Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 8 <br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />June 19. 1989 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />4, <br /> <br />~~ ~fi~ION AND fINISH or THE BUILDING SHALL BE RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE <br />ANI> COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. <br /> <br />S. THE BUILDING SHALL HAVE A SHINGLED ROOF. <br /> <br />6. APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE DRAINAGE RETENTION EASEMENT ON LOT 2 <br />APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. <br /> <br />7. SPEED LIMIT OF 5 MPH SHALL BE POSTED ON LOT 3. <br /> <br />8. THE DRIVEWAY OF LOT 3 SHALL BE ONE WAY ONLY. <br /> <br />9. DRIVEWAY AND PARKING STALLS SHALL BE HARDSURFACED WITH ASPHALT OR <br />CONCRETE. <br /> <br />10. MIAS NOT PAVED OR BUILT UPON SHALL BE SEEDED IN GRASS. <br /> <br />11 . TEN TREES SHALL BE PLANTED ON LOT 3, TYPES AND LOCATIONS AS PER <br />DESCRIPTION ON DRAINAGE PLAN. <br /> <br />12. BUILDING AND GROUNDS SHALL BE KEPT WELL MAINTAINED. CLEAN, AND FREE <br />OF DEBRIS. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />13. SIGNAGE SHALL NOT EXCEED MAXIMUM OF FOUR SQUARE FEET. <br /> <br />14. THE PROJECT'S APPROVAL IS CONTINGENT UPON REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF <br />THE DRAINAGE PLAN BY THE CITY ENGINEER. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schuldt indicated that his concern is not how the mini <br />storage is designed or laid out but indicated that he felt an ordinance <br />amendment was passed in error allowing mini storages in this area. He <br />stated that he does not feel that single family residential areas are a <br />place for mini storages. He indicated that he felt this item should be <br />tabled and researched as to whether or not this facility belongs in a <br />single family area. <br /> <br />Mayor Tralle indicated that the City has existing mini storages in R-4 <br />areas at the present time. The property in question abuts an R-4 zone <br />and Mayor Tralle further stated he does not feel that the City made a <br />mistake in allowing mini storages in a residential area. <br /> <br />Councilmember Holmgren stated that he will support the motion but <br />indicated that he has reservations about striking item #1 which requires <br />fencing. He indicated that he felt fencing is a benefit of the property <br />owner as it affects the owner's property. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />COUNCILMlMBER HOLMGREN MOVED TO ADD AN ITEM #15 TO THE MOTION STATING <br />THAT A TWO YEAR REVIEW OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED. THIS <br />WAS ACClP'1'ABLE TO COUNCILMEMBER DOBEL. COUNCILMEMBER KROPUENSKE SECONDED <br />THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-1. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT VOTED AGAINST <br />THE MOTION. <br />