Laserfiche WebLink
<br />E. Council discussion/conclusion on Findings of Fact - <br /> <br />Council consensus was that the following findings should read as follows: <br /> <br />35. That there has been no determination as to whether or not the <br />proposed use will be unduly dangerous or otherwise detrimental to <br />persons residing or working in the vicinity of the use, or to the <br />public welfare. <br /> <br />36. That there has been no determination as to whether or not the <br />proposed use will substantially adversely impair the use, enjoyment <br />or market value of any surrounding property. <br /> <br />37. That the proposed use is not harmonious with and in accordance with <br />the specific objections of the City's Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />38. That the proposed use will be designed., constructed, operated and <br />maintained so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance <br />with the existing or intended character of the I-I Industrial <br />District. <br /> <br />40. (To be omitted). <br /> <br />42. That the proposed use will create excessive additional requirements <br />at public cost for public facilities and services. <br /> <br />... <br />} <br /> <br />43. That the proposed use will not involve uses, activities, processes, <br />materials and equipment and conditions of opera ti on that w ill be <br />detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by <br />reason of excessive production of traffic, noise and glare. <br /> <br />Added finding: <br /> <br />That it has not been determined whether the proposed use will <br />involve uses, activities, processes, materials and equipment and <br />conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, <br />property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production <br />of fumes or odors. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Sorteberg to direct that proposed finding of fact <br />#44 shall read as follows: 'That the proposed use will not be consistent <br />with the intended purposes of the City's Zoning Chapter.' <br /> <br />Motion failed for lack of a second. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember DeLuca and seconded by Councilmember Pearson that <br />finding of fact #44 shall read as follows: 'That whether or not the <br />proposed use is consistent with the intended purposes of the City's Zoning <br />Chapter is unknown because the health risk assessment has not been <br />completed. ' <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers DeLuca and <br />Pearson. Voting No: Councilmember Sorteberg. Absent: Councilmember Cox. <br /> <br />" <br />! <br /> <br />City Council/July 27, 1988 <br /> <br />Page 7 of 9 <br /> <br />es <br />