1986-03-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes March 25, 1986 Council Business, continued Martinson showed pictures to councilmembers of buildings built with less parking spaces than Harstad's proposal; feels if the two-story building gets built, it will be a product of arrogance and belligerence; doesn't believe the hardship is anything but an economic one; decency ought not to replace reason. Martinson appreciated those on the council that have walked the extra mile, and feels the variance should be denied. Brandt asked if there would be any less negative impact by the two-story building; Martinson understands the neighbors would probably be worse off with the two-story proposal. Brandt stated it was impossible for her to make a finding of fact that there would be no negative impact, and it's difficult to find a hardship which would prevent reasonable use of the property without the variance when there is before the council a proposal to make reasonable use of the property in the form of a two-story building. Martinson stated he did not believe that council and staff were powerless; felt that there is a permitting process, the Planning Commission process, and that some judgements can be made as to what is in the best interest of the community. Brandt asked staff if council could do anything and, if so, what to force integrity into a building that complies with the zoning ordinance. Krueger stated that, in the site plan approval process, the city has always looked closely at the landscape plans to be sure there was a quality in the plantings and that the plantings provided aesthetics to the site; the materials being proposed on the two-story, although not the most desirable, are not sub- standard but rather are good exterior materials. Krueger stated she believes the two-story would be a quality building, and would require additional setbacks against the west property line. Staff would like to see the trees on the site protected as much as possible because they are an amenity, but staff is somewhat limited in its ability to do that, although they would certainly try to negotiate with the developer. However, if the developer stays within the zoning code requirements in terms of setbacks from the property line, the city only has so much leverage. Brandt restated there is really no justification for disapproving permits because of particular landscaping, or the particular location of the parking places, or the particular siding or fac- ing, so long as the developer came within the zoning require- ments. Krueger stated the city does have leverage in the landscaping requirements for this project where trees are to be removed along the west side of the property. Page Fourteen