Laserfiche WebLink
? ? . . • M1 <br />from the discussion at previous meetings. L. Orlowski moved to approve the <br />Developers Diversified, Ltd. and W. & Z. Properties, Ltd. Resubdivision Plat, for <br />the lot split and consolidation plat along with the acceptance of the street as <br />presented, seconded by J. Thomas, and unanimously approved. <br />V. COMM[JN.LCATIONS: <br />Ord. 92-63: This is the ordinance accepting the dedication of Moen Drive as <br />discussed during the Developers Diversified, Ltd. and W. & Z. Properties, Ltd. <br />Resubdivision Plat. Chairman Gorris read the ordinance. B. Gorris moved to <br />approve Ord. 92-58, seconded by R. Bowen, and linaninously approved. <br />Ord. 92-58: Building Commissioner Conway explained that the ordinance was written <br />because the Law Department believed that the codes regarding recreational <br />vehicles was too restrictive considering that residents have had recreational <br />vehicles in their yards since the 1960's, so He was asked to write an ordinance <br />that would be less restrictive. Iiis inspectors looked at these vehicles in <br />various locations though out the City. This ordinance still restricts them from <br />being in the front yard, but allows them in the rear yaxd but sets forth setback <br />requirements depending on the length of the vehiele. Mra Orlowski believed that <br />only one vehicle should be permitted (this would allow three). Mr. Gorris and Mr. <br />Bowen objected to parking these in rear yards and believed that the owners of <br />these vehicles could store them elsewhere. Ntr.. Thomas believed that some <br />compromise could be reached. Assistant Law Director Dubelko stated that because <br />of the rnumbers of these vehicles, there could be many variance requests for them. <br />He reminded the members that during the discussion of the Zoning codes, he <br />advised that after the codes were in effect there would be many areas, that would <br />probably be changed. Mr. Conway stated that other conmnunities have developed <br />similar ordinances, but many have subsequently rescinded them. In this ordinance, <br />he has tried to eliminate some of the problem areas.. The members decided to <br />continue this tmtil the other two members are present. J. Thomas moved to table <br />ordinance number 92-58, seconded R. Bowen, and unanimously approved.. <br />VI. COMNIITTEE REPORTS: <br />No items. <br />VII. NEW BUSINESS: <br />No items. <br />VIII. OLD BUSINESS: . <br />No items. <br />IX. ADJOURIVMIIQT : <br />B. Gorris moved to excuse the absence of T. Morgan and R. Tallon, seconded by R. <br />Bowen and unanimously approved. <br />The meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m. <br />. ? ? <br />? &11; <br />. Oring; Clerk of Commissions. <br />11