My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1988 02 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1988 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1988 02 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:28 PM
Creation date
7/14/2008 10:48:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
2/16/1988
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1988 02 16
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
as written but would consider an amendment that <br />would call for a special use review that would <br />include, but not necessarily be limited to, <br />notification and approval of the majority of <br />residents within 500 feet of the property of the <br />proposed use. <br />Carnival stated that he does not have a problem with <br />what Mohr proposed. However, having a special use <br />review process for home occupations could certainly <br />take a lot of Council's time. <br />Scarpella stated that some people may feel that a <br />one chair business in their home would be <br />economically beneficial for them. Obviously, the <br />majority of people would look at a bigger business <br />which would require a business zone. Scarpella feels <br />that one does not detract from the other. "I don't <br />see where we are creating a problem by adopting this <br />Ordinance on that b,asis..." <br />Anderson stated that since the criteria is very <br />specific in allowing home occupations and that this <br />Ordinance adds furthher restrictions, in his opinion <br />the only issue remaining by using the special review <br />use procedure would be determining desirability in a <br />specific neighborhood. Anderson asked Williamson if <br />that could be used as criteria in either permitting <br />a beauty/barber shop or not permitting this use in <br />any specific residential location. <br />Williamson responded that that is a criteria that <br />Council could use in permitting that use in any <br />specific residentialL location. <br />Williamson further responded that it is his advise <br />to vote on Ordinance' #950 as drafted or "kill" the <br />Ordinance as written and re-draft a new ordinance to <br />make barber/beauty shops a special use review. <br />Carnival stated thai: his motion still stands to <br />adopt Ordinance #950 as written. <br />By Roll Call Vote Ordinance #950 was defeated 4-2 <br />with Carnival and Scarpella voting yes. <br />APPROVAL OF STATE BIDS - VEHICLE <br />PURCHASES The Department of Community Services and Department <br />of Public Safety rec;uests Council approval to accept <br />the State bid proce:~s for the purchase of one pickup <br />for Community Services and two police cars for <br />Public Safety. The funds for these vehicles were <br />provided for in the City's 1988 Capital Improvements <br />Program. Staff recommends approval of the State bid <br />process for the purchase of these vehicles. The <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.