Laserfiche WebLink
Jewelers, Spectacle Shop, and Arvidson Chiropractic. The applicant met with staff <br />several times regarding a conceptual plan for development of the western 145' of 2350 <br />Palmer Drive. The applicant inquired about a Variance for parking setbacks. At that <br />time, staff recommended that the applicant pursue a development that complies with all <br />standards. Several options were discussed in an effort to avoid the Variance process, <br />such as underground parking and shared parking with 2350 Palmer Drive. Based on the <br />tenant needs for this building, the applicant has determined a Variance would be <br />necessary. <br />Peter Murlowski, TimberCraft, stated that the request of a reduced parking set back is <br />consistent with the adjacent properties which have five foot setbacks. He added that a <br />hardship of the small site and all of the tenants are requesting ground floor locations. <br />Zisla requested a clarification on the parking setbacks for the adjacent properties. <br />Gundlach replied that the BP meets all setback requirements except for the west side and <br />was unable to determine how it gained approval for a reduced setback. Champps and The <br />Garage both meet the thirty-foot setback. Brighton Village has a fifteen -foot setback that <br />was approved under a Planned Unit Development and at their own expense installed a <br />pedestrian sidewalk. <br />Zisla asked the applicant if the building size could reduce. Murlowski replied that they <br />are unable to reduce the size of the building due to financial constraints. Bob Smith, <br />owner of The Garage, stated there used to be at the ten -foot setback, but he agreed to an <br />easement since it would be good for the neighborhood. <br />Zisla recommended reviewing the area around Brighton Village for possible rezoning or <br />reduction of the setbacks to help facilitate redevelopment. Howard asked the owner of <br />The Garage if the proposed building would work better on the east side of his building. <br />Smith replied that visibility would become an issue for the new tenants and would still <br />have similar issues regarding the setbacks. <br />John Stenglein, TimberCraft, stated that without the variance the property would only <br />have ten parking stalls, which would not meet the needs of the tenants. He stated the <br />building would enhance the area and bring additional business into the area. Schiferl <br />stated that there may be too many uses on this site and they should consider reducing the <br />size of the building. <br />Bauman stated that this project would be a benefit to the City, since the site is not in a tax <br />increment financed district and would pay taxes into the general fund. She added the <br />City of New Brighton is not business friendly and would like to see that changed. She <br />believes that the Commission should not just consider codes and standards, but also <br />consider revenue and the bigger benefit to the community. She warned that these <br />businesses could leave the community. She doesn't want to continue to turn down <br />businesses because they need a variance. <br />Zisla stated that the Commission is charged with reviewing each plan against the code <br />. and then advising the Council. He added that he takes issue that the Commission is not <br />