My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-1997 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1997
>
02-26-1997 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2013 1:31:26 PM
Creation date
3/7/2013 1:29:16 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
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 />June 27, 1984 <br />Business <br />Licenses <br />(Cont.) <br />log Kennels <br />Agenda <br />Item Mo. 22 <br />3 <br />Mr. Forsberg stated that he wanted to know what was in metal buildings <br />for fire protection. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that businesses in R -1 areas are covered under home <br />occupations. <br />Forsberg stated that the intent of the ordinance was a way for the <br />Fire Marshall to be able to go and inspect commercial and industrial <br />businesses. <br />The Attorney stated that he would have to think about how to handle <br />a non — conforming use that is existing. <br />Mr. Fahey felt that the non — conforming businesses should be dealt <br />with on a complaint basis. Fahey felt that the City would be <br />opening a can of worms looking for businesses that need licenses. <br />'Ir. Forsberg introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: <br />ORDINANCE MO. 229 — ADDING CHAPTER 314 TO <br />THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF LITTLE <br />CANADA RELATING TO LICENSES <br />The foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by 1r. Hanson. <br />Ayes (4) Forsberg, !Ianson, Fahey, Scalze. <br />Nayes (1) Nardini. <br />Ordinance declared adopted. <br />The City Clerk pointed out that the Council had lengthy discussion <br />regarding dog kennels at a previous meeting, but no firm direction <br />was given. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that the issue was the number of dogs someone might <br />have. Mr. Forsberg stated that if people complain, then the ordinance <br />would be enforced. <br />Nardini stated that by repealing the dog kennel portion of the ordinance <br />people would be limited to two dogs. <br />Mr. Forsberg introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 84 -6 -297 — INSTRUCTING THE CITY <br />ATTORNEY TO REPEAL THE DOG KENNEL PORTION FROM <br />THE CITY'S ORDINANCE <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by tors. Nardini. <br />Ayes (5) Forsberg, Nardini, Hanson, Scalze, Fahey. <br />Nayes (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 11, Page 313. <br />Page 53 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.