05/14/1973 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. Panhandles must be effectively screened as necessary on both sides (normally the City has been requiring 75% opaque screening of at least five feet minimum height if appropriate in the individual situation). . 7~ Panhandle drives must be paved, as now required. 8~ Adequate vision clearance for traffic passing on the street and leaving the subject parcels must be provided. 9. All conditions of Public Works must be observed. .1 I 10. The resultant parcels must be able to accommodate structures in scale and harmony with abutting uses (adequate setbacks, screening, and the like). To assure satisfaction with this criterion where particular attention or sensitivity: is required, a condition of approval could be that the site plan be approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. . In answer to Councilwoman Beal, Manager said the proposal would apply normally to RA and R-l zones. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Williams to approve the policy statement. carried unanimously. Comm .Motion 4/25/73 Approve - c.Request for Permit, Nightwatchman Mobile Home, 865 Garfield Street - Requested by Tony Arnerich for Al' sTowing. Staff has no objection;' the use is permissible in the zone for which it is requested. l~e.yo~o.iQ\q. ~Q...\rw-\-\-) Mr. Williams moved seconded by Mrs. Beal to grant the permit. Motion carried unanimously. Comm 4/25/73 Approve - D.Report, Alley Assessment Study Committee - Copies of report were previously dis- tributed to Council members. It covers.study made in an attempt to more equitably assess for alley paving improvements where properties to be assessed. have different land uses. The Committee proposes a three-way assessment formula based on square footage, frontage, and zoning, with recommendation that assessment would be made against all properties abutting an improvement. But Council would have the option of deferring collection of assessment against property zoned for higher density .but used for single-family residence when the alley is improved. for the primary benefit of multiple-family or apartment house construction. Funding of that de- ferral could be accomplished through a revolving fund until the single-family property changes ownership or a more intense Land use occurred at which time City . funding would be recovered without interest cost. Manager explained that the de- ferral proposal is not reflected.in,the Committee's memo, but could be incorporated into any legal document prepared if the Cquncil decides to change the assessment policy. --~- - Councilwoman Bear sugge5~adding to the out];4.!}fEl=~fp.L-PIopciSed new alley paving asse~$1!!g!Jt~m~thod: T,hat in areas -i'n whi-ij]j' existing land use does not .oonfo~m to zo~ - for examp~e, lots used for a single-family in ~reas z~ned for ,higher, ' dens~ty or commerc~aluse, the owner of the non-conform~ng property (s~ngle-fam~ly :residence) may apply for cost of improvements to be paid by the 'City un.til the existing use changes and/or the Property changes han~s, whichever occurs first, and such funding b,/ the Ci ty Wollld be recorded as a lien agains.t thesingle~family property until the assessment is paid. Mayor Anderson wondered if there would be legal implications because of benefit to properties with no assessment. . i Councilman Williams did not feel it proper for interest accruing on deferred assessments to become the obligation of the general taxpayer. He thought that . the benefited property should carry the interest cost. M!,. Williams was con- . :cerned too with the provision that change-of-ownershiE should trigger the payment : of assessment. He suggested ownership could change with property st:,illbeing '. used for single-family living and that it might be better to trigger payment' upop change of" 1 and use onl y . '. . . ." " ". . ---~'-'-'---_'_,~.--' 145 5/14/73 - 5