My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL MINUTES 09171991
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Minutes
>
1991
>
PL MINUTES 09171991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 5:25:24 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 5:25:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
19
SP Folder Name
PL MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1991
SP Name
PL MINUTES 09171991
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
'r PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> _ SEPTEMBER 17 , 1991 <br /> 3 ME 7 <br /> 4 <br /> 5 <br /> 6 Murphy noted that the definition of "patio homes" in the old <br /> 7 ordinance needed to be reviewed as the condos on Foss Road and <br /> 8 the Harstad development do not meet the current definition . <br /> 9 Madden explained that owners of condos do not own the land <br /> 10 under their building. Townhome owners own the building as well <br /> 11 as the land . Brownell felt the term "patio home" was a <br /> 12 marketing term. <br /> 13 <br /> 14 Werenicz felt there was a typographical error in Section <br /> 15 1615 . 01 referring to "Purpose. " The City Manager agreed and <br /> 16 said it should ' be "R-1" not "R-2" . <br /> 17 <br /> 18 Murphy noted that in the single family district there is a <br /> 19 reference to "detached housing." and that a carport is <br /> 20 considered -an accessory use . It was understood that carports <br /> 21 can be removed . <br /> 22 <br /> 23 Franzese observed that permitted conditional uses previously <br /> 24 included day care facilities . . It has been omitted in the new <br /> 25 draft of the ordinance. Brownell stated that this type of <br /> facility is referred to in the state licensed facilities <br /> section of the ordinance. The City Manager noted that the City <br /> 060 <br /> has no control over state licensed facilities . <br /> 29 <br /> 30 In response to a question regarding structural damage, Urbia <br /> 31 advised that if over seventy-five percent of a structure which <br /> 32 is being used in a non-conforming use is destroyed, the owner <br /> 33 would not be allowed to rebuild with the intention of using <br /> 34 the building in the same manner . <br /> 35 <br /> 36 Gondorchin referred to a permitted accessory use regarding <br /> 37 swimming pools . The City Manager stated that the fifty foot <br /> 38 requirement has already been challenged by the Watershed <br /> 39 District and the City -Council has acted on this matter. It has <br /> 40 been suggested that the setback be seventy-five feet and the <br /> 41 City Attorney is working on language to accommodate site <br /> 42 lines , screening, and fencing concerns . <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Franzese had concern with the front yard setback requirement <br /> 45 of thirty feet . She specifically noted this would be a problem <br /> 46 on Silver Lane . The City Manager acknowledged this could be a <br /> 47 problem especially with lots located on Silver Lake. He stated <br /> 48 that language which noted a requirement of "depth of at least <br /> 49 thirty feet" is a consideration , otherwise unbuildable lots <br /> 5_0 could be created. <br /> ap Kennels were discussed and the amount of animals which could <br /> be kept on a person ' s property was also discussed. Kennel <br /> 5_4 control is a concern of the Commission. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.