02-23-2005 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 10, 2005 however, that he has never seen a public building sold to private enterprise. Rheaume stated that if the Watershed will not pay property taxes, who will pay for the property's share ofthe assessment for Noel Drive. The Planner stated that he was not sure. Rheaume noted that the development of this parcel will not gain the City any additional property taxes. The Planner stated that this is correct, but pointed out that the City will gain the sale price of the land. Knudsen asked if the building could be altered to increase the setback. The City Planner indicated that it appears that the orientation of the board room and multi - purpose room could be changed so the shallow dimension of this portion of the building runs east to west. This would increase the side yard setback from Noel Drive. Huber Pelt it would be very difficult to make these adjustments. Knudsen asked why the three zoning districts mentioned earlier do not have an increased side yard setback for a corner lot. The City Planner stated that he does not know the answer to this question. He pointed out that Glanzer feels it is a discrepancy in the Code, and that is a possibility. Huber suggested that when Noel Drive is widened, the road will be shifted and there will be more grass between the property line and the pavement. Barraclough asked about building adjustments to the entry area and the "V" in the building that could be made to increase the side yard setback. Huber felt those adjustments would impact the scupper, walkway, entry and library area adversely. Knudsen felt that the concern about the side yard setback was worth trying to tincl a solution. Knudsen stated that he would like to find a way to move forward on this issue without disapproving or tabling action on the proposal. The City Planner suggested that the natter could be passed on to the Council with language to that effect. Weihe asked if the Commission feels there should be an increase side yard setback for this proposal, would the next step be to change the Code. Knudsen felt that ultimately the Code would have to be addressed. Knudsen felt that the first step would be to deal with this Conditional Use Permit, and then revisit the standard. Chuck Vermeesh. 626 County Road 13 -2 and an employee of the City of Maplewood, felt that the City cannot require a greater setback than what is provided for in the Code Vernteesh indicated that Maplewood has always