My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-25-1990 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
04-25-1990 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2013 11:45:15 AM
Creation date
7/10/2013 11:41:43 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
153
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 />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />April 5, 1990 <br />ACCESSORY <br />BUILDING AREA <br />INDUSTRIAL <br />DISTRICT <br />PROPOSED <br />LANDSCAPE <br />ORDINANCE <br />The Planner pointed out that second pylons at shopping <br />centers are allowed only by Conditional Use Permit, <br />giving the City control and the ability to restrict a <br />shopping center to one pylon. <br />The City Planner reported that the issue of a text <br />amendment increasing the allowable accessory building <br />area in the Industrial District came up in relation to <br />the variance request made by Fuel Economy. The Planner <br />reported that he is recommending that a Conditional Use <br />Permit be allowed in the Industrial District for <br />accessory building area exceeding the 30% limitation <br />currently in the Ordinance. The Planner also <br />recommended that the accessory buildings be constructed <br />with the same or similar materials used in the <br />principle building. <br />Costa recommended approval of the text amendment as <br />proposed by the City Planner increasing the allowable <br />accessory building area in Industrial Districts. <br />Motion seconded by Herkenhoff. <br />Motion carried 7 - 0. <br />The City Planner submitted to the Commission for their <br />consideration a proposed Landscape Ordinance. The <br />Planner pointed out that the two biggest issues in the <br />proposed ordinance are the requirement of a percentage <br />of project costs in landscaping, as well as tree <br />replacement issues. <br />The Commission raised concerns about the enforcement of <br />the percentage of project costs requirement. <br />The Planner reported that the City would require a <br />landscape plan as well as a estimate from a contractor <br />for landscaping costs. The Planner pointed out that <br />the purpose of the ordinance is to encourage upgraded <br />landscaping rather than just sodding and seeding. <br />DeLonais asked if the ordinance applied to residential <br />development. <br />The City Planner replied that the ordinance addresses <br />the development of 4- piexes and higher densities. <br />Pedersen recommended approval of the proposed Landscape <br />Page 22 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.