03-21-00 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The code requires each parking stall to be striped. ? The applicant will upgrade the landscaping by planting a series of trees and shrubs around the ? building. Teague stated that the City Sanitarian has been at this site on numerous occasions. There are some outstanding issues that the owner must address. Stephenson said the site was an embarrassment to our community. One commissioner said that bringing out these issues was unfair to the owner, but the taxpayers do not deserve to have this happen to our neighborhoods. It is not only an issue for the owner. It should be possible for new screens to be installed. Filling a big hole in the driveway is possible. Or to rake the yard. Samuelson said that she would like the audience to know that the City Council has directed the Staff to look at the entire picture on this site and report to the Council. Zisla stated that there seems to be several separate issues here, one of which is the condition of the existing property. Zisla said that was always a legitimate concern about any housing in New Brighton. The City has policies and procedures for inspections so the issue should be dealt with separately. If the issue on this property is that it is not well-maintained, that should be dealt with regardless of the zoning application. Zisla said that the issue brought up by Kraus on the balance between single-family dwellings and apartments. Zisla said he was concerned because he knows there is a need for apartment units, but he does not know what the tools are to make decisions between single-family and multi-family housing on grounds apart from notions about the types of people who may occupy one type or the other. Zisla said he would like to know about the available criteria on which to make the decisions. There is no value in considering this balance idea if there are no criteria on which to base a decision. Should the guideline be 40 or 50 percent? Zisla said he concurred with Mr. Schiferl about being very sensitive about making assumptions about who occupies those units. That is a very dangerous thing to get into. A18,2000, Motion by Baker, seconded by Schiferl, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE PRIL PC. 5 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried. LANNING OMMISSION MEETING Special Use Permit & Site Plan Review Tiro Industries, Inc. Teague stated the applicant has requested that the application be continued to the April 18 Planning Commission meeting. Apparently, the applicant has not yet moved into the old US West building on Lakeview Point Drive. There may be some changes in the business that will tie to this Special Use Permit. Baker stated this is a public hearing and asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak on the issue. No one responded. A18,2000, Motion by Baker, seconded by Livingston, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE PRIL PC . LANNING OMMISSION MEETING Schiferl asked for clarification on the time period. Teague responded the Planning Commission must act on the application within sixty days from the date of the application. The item can be tabled for one month and still work within the sixty-day timeframe. If the applicant requests another continuation, the Commission would have to extend to 120 days or request the applicant to withdraw the request. Zisla asked if the City asks the applicant to waive the 60-day rule for the period of the extension. Teague responded Staff has not done so routinely, but it might be a good idea to require every applicant to waive the 60-day rule. Zisla stated he would like to recommend that Staff routinely do that whenever an applicant asks for an extension. There may have been certain applicants who have been perceived as high-quality applicants who have tried to take I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\2000\03-21-00.WPD 4