2015_0928_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

d:ih af ��r�r �,,_ Attachment B A�L N�irta�esota. IL�S,^� Planning Commission Regular Meeting City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive EXCERPT OF DRAFT Minutes — Wednesday, September 2, 2015 PLANNING FILE 15-016 Request by Roseville Properties, with property owners Pinecone-Fairview, LLC and 2720 Fairview DCE, LLC, for approval of outdoor semi-trailer storage at 2720 Fairview Avenue as an INTERIM USE Chair Boguszewski opened the public hearing for Planning File 15-016 at approximately 7:57 p.m. City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly reviewed the history of this parcel and request of Roseville Properties for an Interim Use (IU) to use the former cross-dock freight terminal, mainly a parking lot, for the storage of semi-trailers throughout the site to, as detailed in the staff report dated September 2, 2015. Mr. Paschke displayed the site plan and aerial maps showing cross-dock freight terminals from past uses; with this IU proposed at three years until the property becomes more marketable, at which time the existing structure will be razed, as detailed in the narrative found in Attachment C. Mr. Paschke advised that specific requirements in staff's analysis for an IU were addressed in the staff report; with key issues related to public health addressed on page 3, and Item C containing recommendations of the City's Fire Marshal. Mr. Paschke concluded that staff recommended approval of the three-year IU as conditioned extensively on pages 5— 6 of the staff report. At the request of Member Murphy, the applicant provided an aerial view of the site today at 2720 Fairview Avenue. Chair Boguszewski clarified that, as it now stands under current City Code and Zoning Ordinance, this use is prohibited with the City having notified the applicant of that prohibition and giving notice to remove the current use; at which time the applicant filed this IU application for Planning Commission recommendation and ultimate resolution by the City Council. Mr. Paschke affirmed that summary. Unlike so many applications coming before the Commission, Chair Boguszewski noted that among the numerous conditions recommended by staff, none of them included a screening or fence. Mr. Paschke responded that the lot was too large for any fence to adequately screen the trailer storage use; and therefore was not included as a condition of approval. Noting the condition that trailers be moved back 70', Member Cunningham questioned if a fence wouldn't help to some degree, since now they're stored really close to the street, but if moved back with a fence installed, it provided much better aesthetics. Mr. Paschke stated that a fence would need to be extremely high to screen the trailers, since they were higher than a typical fence height under City Code requirements. Mr. Paschke further noted that the purpose of a fence is to hide or screen something, which would not be achieved visually and prove futile, nor would it make financial sense for the applicant for a short-term use. Using the example cited by Member Cunningham for the Boaters Outlet property fencing, Mr. Paschke noted that that the fence screened a majority of boats stored on that site, but there were not as high as these trailers.