My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-00 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
09-27-00 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2009 2:26:19 PM
Creation date
8/6/2008 10:50:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 27, 2000 <br />LOT Fahey opened the public hearing to consider the combination of lots <br />COMBINATION- located at 3220 and 3222 Rice Street. It was noted that the City Planner <br />3220 AND 3222 and the Planning Commission have recommended approval of the lot <br />RICE STREET combination. <br />There was no one present from the general public wishing to comment on <br />this matter. <br />Upon motion by Morelan, seconded by LaValle, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Mr. Morelan introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTIONNO. 2000-9-226 -APPROVING THE LOT <br />COM737NATION OF 3220 AND 3222 RICE STREET AS <br />REQUESTED SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH ALL 73UILDINC <br />AND L IFE SAFETY CODES <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle. <br />Ayes (5) Morelan, Scalze, Fahey, LaValle, Pedersen. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />ARCHITEC- The Council reviewed the City Planner's report relative to architectural <br />TURAL review for the Gopher Electronic building at 222 Little Canada Road. <br />REVIEW - It was noted that both the City Planner and the Planning Commission <br />222 LITTLE have recommended approval. <br />CANADA ROAD <br />Morelan questioned the purpose of the architectural guidelines relative to <br />this property. He stated that his understanding was that the City wanted to <br />send the message to property owners that when they make improvements <br />to their property, the City did not want them to forget about the exterior of <br />the building. <br />The City Planner reported that the applicant believes that the <br />improvements they are planning for the building will not reach the 10% <br />threshold that triggers architectural review. However, they were unable to <br />obtain construction statements in a timely manner, therefore, are going <br />through the architectural review process so that their interior <br />improvements will not be delayed. The Planner pointed out that the <br />improvements proposed for the Gopher Electronics building are interior <br />improvements. Therefore, it is difficult to make an architectural review <br />recommendation with little or no exterior improvements to react to. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.