My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-22-1999 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
11-22-1999 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2012 11:08:24 AM
Creation date
8/28/2012 10:56:40 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
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
NOV-19-1999 11:15 <br />NRC 612 595 9837 P.03/86 <br />properties - the anginal reason for redesignating the area for low density residential land <br />use. Finally, the setback section was written to restrict additional industrial building <br />encroachment toward the residential areas. On the assumption that additional industrial <br />building development would make future conversion less likely, the setback provision was <br />written to discourage additional new building construction. <br />Upon meeting with the McCumbers to discuss these concerns, staff has written a second <br />draft of the proposed ordinance. This draft creates a new district, the "B -I ", Business - <br />Industrial District. It is essentially similar to the PUD district originally proposed, with two <br />changes. First, the reference to future residential use has been removed, replaced by a <br />Purpose section which discusses the location of the district. Second, the setback provision <br />has been rewritten to reflect the required setbacks of the 1 -1 District, and not restrict <br />additional building consistent with those setback regulations. These changes would likely <br />necessitate a change to the Comprehensive Plan to reflect a longer term business/ <br />industrial land use on the subject site. <br />The industrial uses are kept as conditional uses in this draft. The McCumbers have <br />expressed their concern with this approach. It is their belief that the requirement for CUP <br />approval for every industrial tenant will be overly burdensome, resulting in difficulty in <br />renting their building. Staff believes that this clause is appropriate for the setting. Without <br />It, any Industrial use could locate on the site, leading to future conflicts between this <br />property and the adjoining residential neighborhood, even where the industrial user may <br />be in compliance with all industrial district standards. The CUP process allows the City <br />to review industrial tenants, and to ensure that such tenants will not negatively impact the <br />area. To date, the site has had only minimal issues related to industrial users, but the <br />long -term likelihood is that future conflicts will arise, due simply to the nature of the land <br />uses. <br />Finally, it should be noted that "Contractor's shops ", an allowable 1 -1 use, is also allowed <br />in this proposed Business - Industrial District A definition of such uses is proposed in this <br />ordinance which attempts to distinguish between the type of fabrication or manufacturing <br />done by contractors (permitted uses) and other industrial firms (conditional uses). Staff <br />will be prepared to discuss this proposal with the City Council at the upcoming meeting. <br />cc: Kathy Glanzer <br />Joel Hanson <br />Charles Bartholdi <br />Page 48 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.