1986-02-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes February 25, 1986 Council Business, continued Benke also preferred they have an opportunity to review it. Motion by Schmidt, seconded by Williams, to REFER THE PLANNING PROPOSALS FOR VETERANS PARK AND CITY HALL LANDSCAPING TO THE PARK BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW AND COMMENTS AND RETURN TO THE MARCH 11, 1986, COUNCIL MEETING, IF POSSIBLE. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried Motion by Gunderman, seconded by Williams, to RECONSIDER OF VN-244 AND LP-192. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried Winkels advised council that Briggs, Houge, and Martinson had met to determine whether or not shifting the building on the site would lessen the impact on the property-owners on the west side of the site. Briggs reviewed the plan which Martinson had designed, which moves the building away from the residents' property, and stated that Mr. Harstad had no objection to the plan. Briggs stated the concept can work, but they need to redesign the plan one more time. In response to Brandt's inquiry, Briggs stated they could have a revised plan in about a week. In response to Benke's question, Winkels indicated it would be better to continue the matter until the new drawings have been submitted. Briggs indicated the important thing would be if the concept is acceptable to everyone and indicated Atonement Lutheran Church is interested in what will happen next. Benke stated he would continue to support the variance; Schmidt recognized the need for both the developer and the church to reach a comfort-level with the project and stated continued support. Martinson stated that the concept that is addressed is accept- able to all of the affected residents; the plans take the same building and makes a very subtle rotation to change the rear setback from 60 to 90-100 feet. Martinson expressed confidence that when the plan comes back, the redesign will accomplish that and feels the approval of the variance could be adopted unani- mously. Gunderman stated he was in favor of the plan. Brandt stated if the new plan will cause this particular building to be somewhat compatible with R1 zoning, she would withdraw her Objection as well. Page Eight VN-244 and LP-192 Reconsideration