CC 11-07-1974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. , ... Minutes of Regalar Council Meeting November 7, 1974 Page tWiJ With respect to the lack of stone-facing as required on the plans approved by the Planning Commission and the Council, Mr. Rich stated that, in his estimation, the project had not been cheapened by C. G. Rein's non-use of stone-facing. He pointed out that his company had added a mall and that in terms of aesthetics it was his feeling that the mall was a greater asset than the stone-facing. He also mentioned that the grading plaDs for the project had been changed without any formal written approval from the City Engineer. City Engineer Lund recollected discus- sions with Mr. Rich regarding the piping and control structure on the drainage . outlet but did not recall any deep discussion with Mr. Rich regarding the regrading .of the project site. DiB.cUlleion then turned to the parking area. Councilman Feyereisen qusriedwhether the parking area had actually been decreased in size. Mr. Rich replied -that he did not think it had been. . Regarding the change in the roof heights, Mr. Rich advised that in fact the two level structure with a maximum height of 24 feet as depicted on the approved plans had been revised to a three level or a three step structure with a height of 28 plus feet adding approximately 4,000 square feet of second floor not shown in the approved plans. Councilman Wingert expressed concern as to the fence and screening requirements specified in the Special Use Permit which were based upon the height of the structures. to be screened. Mr. Rich replied that it was the intention of C. G. Rein to erect and place the screening required by the Special Uee Permit. The increase in the square footage of floor area between the approved plans and the present plans was then discussed. Mr. Rich advised that the original approved plans calls for approximately 90,000 square feet of floor area whereas the actual. construction plans now provide for approximately 109,000 square feet - an increase of 21% in the square footage of the floor area of the project. It was pointed out that the increase in the building area has directly reduced the amount of ~pen space left on the site. Councilman Crichton stated that it did appear that substantial changes from the plans approved by the Planning Commission and the Council had been made by C. G. . Rein and that in view of the fact the Planning Commission had spent a substantial number of hours in reViewing the plans of C. G. Rein and eventually approving them, he was hesitant to do anything without further recommendations from the Planning Commission. Councilman Feyereisen felt that the Zoning Ordinance should be en- forced by revoeatipn of .the Special Use Permitand!or prosecution of C. G. Rein. Councilman Wingert stated that he was not 80 worried about the change in the facade of the structures as he was about the re-orientation of the entire development. He stated that he would want to hear from the Planning Commission members before making a decision on the matter. Councilman Wingert also expressed doubt whether C. G. Rein was actually in viola- tion of the Zoning Ordinance. Attorney Lynden informed the Council that C. G. :tela was in violation of the Zoning Ordinance because of its substantial deviations from the conditions contained in the Special Use Permit and that the Council could revoke the Spel:ial Use Permit on that basis and also prosecute C. G. Rein. for each and every day of its violation of the provisions of the Special Use Permit ~ a period of approximately one year. Mr. Samuelson stated that C. G. Rein had been wrong and then proceeded to explain the severity of the situation if his company is delayed in the construction of the project for approximately 10 to 15 days. He stressed that if C. G. Rein is forced to delay the construction of the project, the delay could result in its losing tenants which have committed themselves as of certain dates; could have an adverse . effect upon tenants already occupying the office building; could involve C. G. Rein in lawsuits and construction over-runs; and could result in its losing its mortgage . because of non-performance. He pointed out that the supern~rket which is to be- come one of C. G. Rein's tenants had already ordered fixtures for a substantial sum of money which are to be delivered on schedule and that other tenants had made similar commitments which "ould be affected by a delay. He aslted the (;ounc11 for leniency outhe basis that C. G. Rein did not make the changes intentionally. ... He concludod by stating that if C. G. Rein were faced with a delay, it would have a disaster on its hands. Planner Fredlund then gave his views on the effect of the changes and reviewed his meeting with C. G. Rein representatives on Monday, November 4, 1974. a report of which meeting is attached hereto. It was his feeling that the plans as submitted now would fall within the zoning requirements for the Zoning District within which the project site is located. He pointed out, among other things, that the area of the site is larger than everyone originally tho,ught; the orientation of the site, -2-