My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/04/2000 Park Board Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Park Board
>
Park Board Meeting Packets
>
1999-2020 Park Board Packets
>
2000 Park Board Packets
>
01/04/2000 Park Board Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2014 12:23:29 PM
Creation date
7/24/2014 11:58:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Park Board
Park Bd Document Type
Park Board Packet
Meeting Date
01/04/2000
Park Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
• <br />• <br />• <br />COUNCIL MINUTES OCTOBER 11, 1999 <br />4. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special <br />privilege that would be denied by this ordinance to other lands, structures, or buildings in <br />the same district. <br />5. The final action will be in keeping within the spirit and intent of the ordinance. <br />Staff advised it supports setback variances for the building and parking lot and for the number of <br />parking spaces because of the physical constraints of the site. <br />Council expressed concern regarding the impervious surface, decrease in parking and partial <br />parking in the County's right -of -way, wetland delineation, and a 90' variance. <br />Staff advised the County right -of -way issue has been resolved. There is already parking within <br />the ordinary high water setback. This plan would pave that area and, provide some treatment of <br />run off, which would be an improvement environmentally. The number of parking spaces is an <br />issue. Staff indicated the variance requested is justified. The setback is an issue also. <br />Council asked if the parking plan is any closer to the lake. Staff st <br />not be any greater. <br />achment would <br />Council expressed concern regarding the elevation and 'n. If stated if extreme <br />flooding occurred part of the parking lot would be g <br />Council suggested the possibility of reloc. . Staff advised that economic <br />development within the City is import .. i t. 'r inesses must grow to survive. The City must <br />pay attention to established busin < h e ity. <br />Council asked about the po o + ucing the size of the building to accommodate the <br />number of parking lot , taf r'orted that some size reduction has been considered. The <br />Planning and Zoning ' c • , ended approval with 10 less parking lots. The property does <br />have many constraints in: to parking. <br />Council Member Bergeson moved to approve variances for setback from OHWL for building <br />and parking lot as indicated on the site plan, approve variance to reduce the number of parking <br />spaces to 78, and approve site plan based on findings in the report and the following conditions: <br />1. Proper building permits must be obtained prior to any construction and 1% of the <br />construction costs must be put in escrow to insure completion of all site improvements. <br />A fire sprinkler system is required. <br />2. New information describing exterior lighting must be submitted and obtain approval <br />by City staff, including the CSO, prior to issuance of building permits. In short, the <br />lighting shall be shielded (no direct light). Wall pack fixtures are not acceptable. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.