Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />City Council Minutes <br />November 16. 1987 <br /> <br />2. THAT THE OUTDOOR AREA FOR THE DOGS BE COMPLETELY ENCLOSED WITH A 6 <br />FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE. <br /> <br />3. THAT THE FENCED AREA SHOLD HAVE A 300' SETBACK REQUIREMENT FROM THE <br />NEAREST NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE. <br /> <br />4. THAT MR. REITSMA CONTROL THE BARKING OF HIS DOGS TO LESS THAN FIVE <br />MINUTES. <br /> <br />S. THAT THIS PERMIT ALLOWS A MAXIMUM OF NO MORE THAN TWELVE DOGS OVER 6 <br />MONTHS OF AGE. <br /> <br />6. THAT A CITY KENNEL LICENSE AND PERMIT BE OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER. <br /> <br />7. THAT THE KENNEL AND MAINTENANCE OF THE ANIMALS COMPLY WITH THE CITY <br />ORDINANCE INCLUDING SANITATION. <br /> <br />8. THAT THE KENNEL BE SUBJECT TO INSPECTIONS BY CITY STAFF AT REASONABLE <br />TIMES AND INTERVALS. <br /> <br />9. THAT THERE BE ONE KENNEL RUN PER DOG TO AVOID FIGHTING. <br /> <br />10. THAT A NEW BUILDING BE ERECTED OR THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THE <br />PROPERTY BE MODIFIED FOR THE DOGS; INSULATED FOR SOUND PROOFING AND <br />MECHANICALLY VENTILATED OR THE DOGS BE SURGICALLY DEBARKED TO CONTROL <br />NOISE. <br /> <br />11. THAT THE DOGS BE KEPT INSIDE THIS SOUND PROOFED BUILDING FROM 10:00 <br />P.M. TO 6:30 A.M. AND ALSO WHEN NO ONE IS ON SITE TO CONTROL THEM IF <br />NOT DEBARKED. <br /> <br />12. THAT THERE BE NO ADDITIONAL DOGS UNTIL THIS BUILDING IS COMPLETED. <br /> <br />13. THAT NO DOGS BE BOARDED OR GROOMED ON THIS SITE THAT ARE NOT OWNED BY <br />THE PETITIONERS EXCEPT FOR STUD SERVICE. <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 3-0. <br /> <br />6. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS <br /> <br />At this time. Cliff Lundberg was present to represent the Central <br />Business District (CBD) property owners. <br /> <br />Mr. Lundberg discussed with the Council some possible ways to assess the <br />downtown beautification project in a fair manner. <br /> <br />Mr. Lundberg stated that some of the possibilities for assessments were: <br /> <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br /> <br />By square footage of each lot within the CBD. <br />Based on the assessed value of each building within the <br />By square footage of the area of buildings which <br />business purposes. <br />By some type of a "layer" <br />street which was improved <br />businesses not directly on <br /> <br />CBD. <br />are used for <br /> <br />4. <br /> <br />effect whereas the businesses along the <br />received a higher assessment than <br />the improved street but within the CBD. <br />