Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />December 2, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Goedeke asked how many tenants would be in the building. <br />replied that this is an allowable use under the existing <br />ordinance. The total square footage will remain the same. <br /> <br />Johnson <br />zoning <br /> <br />Stokes asked Mr. Dahlgren to again delineate the City <br />requirements, which Dahlgren proceeded to do. <br /> <br />setback <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked how the power poles would be addressed that are <br />currently in the middle of the sidewalk. Janisch replied that <br />they would be gone next year. <br /> <br />DeBenedet moved, Berry seconded, that Kraus-Anderson's request <br />for variances at 2057 North Snelling Avenue be approved with the <br />following conditions: <br /> <br />1. That the variances apply only to the existing building. <br /> <br />2. That a landscape and screening plan (including the fence to <br />the west) be approved by staff, and coordinated with the <br />impacted neighbors. <br /> <br />3. That a plan for wheel stops on the north side of the lot be <br />developed and subject to staff approval, and coordinated with <br />the impacted neighbor. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated that he was uncomfortable with this variance, and <br />that it was essentially an afterthought. <br /> <br />Johnson agreed, but pointed out that this was a positive <br />situation, that it cleaned up the existing lot and, in addition, <br />the Planning Commission was limited in its purview in this case <br />based on the recommendation by the City Attorney. <br /> <br />Cushman stated her concerns with respect to the need to upgrade <br />redevelopment sites. <br /> <br />DeBenedet proceeded to clarify his motion in which he stated that <br />the plans should be coordinated with the neighbors, but not <br />subject to the neighbors approval. The plans are still subject <br />to staff approval, however. <br /> <br />DeBenedet proceeded to explain his reasons for supporting the <br />motion. <br /> <br />Stokes <br />moved <br />site, <br />to the <br /> <br />stated his concern as to whether the lot actually has <br />farther to the west. Dahlgren replied that he viewed the <br />and it didn't appear to him that the lot had moved farther <br />west. <br /> <br />Berry stated that she agreed with DeBenedet's logic in that the <br />building was a legitimate use, and the changes were positive. <br />She was concerned, however, about the impact of the lights. <br /> <br />Johnson pointed out that Code Enforcement could address any <br />inappropriate lighting situations. <br />