Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Council Proceedings <br />City of New Brighton <br />July 22,1975 <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS <br />Attorney stated hearing was properly called <br />Mr. Steve Goff, executive director of Building <br />Block and Day Care Center, reviewed the progress <br />of the New Brighton Day Care Center at Brighton <br />Village Apartments. It was noted that they <br />utilize 3 apartment units, two of which are <br />made into classrooms, that the Center serves <br />ages 2~ to 6 and is licensed by the State of <br />Minnesota. <br />Motion by Rebelein, seconded by Fisher to close hearing <br />4 ayes - 0 nayes - carried <br />Motion by Fisher, seconded by <br />SP-62, Building Block and Day <br />to Council review after three <br />4 ayes - 0 nayes - carried <br /> <br />Rebelein to <br />Care Center <br />years. <br /> <br />approve <br />subject <br /> <br />Attorney stated hearing was properly called <br /> <br />8:37 - Councilman Eagon appeared <br /> <br />Mr. Jacobson, architect for the applicant, reviewed the <br />site plan. <br />Mr. Bettenberg, attorney for the applicant, stated <br />that the conditions recommended by the Planning <br />Commission could be met by the applicant. <br /> <br />Mr. Dick Loscheider, 566 4th Avenue N.W. presented <br />the Council with a petition <br />Motion by Fisher, seconded by Anderson to receive <br />petition <br />5 ayes - 0 nayes - carried <br />Mr. Loscheider indicated that the petition was <br />opposing the granting of the variance because no basis <br />for a variance existed; because the residential area <br />existing adjoins the property and the protection <br />for buffering in the City ordinance should be <br />fully utilized. and because the property usage is <br />not compatible with any existing land'" usage in the <br />immediate area. <br /> <br />Mr. Gene witkowski, 533 4th Avenue N.W. stated <br />that the residents in the area were opposed to the <br />original zoning of the property for industrial <br />uses and at that time were guaranteed that a buffer <br />zone would be required. He stated that based on this no <br />variance should be granted. Mr. Bettenberg stated <br />that the property does not lend itself to a 60 ft. <br />setback since 1/3 of the property would then be a <br />buffer zone. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />SP-62 <br /> <br />8:05 - <br />8:30 <br /> <br />VN-140 <br />SP-6l <br /> <br />8:31 - <br />9:10 <br />