My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-23-08 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
04-23-08 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:17:18 PM
Creation date
5/13/2008 10:48:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />APRIL 23, 2008 <br />Major Auto Repair License he holds an Auto Sales License. Blesener <br />explained that businesses that purchase salvage vehicles and reconstruct <br />them from parts of other vehicles would require the Salvage Repair <br />License. The City Planner indicated that the Major Auto Repair License <br />would apply to a business that takes in a customer's car, repairs it, and the <br />customer then picks it up. The Planner pointed out that most of the code <br />enforcement issues in Ryan Industrial Park have been related to salvage <br />vehicle repair. That is the reason for the additional license classification <br />as well as the proposed limit of four on this type of license. <br />The City Administrator noted that the City was struggling with whether or <br />not to place a limit on the number of Major Auto Repair Licenses. Rather <br />than do that, the consensus was to create the Salvage Repair License and <br />place a limit of fom• on those types of licenses. The Administrator agreed <br />that it has been salvage vehicle repair that has generated an inordinate <br />amount of code enforcement due to the accumulation of auto parts and <br />debris on properties. The City has determined that four businesses would <br />meet this classification; therefore, the proposal is to limit this license to a <br />maximum of four. <br />There was no one else present from the general public wishing to address <br />this matter. <br />Upon motion by McGraw, seconded by Montour, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Allan asked if the use of trailers as storage buildings was a public safety <br />hazard. The City Planner indicated that a trailer is not considered a <br />building. Trailers are used for hauling of goods and materials. He noted <br />that there is also a lot of usage of trailers for storage purposes. The <br />Planner noted that rather than prohibit the use of trailers for storage, the <br />proposed code would allow this use, provided that the trailers are moved <br />from the site 25% of the time. With regard to weatherproof containers, the <br />Planner noted that the proposed code would allow these to be used for <br />storage. The Planner felt this was preferable to having small parts being <br />stored on the ground. The Planner also pointed out that the proposed <br />definitions of containers and trailers (including semi-trailers) distinguish <br />the difference between the two. <br />Blesener pointed out that trailers are typically higher and larger than <br />containers. He expressed concern about rusting trailers extending over the <br />height of screening. Keis pointed out that containers can also rust. Keis <br />asked if the assumption is that containers would not be stacked. The <br />Planner replied that that is correct noting the height limitation of eight feet <br />for containers. Trailers cannot be higher than twelve feet. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.