11-19-96 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mattila said the City Council sent the proposal back to the Planning Commission for review and comments. Approved The Council wants the Planning Commission to review the proposed changes in structure size, the drainage plan, and noise control plan. The City Council on November 26 will consider the proposal. They have not approved the special use permit to date. Zisla asked if any action would be required. Mattila responded no action is required. Since the City Council will meet next week, the Planning Commission may want to simply pass on its comments to the Council. Zisla asked what action the Council can take at their next meeting if the floor-area ratio does not conform to the Zoning Ordinance. Mattila responded the Council could deny the project or approve the project contingent on amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow the floor-area ratio for public service structures to be increased from 30% to 40% in the R-1 district. The rationale for the change is that public service structures tend to be similar to industrial uses that have a 40% floor-area ratio for buildings that do not generate much traffic. Single family homes are restricted to 30% floor-area ratio because they are so close to each other and require yards for their occupants’ enjoyment. Here, the reservoir is located in an R-1 district but does not need yard area for recreation. Zisla asked if the City Attorney had given an opinion about the possibility of having a condition in the special use permit that allows deviation from zoning requirements. Are special use permits subject to all other Zoning Ordinance requirements? For example in a Planned Unit Development, the City can disregard certain zoning requirements. Mattila responded special use permits cannot bypass the zoning requirements. Baker stated the record should show the Planning Commission had received a letter from the City of Columbia Heights requesting we reconsider routing all the truck traffic through the City of Columbia Heights. Zisla asked if the Minneapolis Water Works proposed that the traffic go through Columbia Heights. Was that in the transportation plan that the City Council reviewed? Larson responded the City Council looked at that. Larson stated he would not vote for the project unless the traffic is routed through Columbia Heights. An additional 2,000 trucks that will be involved in the process. The figure of truck trips has gone from 12,750 to 14,745 trips. Zisla asked why the City of New Brighton would say our streets are not available for use by the general public. Does New Brighton have rules that say only New Brighton businesses can use New Brighton streets? Larson answered that the people of this community have been subjected to road construction on Silver Lake Road. Silver Lake Road is finally a good, new road. Running 14,745 trips or 29,000 two-way trips on the new street will wear it out in a hurry. Larson said his only option is to stick up for the people in this community. Larson said he would be willing to consider the project if the City of Minneapolis told their haulers to route their trips through Columbia Heights. Without that assurance, Larson said he would not vote for the project. Larson stated he knows New Brighton cannot legally restrict the use of Silver Lake Road, but unless that happens he would vote against the project. Zisla said he was bothered by the last paragraph in the October 22nd Council Minutes where it says, “New Brighton is not in a position to gain from the additional reservoir capacity.” Zisla said he was surprised this I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1996\11-19-96.WPD 2