08/13/2003 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board July 9, 2003 Page 11 • developing in this area. He stated they were a retailer who only sold tires. He noted they • • believed in quality and all work was done inside. Vice Chair Rafferty asked how many employees they would have. Mr. Wendell replied there would be typically eight to ten employees at the store at any one time. Mr. Tralle made a MOTION to close the public hearing at 10:26 p.m. and was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 4 -0. Ms. Lane made a MOTION to approve the Site Plan Review and CUP with ten (10) conditions. The motion was supported by Mr. Corson. Motion carried 4 -0. E. Century Farm North, Final Plat Staff reviewed their July 9, 2003 report and recommended approval of the Final Plat subject to twenty - three (23) conditions as noted in the Resolution. Vice Chair Rafferty stated he wanted the overhang on the airplane hangers to be 36 inches. Mr. Uhde, applicant, replied the airport association had requested the overhangs be 24 -36 inches in the event the building inspectors required additional trusses be added. Mr. Smyser replied he would run this by the building inspectors for their opinion. Vice Chair Rafferty stated he wanted the overhang to be 36 inches on the hangers for consistency in the area. Mr. Tralle stated he believed the developer should pay the full park dedication fee. Mr. Grochala stated this would be an issue for the City Attorney to look at. Vice Chair Rafferty asked what did the developer want the park dedication figure to be. Mr. Uhde stated they were at the Park Board on Monday and they had been directed by the Board for the past year to dedicate land and not cash. He stated up until a few days ago, they had not decided which land to dedicate. He indicated they had not seen what the City was requiring until a couple of days ago. He noted the dedication should be a percentage, considering they were donating land. Vice Chair Rafferty indicated that $103,821 was a small part of this whole development, and he did not see why they could not come to an agreement on this and get it resolved. Mr. Uhde indicated if they could not come to an agreement with the City, by State Statute, they could escrow the money and take it to arbitration. He noted he did not believe this would go as far as a Court proceeding. Mr. Grochala indicated this was something they would need to work on with Mr. Uhde and the attorneys. Ms. Lane noted this was a matter of interpretation and it was up the attorneys to interpret it, and as long as the developer would be required to escrow the funds, she did not see this as an issue. Mr. Grochala indicated staff was comfortable with this arrangement.