CC 11-07-1974 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.. Minutes of Regular Council Meeting November 7, 1974 Page three in his estimation, is better; the moving of- the parking lot to the south would not have an adverse effect upon surrounding properties because another commercial use is located immediate11 to the south; from an aesthetic standpoint the proposed mall is better than the stone-facing on the buildings; and the rotation of the office . building had not changed its location. With respect to the parking, Planner Fred- lund was of the opinion that it was adequate on the oasis of a formula recommended by the Urban Land Institute. He concluded by stating that if the project were to be submitted now, 'as changed and partially constructed, for Special Use Permit approval, . it would be his recommendation to the Planning Commission and to the Council that they approve the same. The discussion then shifted to occupancy of the office building. Building Inspector Larry Squires advised that he had issued an Occupancy Permit to the portion of the office building where Dr. Wallace Anderson is presently located. . In further discussion of the alternatives which tke Council had. Attorney Lynden pointed out that Section III.F.5. of Ordinance No. 99, as amended by Ord. No. 174, provided that in the case of a structural alteration. enlargement or similar change not specifically permitted by a Special Use Permit, the Council must require.an amended Permit and that all procedures apply as if a new Permit were being requested. Planning CommiSSion Chairman Robert Woodburn reported that a Special Planning COmmis- sion meeting had been scheduled On Tuesday, November 26, 1974, at which time the required public hearing eoncerning the amended Special Use Permit application could be held if the application, required documentation and notices could be prepared and published by that date. It was determined that the notice of such public hearing could be timely published in the New Brighton Bulletin. CounCilman Crichton stated that he felt a sense of fairness must prevail in this matter. Councilman Wingert expressed concern about the welfare of the City in the event the project fsils and tenants leave and was~iCularlY concerned about de- lays. Councilman .Olmen moved, seconded by Counci" r chton, that the Council :refer the matter to the Planning Commission for its recommendations re amendment of the Special Use Permit. This motion carried unanimously. . Attorney Lynden then suggested, for Council consideration, that in order to mini- mizethe impact for C.G. Rein (although it may maximize the impact therefor at a later date), the Building Permits could be reinstated so long as it was clear to C. G. Rein that any further construction would be at its risk and without prejudice or.waiver to the rights of the City subsequently to revoke the Permit and/or to prosecute ,'...ill for its violations of the Zoning Ordinance. In response to questions from Attorney Lynden, Mr. Samuelson indicated that this suggested procedure was aeceptable to C. G. Rein. Councilman Olmen then moved, seconded by Councilman Wingert, that the Council approve the reinstatement of the Building Permits for a 90 days' period so as to allow C. G. Rein to continue construction, at its own risk and without prejudice or waiver to the rights of the City and subject to possible subsequent revocatio~ of the Special Us~t. This motion carried by a three to two vote, Councilman 01men, Wingert an epeau voting in favor of.the motion and Councilmen Crichton and Feyereisen voting in opposition thereto. l~. Samuelson stated, in the course of the discussion, that he understood. on behalf of C. G. Rein, that this action would in no way be deemed a waiver of or prejudice to the City's rights, obligations and enforcement po~ers under pertinent provisions of. the Zoning Ordinance and any other Ordinances of the City and was aware that. the Special Use Permit could still be revoked and theoamended Special Use Permit appli- cation denied. . Mrs. Donna ~'~) Mrs. Donna/' reported that a blue cabin on the west side of Lake Johanna 1s in disrepair - windows out, no plumbing; not occupied for several years, and does not . appear to be in safe condition. Matter was referred to Building Inspector Squires. . REPORT OF VILLAGE ATTORNEY JAMES LYNDEN 1974 Sealcoating Contract . Lynden referred Council to his letter of 11-5-74, stating he considers the 1974 Seal- coating Contract to be a unit-price contract. Crichton moved, seconded by Wingert, that Council approve payment, as recommended by Engineer Lund in his letter of October 28, 1974, in the amount of $13,410.63. Motion carried unanimOUSly. (Lund was requested to prepare a "standard form" fued price contract for future use.) -3- ----