Laserfiche WebLink
MINiJTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 28, 1994 <br />Pedersen pointed out the spot zoning issue, and the <br />fact that it is not good planning to have an Industrial <br />parcel surrounded by Residential property. Pedersen <br />stated that ideally there should not be barbed wire <br />next to residential property, but ideally there would <br />not be Industrial property next to Residential. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the two uses are <br />incompatible. <br />Morelan stated that he thought there were other means <br />for McCumber to protect his property other than barbed <br />wire. <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 94-9-331 - DENYING THE CONDITIONAL USE <br />PERMIT FOR SPECIAL PURPOSE FENCE ALLOWING BARBED WIRE <br />ON TOP OF A STORAGE ENCLOSURE FENCE WHICH IS ADJACENT <br />TO A RESIDENTIAL AREA AS REQUESTED BY MR. ED MCCUMBER <br />FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 608 EAST COUNTY ROAD D BASED ON <br />THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE <br />FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS ABUTTING RESIDENTIAL <br />PROPERTY, AS WELL AS THE TESTIMONY THAT TI-IERE ARE A <br />NUMBER OF CHILDREN WHO CLIMB THE FENCE WITH THE <br />STIPLIIATION THAT THE CITY EITHER REMOVE THE BARBED WIRE <br />OR PAY A CONTRACTOR TO REMOVE IT, AND THAT THE CITY <br />REIMBURSE MCCUMBER THE INITIAL COST OF INSTALLATION OF <br />THE FENCE DUE TO THE MISINFORMATION RECEIVED BY <br />MCCUMBER FROM CITY STAFF <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Morelan. <br />Ayes (2) Scalze, Morelan. <br />Nays (3) Hanson, Pedersen, LaValle. Resolution denied. <br />Jackson stated that his intent in objecting to the <br />barbed wire was to find a solution that will provide <br />screeninq for his property as well as allow McCUmber to <br />protect his property. If this is not possible, Jackson <br />pointed out that he will have to view the barbed wire <br />until the pine trees are taller. If interim screening <br />is not possible, Jackson felt his objections might be <br />tempered somewhat given Mr. McCumber~s losses. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. 94-9-332 - APPROVING THE CONDITIONAL USE <br />