My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-14-08 Council Workshop Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
02-14-08 Council Workshop Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:16:26 PM
Creation date
3/25/2008 3:10:20 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 />FEBRUARY 14, 2008 <br />situation. There may be some businesses that only require a small <br />building; however, the outdoor storage would still be an accessory use to <br />the business operation. Blesener asked about the establishment of a <br />minimum building size. The City Planner replied that there is already a <br />minimum building size in the Code, although it is only 1,000 square feet. <br />Blesener felt that the value of the Ryan Industrial Park properties lays in <br />the fact that outdoor storage is allowed. That coupled with the soil <br />conditions lends itself to metal buildings and the types of businesses that <br />are in the park. Montour noted that future construction techniques may <br />negate the soil conditions factor in the future. The City Planner pointed <br />out the revised building materials standard for the I-1 District. <br />Those present were in agreement with allowing outdoor storage equal to <br />60% of the lot size subject to the regulating criteria discussed. <br />Keis questioned the need to regulate the number of auto repair licenses, <br />and felt it was an issue of economics. Blesener pointed out that the City <br />regulates the number of other licenses such as liquor and retail auto sales <br />(outdoor). The City Planner noted that the nature of some businesses <br />warrants a limitation on the number of licenses that a city will issue. <br />Knudsen pointed out that it is an issue of appearance of the City pointing <br />out that auto repair businesses have been code enforcement problems. <br />Those present discussed this issue at some length, and the consensus was <br />that the Code Enforcement Officer should survey surrounding cities to <br />determine if they cap the number of auto repair licenses that they issue. <br />It was also felt that there might be some merit in establishing categories of <br />auto repair licenses, such as the City's current minor and major auto <br />repair, separating major engine repair from major auto body repair. The <br />City Planner indicated that the City's current definition of minor auto <br />repair includes such businesses as tire, battery, and muffler shops. Major <br />auto repair includes both engine and auto body work. Blesener noted that <br />most minor auto repair businesses do not require outdoor storage. <br />McGraw noted that major auto body repair is likely to have clips of cars <br />that get stored on a property, while major engine repair does not generate <br />the same level of car parts. Knudsen pointed out that it is the nature of <br />this business to generate junk and debris. <br />Helmeke asked the cost of an auto repair license. The Code Enforcement <br />Officer replied that the annual cost was $300. It was noted that license <br />costs are to reflect the City's processing costs. If there are code <br />enforcement costs associated with a particular business, those costs should <br />be recovered in the form of fines for violations. <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.