PL PACKET 11191991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 17 , 1991 3 PAGE 7 4 5 6 Murphy noted that the definition of "patio homes" in the old 7 ordinance needed to be reviewed as the condos on Foss Road and 8 the Harstad development do not meet the current definition . 9 Madden explained that owners of condos do not own the land 10 under their building. Townhome owners own the building as well 11 as the land . Brownell felt the term "patio home" was a 12 marketing term. 13 14 Werenicz .felt there was a typographical error in Section 15 1615 . 01 referring to "Purpose. " The .City Manager agreed and 16 said it should be "R-1" not "R-2" . 17 18 Murphy noted that in the single family district there is a 19 reference to "detached housing" and that a carport is 20 considered an accessory use. It was understood that carports 21 can be removed . 22 23 Franzese observed that permitted conditional uses previously 24 included day care facilities . It has been omitted in the new 25 draft of the ordinance. Brownell stated that this type of i facility is referred to in the state licensed facilities section of the ordinance. The City Manager noted that the City 28 has no control over state licensed facilities . 29 30 In response to a question regarding structural damage, Urbia 31 advised that if over seventy-five percent of a structure which 32 is being used in a non-conforming use is destroyed, the owner 33 would not be allowed to rebuild with the intention of using 34 the building in the same manner . 35 36 Gondorchin referred to a permitted accessory use regarding 37 swimming pools . The City Manager stated that the fifty foot 38 requirement has already been challenged by the Watershed 39 District and the City Council has acted on this matter . It has 40 been suggested that the setback be seventy-five feet and the 41 City Attorney is working on language to accommodate site 42 lines , screening, - and fencing concerns . 43 44 Franzese had concern with the front yard setback requirement 45 of thirty feet . She specifically noted this would be a problem 46 on Silver Lane . The City Manager acknowledged this could be a 47 problem especially with lots located on Silver Lake. He stated 48 that language which noted a requirement of "depth of at least 49 thirty feet" is a consideration , otherwise unbuildable lots 50 could be created . Kennels were discussed and the amount of animals which could be kept on a person ' s property was also discussed. Kennel 54 control is a concern of the Commission .