My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 05-23-1994
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
CCP 05-23-1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:09:50 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 3:20:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
160
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).
View images
View plain text
<br /> . June Minutes Page 12 06/01/94 <br /> B. Section II, D of the ordinance be amended to <br /> define a school bus terminal. School Bus Terminal <br /> shall be a building or space engaged primarily in <br /> the transportation and activities associated with <br /> the transportation of students. <br /> C. Section x, be amended to add the following: <br /> H. School Bus Terminals - In addition to the <br /> requirements set forth in this Ordinance, school <br /> bus terminals are subject to the following <br /> requirements: <br /> . A school bus terminal site must be located <br /> within three hundred (300) feet of an <br /> existing general education school. <br /> . A school bus terminal site must be located <br /> adjacent to both an arterial and collector <br /> road and have direct access to one of these <br /> roads. <br /> . The motion passed 3-2, McGraw, Piotrowski, Carlson <br /> voted in favor; Winiecki, Rye opposed. <br /> Mr. Rye asked the records to state his opposition was based <br /> on the R-1 zoning. He thought a better choice would be R-2. <br /> Chair Winiecki also opposed the motion for the same reason. <br /> CASE #94-15: STEPHEN AND CHRISTINE ANDERSON - SIDE YARD VARIANCE. <br /> 1361 FLORAL DRIVE. <br /> Mr. Fritsinger stated last fall the Andersons submitted a <br /> request for a six foot side yard variance. This request was <br /> denied by the Planning Commission and was subsequently <br /> reduced to a four (4) foot request. The City Council <br /> required the applicant to return to the Planning commission <br /> for review and the applicant subsequently withdrew their <br /> request. A survey has found that the home was not built as <br /> stated on the building permit. The applicants feel that <br /> since they are one of only two residents in the neighborhood <br /> who have a one car garage and the home was not built in the <br /> . appropriate location, these support their hardship claim. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.