PL 02/28/1979 - 30504CITY OF FRZ7��Y'
� PLANi•ITNG CGP�•;i�S:i0r1 P4E'ETIPTG - FEI3RU�RY 28� �979
0
c��L mo o�n,-� :
Chairman H.�.rris called the February 28, 1979; meeting of �he Plannin� Co�ission
to order at 7s45 P.b1.
ROLL CALLs
Pdembers Present: Mr. Herris, Nix�. Storla, Ms. Schnabel, Ms. Mod.i� (in place of
Mr. Oquist)
N.e�rbers Absent; Mr. Oquist, Yd�. Pe�;ex�son, Tf,r. I.angenf�ld (arrived at 8s15 P.M. ) '
Othera Pr�sent: Nr. Eoardman' City Planner
l. A,PPROVE t LaNNIi�?G COI�".MISSION N�PaiJ'I�S: JANIIARY 2�+, 1979:
MOTIO�i by Ns. Mcdig, seconded b,y N;r. Storla' to approve the January 24� 197g,
mir.t?tes of �he Plarning Cozmission as zax°it�ten.
UPON A�'OICE . VOTE9 ALL VOTIP�G AYE� CHAIRM�N HARI�IS DFCLARED THE I�;OTION CARRIED
LTTIAiV'IP�IOUSLY .
2. RE^ITEST FOR �t LOT S?�IT I,. S. �=-7�amOl, �Y P-'P,RVIN QP��D ROP.E�T ERICKSON; Split
of�' �he 4�es�erly 7�.99 feet oF Lo-t �0, �'ludi-cor�s Subciivisien �i�. 99 tQ ;,s�ke
� two �uildiiig sites fo� double bun�alob�s� �the sa�ue bein� 1285-�i'j and 1295-97
Norton Av�nu� T�?.�`. .
R"CTIO.� ry I�x. Storlae secondea by Ti�. Schnabelr -to t�bl� lot spl.it request, L.S.
�`�79-01. Tllzs itEm tablec? at *he petitior.ers re�uest.
UPOi�i A VOICE VOTF� ALL• VOTI£;G .AYE, CIiAIRAqATd I-'�ARRIS DECLP.RED T:IE N_CfI'TON CARRIID
UN�iVI1�'OtTSI,Y .
3. Ct�:�i'TP3tiF'�; Pl?OPO�`�D CF�?P,��;ES m0 C�L!1D�'EF; 2rJ�. ZC:iIi'?G:
NdTIO�i by A�s. Sch�at�el, Geco�sded by Ms. Mcxii�, to rec�ive minutes frcm ��ember
Cvmmissions on pro�csed chur.�es and to receive -che minutes of the �amrntulit�T
Developzue�t Ct��rsciss:io�7 a�' 1�'ovember l�+p 197�.
tJPON A L'OSCE VOTE, ALL 'trOTIn�G AXEe C�L41�;2�V IiAFRIS I)�CL?RED T.� r`_OTIOIT Ck.�RIED
UP1A:�y I�'OUSLY .
f�s. �oarc3m�n s�.u�tec� he h�d gone ihrou�;h t!ie r�inutes of th•� A�peals Co�issien
- a��' �;he Coir.?r,t�.nit,y Pevelop�res�i. Co.�mis;;i or� ari�a recc+rde� th�ir i°ecor,lmended chan;es
in h's ',aol: 'i"r;� �'rl��irvn�ren'�a1 Qu�li.f,y Coirlm.issie�za h�d no;; ma8e any specifie �
r�cc���:�.r;,�r��i.nJ�s, �<� they coti.ld discuss 'tho�e L�i.nutes 1��e�, N�r. �ioflrdma�.l
�ia��e;-�,�:� � 1}ey �;o t,112'OLl�h -the hook ;��ge by p;��ey the �aay the Comm:i.ssions did, and
tr��y COU�Il �.S].JCUJE �.� th�y �a�rit alozl�.
,,.,� P•'�° . Fiar. ri. ; ��,�r�e3 .
�'�". ���3r��'�"?,� :��t.ate:c� �;hey cau7.d t,:en �;� 1�<<cat �nd rnake a�ditiorial cor..nients c�r CFIyI1�C�J
�t�'t�r th��.• 1��� nor�� tt�Y«u.nh �h� �,}�o�_c� ?�oirk.
�:,�
PLAT�PtING COt�iNiISSION M�TING, FERPUARY 28, 1979 -' PAGE 2
Ms. Schnabel su�gested they receive the minutes on the a�end� Pirst and then
go back to this. �
.�
M6Ti0r? by P�s. Schnabe].� seconded by N1r. Storla, to continue the proposed. chan�es
to Chapter 205. Zoning, until the end o� the meeting.
UPON A VOICE VOT'E� ALL VOTII`�G AYE, CHAIRMAN HARRIS DECLt�REi� THE NK)TION CARRIID
UIVANIMOUSLY .
4. RECEIVE HUP�Sf�N RESOURCE5 COh'�iISSION MINU'I'ES: �xu�,�Y Z, 1979_:
MOTION by Nir. Storla, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, 'co receive the �'ebruary l� i9799
Human Resources Co�uission minutes.
Mr. Storla stated that Ms. Swanson had reported on the ac�Civi�ies of the Fine
Arts Cornmitfee. FIer report was very acurate. Also� on -the ].as� page of the
minutes� P�4r. Storla n�ted �;hat tY:ere �ras a train3i� program• on Febru.ary 24th for
�h� nesa Memorandvm af Agreemen�c. The training session lasted abou� 8 houxs and
the Huznan Resources Commission will discuss it tomorrow.
UPON A VOICE V�'1'E, ALL VOTING AYEy CHAIRY�IAN HARRIS DECL.�RED TH� MOTIOTI .CARRIID
UNAPIIMOUSLY .
5, RECFIVE ApT'EALS COMNLSSION P�INUI�S: FEBRUARY 13, 1979:
MOZ'ION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Ms. Modig� to receive �che Februax°y 13� 1979,
App�als Con�nission minutes. �
1
Ms. Schnabel stated they had srent quite a bit of time discussing �he requesi on -
the substandard lot or� 2r.d Street. This request h�d epme before the Appeals �
Co�ission in Novembe-r, it went ichro��,h the Planning Gommission and the Planning
Comnissio�� had reccr.�:ended �,o Council t!aat i;he request be ta�led for 90 days. The
90 days is up, and Council had asked Appeals to review �he request again because
they had received two new pieces of inforn:atior.. After revie��ring the request� the
Appeals Co�ission decided they �rere on targe� the first time. .
Mr. Harris asked wha� the new informa�Cion was.
Ms . ScYinabei stated that in 1Vovember they wex�e told the house SdaS condemna�ble, that �
the City vie�red the house as a conde�nable �aece o� p�operty and the City would be
inclined to condemn i� and would order i�t torn ��own• It turns aut that in fact the
City does �ot look at that piece of property in trat li�h�L at all and thi.nk that
�he buildir.� is rehabilitable. They rrere alGo �Lo1d vei°L�a�.ly at the Ptove�ber me�tin�
th�t approval oi bu�ldir_g on -�his property probab]y wc�uld not effect the court case.
They were told �hat this z,*as the opinion of the City A�torne,y. A«eek or so later,
-they recei� ed a letter frem the City Attorney in t�llich he said it prob�bly co�il.d
e�'fec-t the court case. A's. Schnabel s�iated thai; ��heir feelirig was that there would
have �co be so much reiiovation done if �.t ti�as �to be just renovated, The structure � �
oriGnially �rss a chicken coop and at some point scuteon� mo��•�d into it. It is in
bad sr�ne and str.L�.ct�:rally i-t n.eeds a lot of �:*orl�:. The Ap�eals Coun�is�i.on felt �
that by rermitti��g �Lhis to b� d�ne, in a sense, they really <<*ould be �;oing at a
lot� renovation rather tban al.lowin� building an A�0 foat lot. As P�tr. Barna s�a'�ed �
on p��e 8 of f;he minu�;es, it ��r�uld be a rehnbilii,ation of tile 1o�L ra'ther than a �' `
rehabilitation of the hoase� as �pposed to st�ri,i7.� out wi�th a vac�nt j�-0 i'oot lo� -
�nd allowin� s�n;e�.h�_n�; to r�e buil� on it. 7".r�y �el�`-� this ��as a rea1. distinction.
They dici not, ieel tMis would �r�judiee �the couru cnse becau�e of this dis�;iiic�:��on.
,�:-,,
PLANT'lII�;G COt�/u'�1.Z'SSSOi'I MF�ETIP�G� FE?'.RUARY ^�� i979 - PAGE 3
Ms. Schnabel also noted that i.n this ctzse, thi� tirss rehabilitat3on thaic the
nei�hbors WEinted' and in the other cases, the nei;hbors did not want i�.
Mr.� Harris stated he agreed with Mr. Herriclt that�it would have a bearing on
�he case.
Ms. Schnabel str�ted their distinction was th�t most of the other �+0 foot lots
were empty Qn.d �re curren�ly empty. This lot had been occupied by a structure
that people have been living ir: for 20 some years. They ],00ked at it as rehab-
ilitation, as o�posed to allowin; a new structure to be built on an empty �+0
foot 1ot. The Commission recovnnended to Council again� that this petition be
approved.
Ms. Modig stated that if they were goin� to tear i� down and start ovez�, it would
be a vacant lot at some point.
Ms. Schnabel stated i� wc�uld be vacant for on].y a�inimal alnount of time. It's
not like it was al��ays vacant.
Mr. Harris s�tated tha� it appeared to hin tha� the Building Tnspection Department
said that it was a m�rginal building at laest. A1r. Harris stated that the minutes
stated tha� P9r. C1ar1{ s��,id tha'c the electr�.cal, h.eating �,nd plumbing was not all
that bad. Structurally' the floor joists were over sps�n�ed' i;he rafters were over-
spanned, and it was hard to te11. what �,ras in the walZs. N�r, Harris no�ed �Lhat the
setback of the existin� s+ructvse was 20 feet from the street.
n Pis. Schnabel stated the setback For the propo�ed strucfiure would be 30 i'eet.
P�ir, u�:rris s�ta�:ed he �ras concerned abou�t several -thir��s hc�re and asked R'!r. Board�an
when the City first h�d a building c a7e.
Mr. Board�nan s�;ated he thou;ht it camc: around 1959 or 1960.
I�Sr. Ht�rris stated h� ��or.dered how� th�y �at into this place and ho�a they got services
sucli as el.ectrical and plu�'oin�. It had to be inspected by the S��te Electrical
Inspector.
I�i�. Bo�rdman sta�ted �ch� old fi_1es did not cont�iin much Ynf'ox°n;ation to heZp on this
�u�stion.
A�r. Harris stated tha� tlie existing house bo�,rde�s on being unfit for hum�n hab�.tation.
Ms. Scrnabel stated it nrobaUly wras and the CitV �*oui.d not allow i-i; 'co be re�ited
out �;ain, but the O��'T'��Y' i;ou�d ]_ive in it i� sh:� ���nted.
��r. :Iarris as��d if the l:o�ase �ras pre��ntly vacant.
A•1s. Schnabel st�t;ed it was.
Aix. r'arris askcd �,aha�l� I•ir. ;_'erric�,e s opin; on zr�G on this.
0
�� �.s. Schnr-�1ae1 re,�xd €� Z�ci�°tion of t.he 1et�;rr Srom Pir. He�z'rick da,ted Novembe?^ 21��, 197�
ss follows;
PT,ANNIPIG COP�MIISSI0IV �, ING, F'EFiRUARY 28� 1979 _ P��E �
"As you and the members of the Appeals Commission know, the granting of a variance
is.discretiona�y with the City. I� should be done only �ahere there are unique �
circumstances tha� impose a hardship upon �th� awners of the property. This hard-
ship must be one that was not sel.g-imposed or asaumed when the buyer acquired the
property. �
In this particular circumstance, it a�pears that �here is a dilapidated house on
a 40 foot lot. This, of course, 1.s a non-confoxnning use under our existing ordinance.
Generally speaking, non-conforming uses are not to be encoura�ed. The intent in
allowing a non-conforming use is to permit the owner to use the property for its
useful life and then to have it removed.
In this particvlar case� it would appear that the City's options would be two:
1. To declare the building unfit for habi�Cation and hazardous
and haSe it removed.
2. To grant the request for variance and allo�r the cons�ruction
of a new building.
The merits of the two alternatives should be considered by the Appeals Commission
and the Couneil before making the �inal dec3sion.
I believe that the granting of the req�aest migh� we].1 create some problem for �the
City as far as existing and iuture requests for construction on �+0 foot parcels.
If it is �ranted, the City would have to take a posi�cion that the circwnstances in
this case were differents 1) because there was already a house on that lot,
which created a subs�tantially greater hardship on the o*axier �ha� in tYiose situa'Lions
where the lo� was vacant; 2) that the granti;�� of the variance was compatible
with �he neighborho� and would not have an �dverse efrect on the property values
of the adjacent properties or the health, sa�fety and welfare of the surrounding
residential area. In order to ar�;ue successfully the latter poinic, it would be
necessary to have facts and figures that would dii�erent,iate the neighbarhood in
this situation from neighborhood.s where other requests have been made."
Ms. Niodig no'ced that there were o�ch�r houses near t.here on �+U foot lots.
Ms. Schnabel s�tated the�e were s9.x on that block including one immediately adjacent.
Mr. ?iarris asked i�' there was ar�y available vacant praperty on either side of this
iot . -
A4s. Scl.narel :��ated there w�s
and the o�le �o the north is a
to the proposed structure.
no property �vailable, there are houses on bo�th sides,
�+p ioot lot. ihe llouse on the 40 foot lot is similar
Rfx. `-i�rris sta�t�ed tha� in this �arfi.ictil.ar case, il�e�r .rec:ommendation w�s the rest
of the •al.'te�nat.ives available.
N�s. Gchna.�el utated they did .�ot see ��y otycer way to �o. Tf the;; left it there' it
would t�ecome a nusiance� a hazza�d arid ��*ould huve a deterioratiii� effect on Lhe
ne i�hb o�•haod . ,
M.M. :i�rris� stated he ��ras concerned tha-� .trzs si�Lizntion has existed far 20 years �nd
nothin� was do?ie about it� �i�l�at ixz �Lhis cla3� �rld a�c, peo�ile t�ere livin; ira chicken
coops•
�
�
_,�;�,,
4.,...
PLAI�1NIPdC COI�'��II�SION P�r!'TNG, FEPRUARY 28, 1�37� PAGE 5
Ms. Schn,�bel stated that the other side of it was the fact that the present owner
rras in � nurein� hpme �nd she has a p�i�ential b��er. We don't know her iinanci�zl
� circumstances' but maybe she needs the money. Physic�lly, she is unaUle �:o do any-
thind with the property her•s�li. If they deniea this, they wouJ.d be placing a
burdeal on her. -
Mr. Lan�enfeld stated that in approving this request, the Appeals Commission should
note the special circuwst�nces so as not to set a precedent.
Ms. Schr.abel stated they felt this was a unique situation from other �+0 foot lots
because tl:is had a structure on i•t where the other �+0 foot lots ��ere vacant. Ms.
Schnabel reiterated Mr: Barna's statement that this was really rehabilitation o�
the 1ot.
Ms. T°.odig asked if �chis z��auld go on to CouncYl.
Mr. H�arris stated 3.i; �aould.
T��^. Harris noted they had tabZed the i�em in Riverview Heights.
Ms. Schnabel s�tated they had because the peti�Lioner was not prepared.
Mr. Eoardman s�a,Jted they had received another r�quest in the same area, jus'� north
of this one. I�s. Boardman sL�ges-ted that �the Planning Cemmissian recommend a
mora�torium on buiZdii�g iu that area.
P2r. Har�is stated �hey would have to discuss 'cha�C issue, and make a recommendation
to Cour�cil.
UPON A VOICE �TOTE, ALL VOTIN:: Al'E, CHA1�2Ml�PT F.ARRIS DECLP,RED I�Ol'IOPI CARRIED UNATTIMOUSLY.
6. RECEISIE CO?•'��'�!NITY D^S,.�LOFP�iETJ�' PR.IVIJ�1'ES: :F'EE�?�iI.aRY 13 �.979:
�OTTO�T by Ms. I�iodig, seconded by� I•�r. I,ar���nfeZd9 to receive the Febxuary 13� i979,
Convnunity Developr�en�t Commission minutes.
N',r. �n�enfeld stated that ot� pabe 3, the s�co�d para�raph� N,r. Eo�rdman st�a �ed
there taas an a,Zterna�ive rou�e to Osborne Road by dropping do�rrn and using 73rd Ave.
as soon as possible past Lasi; ?i��er RoGd. N1r. Langenfeld asked what they meant by
as soon as possible past Eas'c River Poad."
N;s. Ma3ig si;�,ted th�y were concert�ed about the changing of th� s-Lrippin� on MYSSissippi
r�l�cl b�cause they hsve a lot of bike tra�'Fic9 �;hey �aant to get something going on
this. ��cco�•ding to �he �:^ay fi.he bi��e�ra,fs tire�°� set up, �h�re was -i:•he poasi.biZity that
ch�n�es would iiave -t.o be m�.ae with reroutir.� and they wa:�ted �o get going on �t�e
ali;ern�fives.
P�s. 1?oardnan stated that the �aord °'past" mayUe shou7_dn't have been ��.sed. �hey meant
to say• usi�iJ 73rd Ave. ns soon aQ possible to conrect u� to £ast Ri�•er Foad."
P��°. 3'o:�xdt::;�n s-tzted tl:ey co�aJd tise Co^+i�l�rce or they do h.-^.�.-e bilfe e�sements ?1 rel;ind
th� i�IC?ust.ri.�1 p: o��^r±i�^ tY��-�t go t.ip i;c �sl;orr,e. �'Iie,y ��ri.l_2 h�ve -to u�e OSbpY'Tl� s
^ lif:�Ze uite nnd .r,ould pre.�r�t�1y kecp sou-�h of Osbors,� or. se�;n� ea�ements, to �et across
� the -tr�cts. T..-c 1aol,s like c�sl�oriie Road �ail]_ �o to iour l�nes in �L-hat area too. �o
th�y had l�ei;-��r st�x�i; �a�..�,nnir.�; ri�h� �ow tic �e�t dc;�n -to 73i�c1. yhey c�n �;o on the
s �x°ee t o�i 73rc� .
.�,�� ::
PLANNING COt�IISSION MFETING, FEARUARY 28, 1.97g - PAGE 6
Mr. Hr�rris s�tated if' they get the singlization on 69th which Council apparently
passed on Monday night, that would help.
Ms. Mo+3ig stated flhe fel� strongly �bout some'chir.g being done about the bikeway on
Mississi�pi. The County said the�T sh�uld have fbur lnnes of traffic nvailable there,
but they allow parkin� so they still have only two l�nes of' traffic, and bicycles
besid.es. In the minutes, they indicated they would like to see something done
about taking over the boulevard area be�ween the sidewalk and the street �nd �11ow
the bikes to go there� eiicher on one side of the street or the other.
Pdr. Harris stated that use of the boulevards was not a panacea either, because that
puts the bicycle and pedestrian traffic side by side. Hota could they keep them
separa�te? �
I�. Poa�rdman stated 'that ri�ht now, on 73rd �hey don't have the type of traffic
that they �JOUld need to �o off-street. But �hey should plan to ga off-street at
a later 'cime. Mississippi Street would have to be off-str�et� on the sic�ewalk.
Mr. Harris asked i�' it would be y�ise to mix pedestrian tre�'�ic with bicycles.
Mr. Poardman stated they could Y+lacktop ii, mark it wi'ch stripping and mark it bikes
or pedestrian, and try to keep thPm separaved that way. Iie didn't know if it wou:Ld
work thai �rell, but they don't have room for bzkes on the road. Their ai�ly alter-
n�tive would be to eliminate P�i.ssissippi St,reet as a bikedray system.
b�. Lange�feld stated he wou.ld be against a co�bined biYeway�pedestrian system
near the senior area. �
Mr. Harris and Ms. A4odig agreed with P•^.r. Lan�enfeld.
T�lx�. Boardman stai;ed �hey had also tal:{ed abau� halring the biYeway on one side. and
the wall�aay on '�he other, .but they �rould still have the use of that i'acili�y for
pedestrian. If anyone wa�lts to get to Ho].1J Center, they would have to cross over
to the north side. P�1r. Eoardm�n sta�ed tha� during the revitilization o� the do�ma
to�an area, they could plan the bike and walktiray system into the area.
A�s. Modig stated sh� F�ou].d like to see the p�-rking -tahen off, but they couldn't take
the parkii� a��ray froin the residents. Ms. D7oc�ig asked if it was used as a four
lane road.
Ms. Schnabel stated i� was.
Mr. �iarris stated -that in tre future they migh� have to lwmit parking.
UPOP1 A �'OIGE VOTE, ALL VOTING ��i'�, CF�,IRPdAiT .i�'�;RIS DE^LAREA TH� NOTION CARRIED
UI1��NIA:OUSLi' . �
PQs. Schnabel s�ated they should �et on �;he mot,ion c�n pa�e 3 of the minutes.
/'��
�
,�
A;fl'?'IO�; L�� i�'s. r:�di�, seconded by 1��r. Storla, ihat the Pla�nin; Com.�ission recommend
th3t -Lhe l-�i':ew��,• system l�e cc�n�tinued on I•tississippi `'i�reet with off�s�reet bilcin�;➢
and to r�con�?�enc1 �ha'c r�n al-terna-tive bilceway roLtt� for Osvo.rne Poad be the use of �
73rci 1lvenue as soon ss pa: sible g�s� r�st Piver �oac�.
r1�. Selin;,:e�l asked iP ir t�he r��o?;�nend3tion for n"ississi��i Str.ee� theyr were -takizl;
a posi�,�.cu as to wi�ere i� Ghou7.d bE.
PI,�PINTIV�� COr�'IISSIO!'1 N�'ETI�1G' T�'FP,RUARY 2i, 1g79 - PAGE 7
�Is. Moc'..i� sta.ted th� posi�:Lon �ras to figt�r.e ou�t some alt�r�a�ive to what they
have. They r.ad mpntioned the boulevnrd or. havin� it on oral;� or_e side oi' the
street. Tlzere really �J3S2]�'G a great solution to any of it. Hopefull,y, they c�,n.
;� find some type of solution Uecause even i�' �hejr take the bikeway system off,
peaple. ivill still use it for biking anc� tha-� �cov�d be dangerous. Their opinion
was to do .�omethin� to eliminate as much danger as possible.
ih'OP1 A VOICE VOTE, A7�L VOTII�JG A`l�, CHAIRt�iAN HARRIS DECLARED THE MOTION CARRIED
TJ?VATd'IItiiOUSLY . .
7. R�G�IV� E1�nIIR0��P1Er�eTAL QUALZTY COP�iISSION MITV(�.�5: J.�?�UARY Z5, 1g79:
P�7drTOi�d by Mr. 7,an�enfeld, seco�.ded by N!s. Schn�bel, to �eceive the Janu�,ry 16, 1979,
Environmental. Quality Con,mission �inutes' and the ].etter dated January 12� �97g from
John Boland af the Nietropoli�Lan CounciZ, and also the letter dated Jt�nuary �5, 197g
from Claude C. Schmid'c o�' the i�:etropalitan Airports Cornmission.
Mr. Lan�enfeld stated �hat mos�; of the minu�i,es �ae�e i�Eems that h.�d been discussec�
last time.
Nir. Harr3s referred to the motion on ��ge 7 reg�rding the le�ter from the Charter
Commission. m
N.r.. Langenfeld sta�ed -�hey had received �he letter and had discussed and acted
upon it. P�'Lr, Langen.feld sta-tecl. th��t the Coma:ission's next serie� of minutes would
answer a lot oi' these i�tems.
n �F,r. ?�aY?�enfe.ld asked I�r. �Bo�rdman ii" �her� was an ordin�.t�ce regardin� junk ear•s
because they l�d a situation ��rhere there were 4 or 5 cars p�rl:ed �or over t�,ro
years. Also, �here was a�roblerri wi�h mul�tiple occunancy in one part o� a clwelling.
xea�le were mo��:i�� ��±�t beca�.�s� so�i� you.l� people �rere c��atir.,r�, a mul�iple livir�g
situ�,tion. Coul� any�thi:� ; be done?
/'�
,
Ms. Boardu�n s�ated iaF the vehicle was ope-rable and had a current license' �they
could not do anyf;hing about i�c. As. poardman asker3 Mr. Langeni'eld where it was
located and s�;a�ed h.e wo.:ld ���ve someone look into it.
A4r. Lange�.feld sta�ted i-� �vas located a� lo0 63� �4Tay.
Nir. Lan�enfeld siated the let �ers f'ro� �he �ietra�oli.tan Ccunci� and �the MeY•ropolita,i�
Airports Co�;missi�n wcre replies i°rom lezi;ers he had T•rritten to t:�Ea�.
UP��v � V0.'�'CE ��OTFy AT,L �JOTTi7v 11YF��'9 C?iAZi�2•1�1N �L-^�iT"-�TS ��CLIL.�?�� TI-� ?��iQTTUN CARRIED
tTr����+iIR90U5LIr . �
8. F��'^EIV�' EP�'RGY �'ROJTG!' ccr.r����; 2�'LT.T;UfiES; J1�Td(,'AR`r 170 1979:
�:CfilC�d ?�y f�.r. I��tnt ez��eld, seco�zded by l�?;,. ::chnab�l, �o receive the Januar3' 17, 1979,
Ener�y Proj^ct Committee minutes.
n�. Stoi°l� �sl�ed *.ahat 0�y�d P stood for. ci� tL� 1.ast pa�e,
Ax. H�rx•is Utated that 'r0" meU�i-t o;.l. nnd 'rP" ��an�t; �rop�al.e.
�
PLANPITNG COI��('iSSI�r1 MEFTIN�.�� FE�RUARY 28� 1979 __ _ - PAGE 8
Mr. Lan�renfeld atated -�ha1c the Mr. Andex°svn mentioned in the top para�raph oY
page 3 was vrith Pti.nni�;asCo, no'� NSP. P�. Langenfeld alsa noted that on pa�e 6 �
of the minutes, in the fif'th para�raph, "12,000 haurs" should read 142�+�000 hours".
N�. Lan�eiifeld stated concern v�as expr�ssed at �,he last mee�ting re�arding the �oals
and objectives, and decidin� eyactly whr�t their �;aals should be. It was vexy
easy to get side�Lracted on technical things. They ��ill discuss goals �t their next
�nee�in�.
Mr. Harris brought the fifth paragraph on pa�e 8'co the at�ention of the Commissione�s.
This paragraph referred to the En�r�y Agency. _
UPOI�i A VOIC� VOTE, AIS, VOTING AYE, CIiAIRM-A�d H.AR�IS DEGLARID THE PdOT20r1 CARRIED
ITNAi1IN:0USLY . -
�. COI1TIPitJ�'�: PROPOSED C:T11?�1G�S TO CNAPT�2 205. ZOT�III�G:
Mr. Eoardrian st;at�d that �Lhe followir.� recomcnE�ded changea were mFtde by the
Appeals Commission and the Commu�i'ty Develop�ent Commission:
205.01 PLIRP�J�E
P�ge l, iirst paragraph:
"morals" .
�05.0� �o��s
�ppeais Commission recoulmended they delete the word
Page 1, �;�2: Appe�ls Co�ruissian recommended they delete tk��is sta�ement altogether.
l��s. Schnabel s•cated they felt this was wordy and really' didnet say anythin�
great and the goals should say wh�� �he Zoni?ig Ordinan.ce car� do and �this state-
ment doesn't do that.
The Commissioners concurred.
Page l, 7�3: Appeals a.nd Commu7iity Develog�ent reco�nended this statemealt read:
"To promote sound land managesuent and or redevelo�Tent af 'the corn�nu.nity" .
Tl�e Commissioners coiicurred.
p�ee ].' ��+• Planning Coi�:mission recommended they dele-te the word "ensuse" and
insert• the z�iard "promo'ce" . �
Pa�e 1, ;�5: Plannin� Co�ission reco�r:�iendec: they delete the word "secure" aud
insert �:re �.�ord Y4prerrote" .
pa�e 2, ;;';': Plazinin� Co°nn�issio:�� recomiuer.ded �;li�y delete �;he word "assure" and
inG�er� �:he word "�romotetQ.
p��� 2� ;'��• A�r. Boardm�n sta�;ed �rey slloul.d delete ��aord "and" �nd insert �aord "an".
�
p��e 2, ;�1Q: Apne�ls �na Com�unii,y Devc1����ent, �•?�omme?:d�d tbey d�lete word "ungrade°'
and insert �the ��*o.rd "a:ain�.�i�" . �
T��e �:o:rn��issiofiers cosicu�red.
PLANtdIPJG COT�'��;IS�IOi1 P-1�ETIl�i.��� I'EP.RUl�;Y 2�� 1979 PAGF 9
205.03 DLFIIbTZ�'TO:V�
Pag� 2, y�3 �1PARTT�1`JT: Appeals recommendEd this definition be retained. 2t, had
� been dele�ed. � �
Mr. Bc�ardrnan stc�ted it w�s deleted because tk�ey fel� the definition of apar�tment
was clear arld �hey didn'� need i�.
Ms. Schnab�l stated they fel� when a re�erence w�s mad.e in �he -iexi to someiching
specific like "r�p�ar�t�:en�", there shoulcl be a definition ior iic.
Mr. Boai°aman stated some terms ��ere co:nmon enou�h that they fel� it didn't need to
be defined.
N1s. Schnat�el stated that since there ��as a definition for hotel and moicel� there
should be a�7.istinci;ion made and a defini�tion #'or apartment. '
Mir. Eoardman stated he had no problem �i�h. retainin;� it.
The Corr�nis�ioners aUreed to retain the definitian of apartment.
Page 2, P?ew �3 ARILRI/�L SZ'I2�,TS: Communzty Dev�lopment recor;.mended they chan�e
the heading to read; "STRE�TS, ARi�RI1'iL". T�:ey also recorumended they delete
the t.�ord "�horoughfare" a�a+3 inser'c �the word "transportationrr,
The Coffinissioners coxicurred.
Page 2, �1+ 1�U'�'OMO�.;ILE P%.�J�R REY�`,Ti�; Cc,nau�anity Dev�lap.�ient recommended they cran.��
head ing t o read :"t :Q1'OR t,T�,'�iIC?�E I�,AJOR RE?'11IP," .
1�_�°. Harris st�t,ea tha� Trrould includ� motorcycles� snowmobil.es,outbo�rd motoz°s,
automobi�es, tractors' ete. '_"�efe is a big dii�'erezice betw�en tearing down a motor-
cycle er��ine and a automobile en�ine.
A•?r. Bcardman si��.ted -�h�t if thex°e �ere geii�� �o �hange that to ino�or veh�.cle, they
shoulel have a deiini�Lion of ma�or vehicle. ^hey would li�.it the si�e when they get
into �rhat a garage is ,
I�ir. Harris sva�i;ed t.hat w�,v fine as long as they covered it so�newheree
Tlle CerTM:�i�sioners concurred tl�ey needed a ae�'in:Ition far r�otor vehicle.
pr�ge 2: Cor�.mtan?i.y L`•c�vel.o�raer.�t question�d wh�+ber thPy .leeded � definition for
"TcdTQR ��':-:ICLE i�;? irT��: I'�r P!! nt° .
. b�. Zaardman s-c•�ied re did re� ieel t;hat wa� ne�e�s�ry because �ilythin� not covered
uz�d�r r�� jor r����xir w��ua.�? eome ti:nder mino:r r�e�air.
The CcmW�aiss:�cners concurred.
P��e 2, ��`c l�L'TO:��rYi..T' S�Rti'T.�r ;:a`":1TIOi1: Co:��r.�_tnity D�velor^:e�nt reco�ne:,ded �tl1�y
ct���7�;e i.}�e heac? i.n� tc °t?•,OTC!� 1!EcIIuL�r, SF.F;VICE SZ:+1`�'IC?id1P ,
�, Pl �nn � n� ��o.::i�; ��;:1.ori r�r_.��;.rn��:��ct �;t�e d�i'init i_��n re clz�:r:��ed �;o re�d as follows:
1er7 �I�tCi 47;1f.'.i:E.'. {�l7(>�. Ei��. (��`.}]PY' FSt'•C_'li'ti.i.F1Z �+i:iV�C�'� 7°C.7:Zi.C(� •�;O j;il-G' 01jC'iAi;1C`Il Oi'
rr.otor � c�hicle.,,�;�� re�;€�`..}.F��:i dir�ct.lv �o t�ir� �,urlic c�.: ��r°cr:ises� inclu�.ir.�;
1�;3.riai• ,,«r�v.i�:�;��; �_ici rel��,�.:�•m buL �oc includi��� mot��*° �<c,i�i:.el� �i�jcr p•e��u�z•.
�:�•- -
PL�,NPIING COP�PAI�SIQN P•'�;ETII�'G, �� RUl�RY 28' i97g - P�GE 10
Page 3, lst para�raph: Commuraiicy Development recor�aended �hey delete this p�ar�-
graph. •
The Corrnnissioners concurred,
Mr. Harris asked �rhere they were h�ndling se].i-service �,arages.
Mr. P.oarclm�n st�.ted ichat would come under the definition of motor vehicle major
repair. .
Page 3, Old �f� AUTO 4JRECKING OR JUIdK YARD: Appeals had a question� regarding 'chis.
Ms. Schnabel stated Appeals wanted a defini�tion far "AUTO SALVAGE, AUTO Z�RECKING".
I✓�. Boardman stated that would come vnder definition �43 JUDTK YARD.
Ms. Schr_abel s�t,ated i;hat firsic of all they wan�ed "Junk Yard" redefYned ar.d
secondly, trey didn' �t �think that "JUI`IK Yt�RD" rlecessarily applied because most
people use the ter� "Auto �alvage" in -L-heir ti�tle.
Mr. Boardman stated his su�gestion was that tk�ey use �Lhe wordin� "JUI�TK YARD; AUTO
SALVAG�:" ar_d then say junk yard Trrould include au�Eo �arecking yard and auto salvage
yard, but does not include uses that are entirelSr tai�Lhin enclosed buildin�s or
City Council approved recycling centers. ^lhey do not �:*ant to have bat-�eries, iron
scraps, etc.� which is normalZy wha'c would be classiiied as a junk yard. he �'elt
they pretty �•rell covered tha� with �;h� s definit�ior..
A'�s . Sehnabel asl�ec7 ii auto saZvage 47£�Sila � really difierent �'rom a junk yard .
�
Mr. Boardman sta-�ed thaic the �.aiu thing they locr at �there was not �he definition
of wh�t a junk yard is but the nature o�' the opera �ion: If thes�e was outside storage
of inope:.able vel�icles, which we call junit vehieles, that's in the defini�,ion.
Thereicre, even �thou;h they are salva�abley i,Y�:�y don't sal.vagE them within that yard
or re�ai� them within �that S'ard. An auto Ualva�e ya.rd. hold those vehic�es and se11s
those vehicles ior salva�e elsewhere. F?hat they have in effect, is an operation
Yahere tlzey haul in inope-rable vehicles for sale for s�lvage.�o be repaired.
PRS. Schna�el sicated she fe].�; the difi�rence from �z �i�i'� ya� was that in that case,
an automobile remains in tact, �-rliereas in a ju�k yard it wc,u].d be torn apart in
diiferent pieces.
R�r, �oardTM.un �tated it «as s�;ill the s�me type o� operatian. They are storing in-
operarle vehicies on a site and whe�her you have an at1to �rreckin� yard where they
break down those parts for stora�e or you have a.n auto salva�e yard where they don°t
'�reak do«i tY:ose parts for stora�e aY:c1 they se1:L the �rehicle as a part, he ��ould
lnok at it in i.he same r!�nner as havins batteries, eld tractors or wha�ever• Ne
�rishes they had n�ver sllotr�d �chem in.
b�r. L.�n�eri�eld stated th�y could insert the words "nature of operation" at the
beginn� 1,� of the d�:finitic���� �nd in Old ��6 iilsert tibe �JOrds "�ee Definition. 7��+3".
nqs. Schnsl?el sts�Led th� AppeUls Commission ielt the�e shou7.d be a separate definition ^
f or "i�t�0 :'.4T �'A��p ALt�'0 �•�I�FGKI�dGr, .
�:�
i LANNIN:� COI•�fISSTdPI ?RFETII�G, ��}aRUAR'C 28 Z97� - PlIGE 11
� P��. Lo�,rdraar, �ta�Led that Cornmuni�Ly Development haa recommended they ellmina,�te
junk yar.d from the cade. ".'hey're u�yin� �that a junk yard is no lon�e� a le�al
� u.sA in any zone. They are existira� non-conformin� uses, but there is no longer
' a grovision for Nj-,eci�1 Use Permi�Ls.
N,r.. fI�xris sta�;e�. they �•rerP a fact of life.
Mr. Baa.rdm.an st�ted they had the authority to zone �them au•L- of the cormm�ni�ty. Did
-they want them in th� community? They can establish tkie standards of the coimnunity.
l�r. FIarris st�ted thP�r woulc� t}�en te a non-conforming use with no provision for
� Special Use Permi-t, but now 'chey do provide fo� th�m?
Mr. f;oardman stated. that was the case.
Mr. Harris suggested they pu� a ques�;ion mark on this item and he �aould talk to
Council and see what they wanted to do. .
Page 3p New � pASET��TT; Comraunity Development stated they had a definition for
"�ASEi�1F�1�T2'" and a definiiion for T9�,�RTf They recommended h�,v3.ng only one
C3.@i1211 u1021.
I�1r. �oardmau stated he fel� tliey did need two definitions.
The Corr,mission�rs concurred.
Pa�e 3: Co�rnuni-iy Develo�aa�enf: reco.nrnend�d i�he addi �i.on of a clefinition for
t1�%yf�dAY4° . The definitiolz ��ptal.d r��a� �3 �'ollows: "A desi�r�at�d s�arf�ce �fo�
use of Y,icycles".
The ConLnissieners co�.curred.
Pag� 3, ;r10 BtTII,,`�I�T�; Appeals reco�nended they delete the u�ord ttchatiels".
Tiie Co��iissioners concurred and reco�nmended -c1�ey i�sert the words "property oi
ar�y ki�d" .
Page 3, Olei �ll BLT?�IiqBLE AIi�; Appeals rec�uunen�ed they retaial this definitior..
p&be 3, ;�13 C���LA�: Appeals reco�^.�.�ended -L-hey delete �L�Zis defiili�;ion.
I•is. ScY:��t�el s�atcd -tl�ey did not ileecl this defii�i�Lio� becalise it zaas not used
a�,ytar�ere eise in i;he xex'c.
l�:-r. Boardn,an asked if thc:� Lts�d "I;r�E;:>i�Pd191 ar�,tah�re e1 se in �the i�er,t either. He
recora�.er�c�c? -the�� nut a questiar m�rk ry 'tLl�;?L'��:.�;T" a,-�,c1 see ii it ��r�s used �r� the
� ex�; ,
Page 1+, �'�Z�� CIr:1I�rr.�L; COtiL*1'ILLlI.'i,;j' ;��veZonn:eZ� recom?nended t;his c:e�itlition
re�d as fGllc+°��s; "���l.e nat,��Y°3�. Ol" �?•t.if�icial c1e1�z°es�;io�� ef �erceptible e.tc.�nt�,
�:*:itli c�efi�i��e bed;; ��d �;,�:zks ir� coniiue and ca��duct; waGer eii;her cc:�-ti.iousl,y
o.r peri.odicf��.1S�,,,
,•-•.
r �
PL!-�NNII'dG COP�SSIOAI tSEFTII'1G, I'EfiRUJ�FZY 28, 1979 ___- PAC,F. 12
Pa�e 4, �15 Ci�URCH; Corranuni�y DeveloPment recommended they delete the worc�s:
"to�ether with i�ts acceasory buildings a.nd uses."
Mr. Harris asked �:ow they handle accessoay buildin�s for a church.
Mr. Beardman s�Lated i� was an aZlowable use.
Page �+, �'�16. COLLEC�OR S�T; Community Development reco�nended
changed to read: "ST�tEET� COLI.ECTOt�". They also recom�ended
word "thoroughfare" and insert the word "�cranspor'cation".
The Co�issionexs concurred.
Page 4, �18. COMPAi'IIiI�:
Mr. Harris questioned this definitivn.
the heading be
they de].ete the
P�r. Boardman stated the reason "Compa�iible" was in ihere was that later on they
put in a clause th�t the City Staf� wou].d �le'cermine whether so�ething was com-
patible or not� to the area.
N.�. Hmrris stated some of these were judgemen'c calls.
Ms. Schnabel sug�ested they use the dictionary definition.
Nir. Harris su�gested �hey put a question mark by thi� defini'cion and come bacls
to i�.
Page �: Apgeals recoramended they insert a de�inition ior T'CO1VDGi�`•I1dUM" vetween
�18 and �Tlg .
Page li, �19 CORIr'E:� LOT: Com.�nunity Deve].opment recommended �he heading be chan�ed
ta: "LOT, COR�tER" . � •
Page �+' ;,��- DOUELE rRONTAGE LOT: ApPeals and Corr.�u�ity Deve�opment recommended
�his definition read as iollows: "A lot which has cp�os�te lo�t lines on tr�o
no�-intersecti:�g stree�s. Poth street liues shall "oe considered as �ront
� yard.s." A1so chanoe headin� to read: "LOT9 DOUF3LE :��P�]Tr�GE".
The Cou�uissioners eoncurred.
Page 5, ;�26 D��;ELLI�IG, LIP�ff'T�U: (Z�".OTF�-IN-L4T�: APphTi"�P;T) : Appe�ls Cor�iss�ion
reco�nend.ed they c�e:Let�e the ��rords "A'��'IP,E11m:�P?-LAZ�� kP�IRT���IT".from hea�.ing. ��
Co�unity De�crelap�ent Co:n�nission recorurdended :;he�* delete �•�ord '�s��7le-fa:�ily
ar.d insert word "one-family". I�ir. l�on.r�llilan no��ecl �,ha'c in oTlie-r deii�itions�
t��e �lppeals Con:�nissio.i 1�.�,d rec.ommendea t.��e use of "sit��le�fa�ilti''T rather �tha�
"one-fan:ily". TYie F:��eals Cam:�.ission also recom��nded 'thEy del.etc tr.e �aords;
ttW1tY1121 O�� ,�,G21�r�."�1GI1�� . •
I•"x. no��d��=�r_ st.ate� tha�L in dele�;�.n� :,r� �ac�rc3s "within oiie �;��ner��Lian" the� r,oula
loose coutrol �s to ta}lo �$ould u�c thr�� apar±:r�er.�. :I'he°1 :"�ould i�ave co�l�rol because
otherwise t,hey ��ill have ��l;wo un_ii: home in a sin�;le �auiily area, ig that a�art�ent
is x°ented �,o j�tst anyone other �than a"uiother�iza�J-aw" •
�1
/�1
�
PL�N�VIr1G COt•��qI�SiOr1 PFr:,FTSI�TG, FI.F:F,UA?�Y 28y 1979 - Pl�GE 13
Ms. Sr_hnabel �sked why �he� would `rant •to contral it as lon� �E �ch2y weren°t doing
enyi;hia�g.� .
�1 P�ir. F'oar�imai� ststed �tha� 3n �he �irst �lace, ii they were going to have a ttao tzriit
d.�relling, i� shouldn'�L he in a single famil�T erea. Tf they set up two•apar-�men'cs�
they are se'ctin� up � du�Iex, and by allo�rin� a"�nother-in�lew't apartment9 they
woulcl be o��ning themselves up to it becoming a duplex.
N�°. tiarris s���ted tha-� wi�thout �he code allowing for a mother-inmlaw �partment, people
w�uld �t311 do it without the con�rol oi makir�g su�e it was properly ventilated� etc.
hRr. ?3oardm�n st�ted. that by allo�ring it they have the poteni:ial oF having two iamilies
in ane etructure, �ahicb F�ould chan�e the CZ@TIS1'tjr' allowed in that ax°ea.
hir. Fiarris s�;ated th��t old peopl� do exist and �o�e iamilies have the need o�' havin�
them live with tl:em� and i,hey c�.nnot ignore 'ch��; fact. Tl�ey canno'� throw �he o7.d
folks out onto the stree�t.
i�trr. P�oardman no�ed that t�e ic3ea Df duplexes had been discussed and i'c vras decided
that they would not be allo*aecl in an R�1 area even with a specia]. use permi�. `�he
City Council stated �hey wanted �o elimina�e dupler.es in R-l. Nr. Boardm:an asked
if theyr should requir� a speci�l use nermit for "ano�her�i��la�r" apar�ments in R-1.
N,r. E-:arris s�a�ed tl�at �ould one w�y oi con'trolling it.
Nlr. Board�.�n stated that once the special use permit �sa� gran�ed9 they still had
Yl0 4TaS� of controlli�ug it.
� Mr, K�rris su��;es�ie� 'chey re�hink �Lheir definition of theix� �rh�l� i?m1 �rea ar�d pu�L
` a queation a��rk by it and he vr�ulcl tall; ta Cot�n.ci1 a!ad seP �*hat +�iey wani;.
Mr. Board�naz� sta�ed he nad no prob�em wi�:h li�!i'tea dwelling� b�cause tha� is happenii�
al1 over.
T':r. H�rris ne�;ed tlis� �'rom the enerpr s-tand��i�'c, it migh't not be righ� to eliminaie
motiier- in� law ap�rtr�eri`t s.
I�r. Z�nU�nfeld notEd that th� r�er� Project Co��_ttee mi�ht well recvrnmend �ha�
fa�il�es joirz toge�her �o co�2serve enei�r. •
Ait . Boardrnan a;;reed th�.i. �he sin�le iamily hc�x�e t��as �aot ene-r�y effici�nt.
Ri�'. ��c�ar. r?r� an s�a �ed �h�t Ce?�e.mur,i��� D:�ve1 op�:�nt hGc? recor::��nded the use o.f' the ter�i
"are-family" ard :?pp�ais lZ�.c1 reec�mmeiide�. the us�e a.i the t�i� "sin�l���amis�". ����ieh
�.�y did th�;� �,�r�ni� t.o ;o? ��:�. '?o�rdm�n noted tr�a� i;hey did use �h� te:cr� "two-family" .
r4r. ��.3-ri ; asked l�o� i,r,ey u�ed it iai �h� P�,:irit�n�,��cP Co�.e: -
P�Is. Schn�i�el sta-�c�d -they used f1one���zr,i].y" . Put -4liroughoui, tl�e zoning code tex.� they
used t�„ -l-erm "siz,�le-z°�n:ily�" .
Ti.� Ccli:,�is�ior,��°s dec�,�c-.d th�� �'�;� 7�err� "ci��-i';+r.}�.1)�" sl�o�.td t,� usec? th�ou^;h��u•l'. the
�� trx�i, r�r.�3 i;;�e us� c�� "�iut�le�f.=�mi�rt9 tir�,uld be c�,�n�ed to �rL,ne-ia�;ly�" a.n 'che t��xt:
PLANiiIPdG CO��IMMTSSIOJd P2F�TIRTr, ���IiUARY 28, 1979 - PAGE 14
Fa�e 5, ��30 DT�iELL?P1r U:JITs Appe�ls Co�mission reco�n�ndeci this definition be
cha�ed to read the s�me as 'che Nlaintenance Code defzni�ion foz Dwellin� Unii: n
which is as follo�rs: °tA single unit providi;�g complete independenic livir��
. facilities for one or more persons including-permanen'c provisions far livin�'
sleeping� eatin�, cookin;; and sa�nitation."
The Commissioners concurred.
p��� 5, �;�31 FAt9ILi': The Appeals Ce�nission recommended this definition be cY:an�ed
�o read t.he same as the I��inneapolis definit;ion fox f'�mi13r which is as follcras:
"An lndividual or twa (2) o?° znore p�rsons rel�ted by blocd, ma-rria�e� or adoption,
� incl.udin� ioster children and bonafide domestic serv�.n'cs employed on � ful7. time
basis by the iamily in the dwellin� unit, living to�ether as.a single house- .
keeping aznit i� a d:�*ellin� tuiit and also ineZuding rociner�, provided �hat �he
fa�ily plti� the roomers shall not e�ceed a total of �ive (5) persons, nroJided
fu�'ther trat the limit of fiTe (5) persans shall not appl3r �'or the en�ire group
living in �che dwellin�; unzt consis'�s of �ex'sons relatEd by blood� m�,rri��e' or
adoptiony inclu��ing foster chilclreu ar�d do�E�tic servants, or a famil.y consisting
of parenfs an�. children and other p�rsons ��r'no all live together as a single
housekeepin� unit (no� as landlo:c°d an� ��enan�t�)9 sharing �11 expenses of the family,
and k*ho are r�ie�ners of � federal tux-exer�p-t non-profit organiz�tion; provided
-the �otsl nu�b�rs of persons �ther �tl�ar� nare��;s �.nd children sha1� not exceed
five (5} in number."
The Cc�nissionex°s corcurred.
Ms. Schnabei su��este� ��r. '�eardmaiZ checl: 'co see if the State l���r says 5 or 6.
1�;y�, I3o�rdr�a:� statied tha� ag��lies to group nomes arla tiras cove�°ed in the de�ini'tion.
pa�e 5� #3?, ��33. �3�+9 �35, �'36:
�'he Ca�missi.�ers concurred.
L�elete �17e wora "�eans" irom all these de�initions.
p��e 5y 7!!37 Gt�rti"v��� FRIVAT�: The P�a:�nir� Comii�iss�e::ers recommenaed they de)_e'ce
t}le �orc3.s T,recrea.t;on�l �quiprr:en� by� the resid:;nt o�' i:he properi,y°t and inse��
�t1e �ac�rd s"o�:1ex per sonal pro;��rf;y o�' the re sic,e,i-� .�
Pa�e 6p ;�38 Crf�u�iAG�, P'J�L'.�C; T��ir. 13varclrc�n x°er_ommended the�° dele�te the words "other
thazl a p� iv��te �ar�ge" .
Th� Ca�.^�issioners cor,cu�°rec� .
�
p�.�;E 68 ,r3� G�.:Z�Gg,p REp�?�t; The Appeals Co��issian r��d questioned -thiy defi��ition.
N.s. Selu�abel ;tatec? that ��pea.ls fe7t 'c,h�t �3� ancl ;;��;� ��a�s ve�y sSmi_lar to ;�•and �,�,�'�5.
N�r. Foas°d��3r state� th�t t}ie d.iifex•ene� �aas �ha� this w�.s ihe placp of an activitYs
whex�e 7i`�1+� ar-:d ;FS was -i.he ��c�tivity. �
Pa�e E, ;'�+U .f;RAGL, L�E'R;:E �?�l1�IF: Ch�.I:��e iieadin� 'co re�d "Gr'1F�AUF, HE�!VY Dt�'Y R�:P�11T;T4.
��
Th� CLr�:nissac�n��xs concu��re�d . _
Fa�e 6r C':� ;`;�27 GL��T �P,Ch^A�: �etain �hi:s defini�tio,� �ec�u:�e i�� �J UJ�� �.TS 4'�P. te�.to
7�k)P (,"t7?'il'�t�."i.�iC�YIE.'�:� C:Q:3.�^.11Y'T':',Ci.
-�-.�,..�.F-.
�
��-
�
i�1
�1
rLnNr?zr:� cor�.szs�zora r�rYrr�, r�pU���x z8, i979 �� - Pa�E 15
Page 6, �42 HO�� OCCUPATIGPI;
Mr. fIarris ques-�ioned this definition and whe�ther they could enforce i�L. .�
Mr. Lan�enfel�. stai:ed that insurance companies used a very similar de�inition.
I�1r. Poardrnan st�fed thrat �hey have eniorced it ancfi had left out parking which wnuld
be in.^erted .
The Commissioners agreed -to 'che degini�tion.
Page 6, Old -�g P.OSPIT?L OF SANITI�I'.IU1�7: It was recearnmended they retain this
definition.
Pa�e 6, 01d �#30 fI0'.PELs It was recomme�ded �;hey retain this cleYinition.
Page 6, �j43 JU:1K Y�s
discussion.
Page 6, ��1� KEATPIEL:
They h�d put a question �-iark on this earlier in the
A�x°. Eoaxdmari stated th�t in the oId ord.inance a kennel is not aliowed in a resiclential
area. In other werds, il a resici_ent has three or more d.ogs or cats, th�,t would be
defined as a ker�riely and a kennel is not allo�red in a residential area< 'I'lzeiefore,
a residen� canno1c have � or raore c��s or dags. Nlare than 3 cats would be classified
as a kennel. If �he,y allowed a lo� o�mer to have niore than 3 do�s, he wculd have to
get a�;ennel lic�nse 2nd there �aould h�,v� to b� s�rne c�n'cro? aver the oper�tion of
that kenneZ.
Mr. Harris stated he dzd no� 1.�3.�e the idea oi al1o�•ri.ng �nybvrJy to own moze th�n 3
d ogs in any residential zone, other �han puppies. ,
Mr. :�,oardra�n stated they had �roblems �•�i'ch �his befo}�e and had discus�ed aJ.lowin�
ken�cls vsi�th CGntrols such as �slacer�ent af �he kennel on the _l��t, etc, He h�d no
prob].em wii�h no�t allowing keni�els in residential zones. The a1_d Qrdinanc� does aaot
a11o�a i't.
The Co?rciissi�nex�s agreed i•o retain the old dei'inition a:�d inser�t '�he worda "and ca�s".
Page 7, �"!�5 K�1`V1,�Zt CO���.IEi�;C1ALe The Comxaissi one��s avreed to clele�e tl:is deii:�� t:.on.
Pabe 79 O�d �32 L.=�I'OItATOiti: It was recou±r�ended �;,hey retain �his defini�tion.
Page 7s ,�►-�?3 LCCFlL �i��•:�5: Ghange headin� �o re�d; "ST�'�E;ETS, LOCI�I," and dele�e
'��]e GIC�Y'C� ��'�'.'lOS'Q�1�Cl�'clt'E'�� � :C .7.11SG'Y'� 1,�1P Z�TOI'C� ��TT°�.L1Sj?OJ"��'t10?.19r.
'11�e Co�.�i.ssioneTMs coiicL;rred.
„�
.., p`cl"f'. �p ;' !,,.j'z;�::r �..'�'i'''.;: 'i�E �,C?:��'=SS7.O:_E.'1^: .'��'7'E;e:� tC C'i LIri�;C' �'ti �5 C�Psl?��::.OYl �O
re^r_I �s f_oll��rs: e1Th� flr�u oi a�>uild�u�;Jdec,i�;ne�, �� be i�sed �'or Iivin� pur»
^ �OS�`; S1iC�1 Faa �('?YOO:I:�p C�lilillr; I':,�Q2Sl:�y 1.1_V1.J7�� T°OUI;e3 �IYlLCkI aT'� USE:C� �U?' �F%Pl?l.�.j'
! 1 ]�!72'j?C)685,
_� _
PLAP�IJIP�G COP�I�:ISSIO:I NiCETIPIG� FEBRUI�RY 28 1979 - PAGE 1.6
Pa�e 7, ��+9 LOT: Co�rnnurai�ty Development Con�miss:ion qvestionec�. this definition.
Mr. iiarris s-cated trat he did not feet tl�t "]3" was c� correct si;atement and
su��ested they should chan�e the headirlg ta building site.
Pdr. Boardraan read the definitior� from the building, code for t4lot'r.
The Coaun�ssioners agreed. to change the word "lo�t" to "building si�ce" and Mr. Boardm�n
will check ���ith Darrell C1arY to see if -tha� tirould be a problem.
MOTIO:d by P4s . Schnabel, seconded by I�ir. Langenf'eld �co cantinue the proposed changes
�to Chapter 205. Zoning until the next meeting.
UPON A VOTCE VdI*E, ALL VOTIIVG AYE, CI%A�Id �1ARRIS DECLARID Z;� MOTION CARRIED
UTJAIV II �OUSLY .
10. OT��P, LUSiNESS;
Mr. Zan�en�eld aa?ced if Council had taken any action regarding their reco�rimend.ation
to Yeep fee increases to 7°�.
Mr, Flarris s�a�ed t1�ey did have a consensus oi' opinion. They did reach an agre�ment.
�
;
�
;
�
�
p�ir, Langen?'eld asked if th�y trould pick up the Central City Development on �he nex't n
agenda.
Mr. Harris stated tliey had star�ed on i�C and there was no�hin� �or �hem �o do. �
I�m, boa�edman statec3 he �rould k�ep 'chem inforr�ed.
Mr. Storl.a noted th�y hfzd not read the �ax increznen� fin�ancing at th� �i�e 'they
vo�ted . •
I�1r, Har�is s�tafecl �that was co��ect �nd be�'ore ��c� Plannin� Cormm.ission �ook an
oificial stand� th�y wou].d vyani; to discuss it. Ne requ�sted it be put on the next
a�enda.
A'�t., k�aardnan stated he za'ould 'take ct�re of 'ch�t.
rir, Iiarris stated �hey were �e�tting a lot o� 'rec�uests to i�uild sin;le family unii;s �
on substandard la�s in th� �'J_�od plai�. a.rea of �it�ca~view Nei�hts. :ie asked how
L�ar�}' parcel � were avai.laL le 'clzere .
Z.�, ;'•oardr�ar= �ta•4�a t,h�je w�re a�ouLid 7 or 8 buildir.� si�es in tre actual flood �lain
ax�a. -
}.�, T:�rr� j sf,ated that ��r drivinJ �thro��� tisere, he not•ed th�,t e�rei°vone oi them h�d
a prnv}.em �f .on,e s�r�t. They �re st�r�inn to ��'� a lU�C c�f re�,�les°�.s recausP building n
sites in Fricll�y are shoi•�.. mhey pr.esen�cl.y have �:�°o rPquests a~�d f•he buildin�; si�es ,
ar� 50 t,y 717 �i�ich is a pr�tty stn�ll lcat. �1
�
� -�--:� .
�'L�,NI3INC COAR•?ISaION I-�ETII�s, F'L'�F�U�ItX 28, 1979 - PAGE 1'j
• .. � .
P�. 1�an�er,feid �ta�ed he thou�ht �they were �c�ia1� to h�ndle them on �.n indiv9.du�1
� bas3.�. He did. not ieel ��i;hey could star�; denyin� now. They ha,d uever denied before.
E
A�. Harri� �t� t;ed h� f�l'c f;he City slzould. set a policy on it ae to what triey will
and w�ll not nllow He felt they should p�ss a r�solution �skin;g Council to
decZare f� IAOT'��O?'].IUC: on buildii�� perrriits an the flac�. plain in Riverviet•� Heights,
un'cil they cauld �ei; some data to�ether and set up some criteria for wha�: they
wou]:d allow ichere.
AIr. Pc�ardmnn st�ted 'chat the criteria ��ras alxeady established and iY they could
n�e� the requ�rements, they could build. °
Nir. L�,ngenteld no�ed that in all previous reques-ts in �hat area' he had stated
that the burd�n gaas on iche pe-�i�tion�r, not the CitJ. He was in favor oi a raoratorium'
and suggested Mr. Harris approach the Council and di�cuss it with them.
NOTIOTJ �y Ms. Schnabel, seconded. by I�ir. Lan�en�'elcly the Chairrcan o�' the Planning
Com.mission approach �he Council at the�r next regular mee'cing to diseuss with
Cowlcil the possit�ilat�r of dcclaring a mor.a_-tor�um orl building in Riverview i'lood
plain area until such time as cl�zta can be collec�ed and a study ma3e i;o de�termir�e
whether or not building should be �ermitted i� that area in -the futu�e.
P�t°. Lan�en�'eld stated he T�rould like th� moratarium established for 60 days. ThEy
�aould be helping the person who wan'c to build on it by maycin; them wa?t so �hey don°t
�et washed away.
� Itiir, �Uardman r�o�ted iha� il�� �?a�s w�s alre�dy ccll�c'ced an3. t•ro,zld 1ik� �o kno�t
_ exactiy wh��L data f.z�y �rani, , r?e s ��'t'd they co�a.ld lcol� �,t the al�erna'tives For
dev�lop�ent.
:;x . Fiar-ris st�ted �Lhey sY:ould. just �o to Cou_ncil and ask them �rhat 'they war�t to do
ti�a�;h these lats.
rir. Loa.rd�n��i su;�esi;�d t�^ey reques�c a mopatorium on al]. de�c�el�prnen'c in iche �'lood
pl��n ��1d -i,ha-t the City should loak a�c the pos�ibil_i�Fy ��' �u-tt�.ng an opt�.o� on iche
acquis:_ta.on of all o�' the rLeu�es in the �floa3 pZain area wh�r 'chey co�e up for s�al.ea
i:s. Schnab�l stated she did not li�,e the idea o�' the City gettin�; into tha'c l•ind of
business. �
t��s. Bo�rdman stated thai ir_ order to ma.,e tk��e area a bz!�.Zd^b].e ax°e�z they have to
fill � t az�d the ��ro��1.e:� is �t;ri�-t it �.s happerii�� piece�teal i:: a r�;.�do:n p��,tern which
ca�.i;?es drU-i.��;�ge �r�o�k�_le��, I:f �h� C1.�ty pu3°cY:,�sec?' -c:ne eri-�ite �rea, �tore dotaii -�l�e
e:�_is�i.,� ri�mes an3 _fi.Iled �he ��rhnle area a�c one�9 they could xesell tlie lo�s as
bu�.J_a�1�1e lats.
�i�; . S�1�:1.a�ael st�ted i:Y�at r�k,yLe �ch� c itizens of ;� r3.dley d id not w�n.� th�,t.
r�i:r. :�,rr; s:��t�,�c•d �,he�� �aQt!�.d h�ve i,o talk i;o Coualcile
?1POi�d ?} �,'QTCE '�'C?TF9 1?LI1 VQ'_!'�P�G :=,Y:�' Cfa'1T2'`L�Iv t'.l�.�ryS DrCL!`^�'D ii� l�i0TI0� Cl'1R1iII1D
�""� U:�f�;.1:�iC��`SLY.
PLAiu�il?�G COA�'�SIS`�I�J�1 I+�i�, TIN�"r FET3RU!+.P,X 2� 19 (9 - PAGF 18
Chai'rman Iiarris declared the Febivary 23, 1�79, meetin� of the Ylannin, Co�mnissi4n �
ad,journed at ].1:30 P.M.
Respectful.ly Submit�ed:
_.1/ "- � �j �����
' -" -`` �,;�:'�'' `.r-�- �
Kathy �'Y eltan� i�ecording Secretary
^
�
�
�:.�-t