My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1984 09 04
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1984 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1984 09 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:23 PM
Creation date
10/16/2008 3:55:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
9/4/1984
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1984 09 04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
9/4/84 Page -15- <br />CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Councilmembers had a copy of the ordinance <br />ORDINANCE NO. 838 - BUSINESS Attorney Rautenstraus read it by title only <br />OFFICE ZONE on first reading and the request was for <br />publication and that a public hearing be <br />set. <br />PUBLICATION AUTHORIZED Mayor Meier moved, Councilman Fauson seconded <br />that Ordinance No. 838 - Business Office <br />Zone be published and that a public hearing <br />be set for October 2, 1984. <br />Councilwoman Morris Wished to compliment Attorney Rautenstraus <br />and Acting City Administrator Rupp as she <br />felt this ordinance was much improved over <br />the original one presented. She also ex- <br />pressed concern with No. 25 of the ordinance <br />as she saw a super market or department <br />store as being a primary usage and office <br />as a secondary useage. She had some concern <br />that there maybe a conflict built in here. <br />Attorney Rautenstraus stated that he agreed <br />with what Councilwoman Morris was saying; <br />however one of the problems that we have <br />with the Use groups is that we have to <br />carry on and stated that he felt Mrs. Morris <br />was correct that a super market would mot tie <br />in with an office situation. However, a <br />shoe store could and certainly drug stroes; <br />and of course it is a review use so if <br />somebody came in with a super market pro- <br />posal then Council could say that was not <br />an appropriate review use. He felt this <br />was very clear in Section 2. L. <br />Councilwoman Morris also expressed a similar <br />concern with No. 38. Gasoline service <br />stations as being part of an office complex. <br />Attorney Rautenstraus stated that there <br />were things tied in this way, i.e. some of <br />the Tech Centers you see a service station <br />with a limited amount of pumps. Again it <br />would be a review use. <br />Councilman Leary Referred to Administrative Office and stated <br />limiting the parcels to 3 acre size troubled <br />him somewhat. He felt that there were ad- <br />vantages but also felt there were some dis- <br />advantages of doing that. He could think of <br />situations where, as the alternative is <br />going to the next category - Business Office <br />which allows commercial; therefore it seemed <br />very possible that you could have a 5-10 acre <br />site that for various reasons, given traffic <br />flow, comprehensive plan, etc., you would <br />not want commercial activity there. Yet <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.