CCMin_88Apr13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES APRIL 13, 1988 PAGE 2 conditional use request as recommended by the Planning Commission, with conditions as stipulated in Section 9-10.01, Subd. 2(r) of the Municipal Code and also joining of the property owner in the application. Motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION R-88-7 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A OONDTTIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ESTABLISHING A PET SPORE IN A B-2 RETAIL BUSINESS DISTRICT VARIANCE REQUEST FROM FAITH OHMAN, 1802 SIMPSON, DECLARED UNNECESSARY Baldwin presented Ms. Ohman's request for a variance to construct an addition to the east side of the existing home in line with the north wall of the home within the 30 ft. side street set back. Baldwin felt a variance is not needed based on his interpretation of Section 9-2.02, Subd. 2 of the code and Gedde concurred that the code is unclear and Baldwin's interpretation was reasonable. Following a brief discussion Council dismissed the application and directed staff to refund Ms. Ohman's variance request fee. At a future meeting Council will attempt to clarify the confusing languange in this section of the code. CLATTI'S PARKING DISCUSSION - MATTER DEFERRID TO 4/27/88 MEETING Baldwin commented on the 6:00 P.M. informational meeting with the residents and business persons in the area of Ciatti's Restaurant. Wiessner stated that Hermes and Bucks had indicated they might be willing to lease some parking space to Ciatti's on the condition that the City make some good faith motion to assist in a remedy. Council briefly discussed the possibility of providing parking on the city's right-of-way between the alley and Larpenteur on St. Mary's St., posting the east side of St. Mary's "No Parking", and establishing St. Mary's as a one~way street. The matter was then deferred to the April 27th meeting to allow time for all interested parties to comment on the problem. ENGINEER TO RESEARCH "NO BUILD" AREA AT EDID OF LINDIG STREET Baldwin referred to correspondence received from Sping Lin, 1785 N. Fairview, owner of a lot at the end of Lindig, and from Jim Day, prospective builder, questioning the need for a "hold harmless" agreement in order to build on the lot, and requesting information regarding utilities and possible assessments. Baldwin felt the city had expended enough money as an extensive report had been done by the former city engineer (report dated June 6, 1986), but he did think it would be appropriate for the city to reassess the present "no build" area to determine whether or not it still applies. Council directed Maurer to corx~uct such a study and also to determine if it would be advisable for the city to obtain additional right-of-way in the area. ~~