My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC PACKET 05111982
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1982
>
CC PACKET 05111982
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 3:47:22 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 3:47:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
16
SP Folder Name
CC PACKETS 1981-1984 & 1987
SP Name
CC PACKET 05111982
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
103
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
-7- <br /> subject. Mr. Soth said he sees legal problems with joint ownership <br /> of fences and recommended fences be installed on one property and <br /> construction costs shared, if desired. <br /> The Public Works Director stated that fences which are grandfathered in <br /> will be permitted to remain as they are the same as signs and non-con- <br /> forming lots until the use or structure is substantially altered. <br /> Mr. * Childs said the Fire and Police Departments in the cities he <br /> previously served had reported problems with fences higher than six <br /> feet and said the swimming pool ordinance requires fences "not less <br /> than six feet high" . Mrs . Makowske indicated the irregular configuration <br /> of some lots in the City might permit a six foot fence being built. <br /> right in front of a neighbor's picture window. <br /> The Council agreed this would be a reasonable amendment. <br /> Motion by Councilman Letourneau and seconded by Councilman Ranallo to <br /> approve the first reading of Ordinance 1982-003 with the following <br /> addition to the wording of Subdivision 3 of Requirements on the second <br /> page: <br /> "and no fence in the front yard shall be over four feet in height <br /> with the height of all fences measured from the natural grade of <br /> the property. " <br /> ORDINANCE 1982-003 <br /> AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO FENCES; REQUIRING <br /> ® BUILDING PERMIT; REGULATING LOCATIONS; <br /> PROHIBITING CERTAIN FENCES; AMENDING THE <br /> 1973 CODE OF ORDINANCES BY ADDING A SECTION <br /> Motion carried unanimously . <br /> Keith Grewe , 1001 Orchard Lane, whose request to operate a tanning <br /> salon in Apache Plaza Mall percipitated the proposed City ordinance <br /> amendment which would permit such an operation as a conditionally <br /> permitted use in the City, appeared along with Tom Van Meter, Presi- <br /> dent of Tan Me, Inc. , the franchise under which Mr. Grewe proposes <br /> to operate, to discuss their request with the Council. Mrs . Makowske <br /> reiterated that the Commission had not acted on the request because <br /> it was not on the Commission agenda which is posted throughout the <br /> City and through which interested residents could have been alerted <br /> to attend the meeting. Mr. Grewe and the franchise official repeated <br /> their belief that the health aspects of the salons should fit them <br /> into a category already established in the City Ordinance for a similar <br /> use. Mr. Van Meter addressed the "massage image" he believes people <br /> perceive for this unfamiliar business but speculated many of the exist- <br /> ing businesses in the City already offer tanning services to their <br /> clients . He invited Council members to visit his own salon in Maplewood <br /> to see for themselves what type of operation they can expect if they <br /> approve the salon for Apache. <br /> • Mayor Sundland told them he agrees with the City Attorney ' s opinion <br /> that the tanning salons do not fit into an existing category in the <br /> City Ordinance and the proposal will have to be presented at a public <br /> hearing before the Planning Commission as an ordinance amendment which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.