06/04/01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1813 June 4, 2001 Mr. Lieberman wished to ask Mr. Ollendorff about truck accessories. Mr. Ollendorff said that camper tops are covered in the existing ordinance. Mr. Wagner said that all the restrictions were carried over. The only change was that you did not have to do an annual inspection fee. Mr. Wagner further explained that the one time inspection fee is to cover our costs to verify that the truck is registered to the owner at that U. City address and that it meets all of the constraints. They felt that the change to a one time inspection fee was an improvement to this very old ordinance. Responding to Mr. Lieberman further, Mr. Wagner said that they removed the requirement to show that you don't have off-street parking. To Mr. Sharpe's point, the worded ordinance will state that you will be able to park this permitted vehicle in this street in the vicinity of your home. Ms. Colquitt still disagrees with the idea of a fee being assessed. She feels that the inspection could be done along with occupancy permits. Mayor Adams disagreed, asking what would then happen if a five year resident, whom has already gone through the occupancy permit process, purchased a truck? Mayor Adams stated that he and Councilmember Schoomer have talked to the state numerous times to get them to change their licensing laws and issue a plate that says non-commercial. The state will not do it. AGENDA #3 - CONDITIONAL USE AMENDMENT - 7498 DELMAR: Mr. Ollendorff concurs with the Plan Commission advice that the condition requiring construction of a sloped roof on top of the flat canopy should be deleted. The condition was originally attached to bring about the more aesthetically pleasing appearance. In viewing the canopy as constructed, several neighbors and members of the Plan Commission as well as City staff have reached the conclusion that the canopy is acceptable as is without adding additional roof height. Adjacent and other interested citizens have been advised that City Council will consider this proposal at this meeting and were invited to attend and express their point of view. Doug Finer, 7441 Teasdale, is unhappy with the flat canopy. The original intent of all parties was a pitched roof canopy which was compatible with the convenience store. This canopy was the subject of two Plan Commission meetings. The canopy should be built as per the original plans and approvals. Jason Roland, 7444 Delmar, stated that he is all right with the flat canopy, but the pitched roof would be more aesthetically pleasing. He also believes that the canopy should be built according to approved plans.