Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />February 11, 1981 <br />Shoreview The Planner informed the Council that Shoreview's Comprehensive Plan <br />Comprehensive is consistent with Little Canada's plan. The only area of concern <br />Plan which involved Morth Owasso Blvd. being designated as a local street <br />in Shoreview's plan and being designated as a collector in Little <br />Canada's was pointed out by the Planner. The Planner suggested that <br />the Council write a letter to Shoreview about this and possibly the <br />Metro Council also. <br />Cub Foods The Planner reported that Cub Foods has added a second floor office to <br />its bui7ding. The Planner reported that Cub did not take out a building <br />permit for this addition. At the same time they added a bakery to the <br />building, but the permit did not include the office, <br />The Planner suggested that the City should try to collect the permit fees <br />for this addition. The Planner also reported that the parking still is <br />adequate for the building. <br />Mrs. Nardini suggested that a system of stamping building plans should be <br />set up. Nardini felt the Planning Commission, Council, Building Inspector <br />and she herse7f should stamp all plans the City receives after they are <br />reviewed. Mrs. ~lardini asked if it were possible to go back and try to <br />collect the permit fees. <br />The Attorney stated that he di~ not know if the City would be successful, <br />but they should try. <br />Mrs. Nar~ini also stated that the inspections were not ma~e on the office <br />portion of the building. Nardini also informed the Council that the Bui1ding <br />Inspector only made one inspection on the bakery addition, when 4 is the <br />number required. <br />The City Clerk reported that the County needs a building permit for the <br />office addition, so that they can tax Cub Foods for this a~dition. <br />Mrs. Nardini stated that she would check if any of the other inspections <br />were made on the office addition. <br />Mr. Forsberg commented that perhaps the building could not support the <br />office addition. Mrs. Scalze thought the City should put something on <br />the permit stating that inspections of the structure were not made, <br />Mr. Forsberg asked if the City could be held liable if the structure <br />collapsed. The Flttorney answered that it is very likely. <br />The Mayor suggested that any action be withheld until it has been determined <br />if any of the other inspections were made. Mrs. Nardini stated that she <br />would do this, <br />Planner's The Planner submitted <br />Contracts for planning services. <br />has not been changed, <br />a 7ot of question as t <br />then have to clear the <br />That is the reason for <br />to the Council for their approval corrected contracts <br />The Planner stated that the ~em on expert testimony <br />The Planner explained that in a court case there is <br />o when the trial wi11 come up. The planning people <br />ir calendar and wait for their testimony to be taken. <br />the $300 minimum charge per day for expert testimony. <br />Paqe -11- <br />