CCMin_85Feb13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1985 PAGE 4 Hermes with no success. He also read into the record a letter once again requesting shared parking with the Hermes and transfer of a portion of the alley to the Lido Cafe. Randy Gustafson, 1775 St. Mary's, inquired as to lounge hours and RANDY entertainment. Mr. Labalestra explained they had tried entertainment GUSTAFSON in the past and felt it was not needed. They do not at present plan 1775 ST. to have entertainment, but would like to leave all options open. Hours MARYS would depend upon flow of customers. Mayor Eggert informed that three of the four Councilmembers had attended the Planning Commission meeting on February 4th and all had copies of the Citizens Committee reports and the Dennis Smith letter. Ted Meyer, 1710 St. Mary's, stated he was not speaking on behalf of TED MEYER the Committee but would enjoin their report and would recommend Scheme 1710 ST. E. He then commented on items that he felt had not been dealt with MARYS reference to the ordinance relating to conditional use requests, i.e., pages 268-270 of the code, subdivisions 5c, d, e and 1. Mr. Meyer raised the following issues: (1) Planning Commission denied conditional use by a 6-1 vote, (2) the City does not have authority to grant a conditional use if property values are to be depreciated, and he felt there was no question that values will be seriously depreciated, (3) a conditional use must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, if the use of the property for a parking lot is appropriate it should have been done at the time the Plan was adopted, and (4) the Committee and citizens were willing to compromise, but have seen no evidence that the Lido is compromising. Mr. Meyer was concerned that if a conditional use is granted the property could continue to be used for parking even though the property is sold. He commented on the use of the Hermes alley, shared parking and vacation of St. Mary's and argued that any scheme other than Scheme E would be an intrusion moving up the street. He felt they were insulated from the commercial district as is, however, did acknowledged that the Labestra plan would provide insulation. Mr. Meyer stated he was not willing to agree to the vacation of St. Mary's and if the conditional use is granted for the Croft property he will have no choice but to commence a lawsuit for compensation for damages to his property, and enforce application of the code. He also stated that it is ill advised and should be defeated. Councilmember Hard referred to the neighborhood report as it related to covenants. Mr. Meyer said he was prepared to sign a covenant for residential use which would be ideal if all agree, but would not, how- ever, unless it is also agreed that the Croft property will be owner occupied, single family. Councilmember Hard felt that property values would decrease with the covenant to which Mr. Meyer replied that if all sign it would be an enhancement. Councilmember Baldwin commented on the fact that if the Lido is not allowed the expansion, they will not stay in business there, and there could be an impact on property values if a business of lesser quality should take over. Mr. Meyer stated that Lido has no impact on his property and he has little concern over what is in the business area. Councilmember Baldwin expressed the opinion that a cul-de-sac, berming, and having a more sightly corner would increase property values. Mr. Meyer stated he felt the cul-de-sac would have a negative effect, and in reply to an inquiry from Councilmember Ciernia, replied that access to Larpenteur is more convenient. 1~