed out that the concern was <br />raised at the Planning Commission about the legality of <br />the fence. According to the Building Inspector, the <br />permit for the fence was based on the fence meeting the <br />qualifications of the Ordinance. That is, if the fence <br />is located 30 feet from the street, it can be opaque; <br />if the fence is closer than 30 feet, it must be shorter <br />and cannot be opaque. The question now is whether or <br />not the fence meets setback requirements. The Planner <br />reported that he is not sure of the status, however, <br />efforts are being made to document where the property <br />line is located. There are some questions about the <br />right-of-way locations for Little Canada Road, and the <br />Building Inspector has asked the property owner to <br />verify the location of the right-of-way. <br />The Planner reported that another issue is the flower <br />box, which appears to definitely encroach on the <br />right-of-way and that is not allowed. Also, there is a <br />large planter and as long as the planter is less than 2 <br />feet in height and off the right-of-way, the planter <br />would be allowed. Again, right-of-way locations are <br />trying to be determined. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the setback is <br />measured from the property line and not the paved <br />street. The Administrator pointed out that when the <br />fence permit was first issued, the Building Inspector <br />relied on a monument to determine right-of-way <br />location. However, it appears that monument was to <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.