My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1983-09-13
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Minutes - City Council
>
Minutes 1983
>
1983-09-13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2005 4:52:46 AM
Creation date
8/11/2005 1:34:05 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />City of New Brighton <br />September 13, 1983 <br />Page Three <br /> <br />Councilmember Benke stated that her business requires <br />a license ,it was prohibited in a residential area, as <br />he interprets the ordinance, and that that would be <br />his opinion that evening. He further stated he was <br />willing to consider changes to the ordinance but that <br />would necessitate going to the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt stated that the Council was <br />really dealing with two ordinances: one addresses <br />home occupations, the other neighbo~hood businesses. <br />He further stated that the Council had to deal with <br />the ordinance as it exists. <br /> <br />Motion by Blomquist, seconded by Janecek to deny the <br />the request for repeal of the City Planner's order. <br /> <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes - motion carried <br /> <br />Motion by Harcus, seconded by Schmidt to refer the <br />Massage Parlour Ordinance and Home Occupation <br />Ordinance to the Planning Commission for reviewal and <br />recommendations and further move that the City does <br />not desire prosecution during that reviewal time. <br /> <br />5 Ayes - 0 Nayes - motion carried <br /> <br />Councilmember Schmidt asked the City Attorney if any <br />other business that is operating in the home would be <br />treated similarly as the occupation before the Council <br />this evening. <br /> <br />The City Attorney responded that the Council has made <br />it clear from their discussion that the ordinance is <br />or may be somewhat more restrictive than it should be. <br /> <br />Ms. Taft extended an invitation to the Council to <br />make an appointment for a complimentary massage to <br />see for themselves that the business is legitimate. <br /> <br />Mrs. Susan Doherty, 239 16th Avenue S.W., asked for <br />permission to have a beauty shop in her home. She <br />indicated that she had collected name, addresses <br />and signatures from eVeryone on her block indicating <br />their approval as long as it was a low key business. <br />She further stated that she would be working on it <br />herself and that it would involve only about two <br />cars, one coming and one going, at any given time. <br />She then presented drawings and the signatures to <br />the Council. <br /> <br />Mayor Harcus indicated that this would also need to <br />go through the review process which was already <br />done previously in the meeting. He further stated <br /> <br />Home Occupation <br />Ordinance-Report <br />#83-241(Doherty) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.