09-16-98 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

employs twenty to thirty people at the facility. According to the original landscape plan, ten parking spaces would be lost. Conlin said she had no problem with putting in evergreens. Zisla asked for Conlin’s reaction to the suggestion to screen three sides of the monopole and the building and going back to the original plan for the Cleveland road side. Conlin responded that would take out parking spaces. Conlin showed some solutions on the site plan. Conlin said she was trying to solve the issue of screening and minimizing the effect of the screening on the parking. Baker proposed to continue the issue so US West can submit a landscape plan that would screen the tower and the street. Baker said that he could not accept a fence only; there must be landscaping. Conlin said that the underground telephone and power lines are an added complication. Schiferl stated that he agreed with Baker. Schiferl said he would judge the proposal using the approved plan as a standard. The alternative plan must be close to the approved plan in terms of the overall visual effect. The City Forester would have to make the determination. Schiferl said that, according to the Federal Communications Act, a city has to approve monopoles if the poles meet certain requirements. Schiferl said monopoles were unsightly, but New Brighton has approved a few of them. In reading the requirements, it is unclear if this US West facility would have been approved with a lesser landscape plan. US West should be required to submit a plan since it created the problem. The City is not responsible for finding the solution. Baker said that the Planning Commission should not have to design the landscape plan. US West should submit a plan for the Commission’s review. Conlin asked what the Planning Commission would accept. Baker responded he was not a landscape engineer. Teague reviewed the landscape features discussed this evening. Baker said he would not rule out landscaping the north side of the site. Landscaping on the north side need not eliminate all the parking spaces. Conlin showed some possibilities on the site plan. Baker said that there should be some landscaping around the fence. Larson stated US West should submit an accurate landscape plan, not a plan showing how the site will look in thirty years. The neighbors’ view is of the vans parked in the lot. This parking is not screened. The poles are painted yellow. Larson stated that the neighbors across the street from the site have to be considered. The plan shows 45-foot trees. Larson said that, unless he looked at the wrong site, there were only some short, scrawny trees there. Conlin responded there were no tall trees on the site currently. Larson commented that the existing trees on the north property line do not screen anything. Conlin responded the trees are about six or seven feet high. Larson said those trees were no taller than Conlin. Larson said the trees were small and have been there for some time. Conlin said she understood from the City Forester that the trees have only been there six or seven years. Larson said then it would take another twenty-five to thirty years before these trees reach the height shown on the plan. Teague said the City Forester thought these trees would eventually grow together to make a solid screen. The use to the north is business and will require landscaping when it is developed. Zisla said the drawing said “existing trees.” Zisla said the simple fact was adequate screening is required, but there must also be a clear view for traffic. SPRO Motion by Baker, seconded by Livingston, TO CONTINUE THE ITE LAN EVIEW TO THE CTOBER PC. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried. LANNING OMMISSION MEETING Concept Plan Review - Minar Ford Teague introduced the representative for Minar Ford, Dave Phillips, Phillips Architects & Contractors, Inc. Phillips said he appeared before the Planning Commission in conjunction with McDonald’s proposal. Phillips I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1998\09-16-98.WPD 4