Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 13, 2000 <br />Council Member Carlson asked for the square footage of the second floor. Staff advised that figure <br />was not determined. <br />Council Member Carlson stated Ms. Sherman calculated that figure to be approximately 41,000 <br />square feet. <br />Council Member Dahl advised she did discuss sewer and water and that issue was one reason she <br />could not support the project. <br />Staff advised sewer and water was discussed. However, denial based on a septic system is not legal. <br />Council Member Carlson advised both the septic system and square footage of the building tie into <br />the staff report relating to capacity. <br />Staff advised septic systems are based on the square footage of a building and are designed for peak <br />capacity. <br />The City Administrator advised she reviewed the tapes from the i "3 d correct square <br />footage was not determined. <br />The City Attorney advised the reason for the findings o to acts together to support the <br />denial. The City has ordinance standards that the t ply with. The findings of fact need <br />1111 to include issues raised by the Council. If an issu s no levant, it should not be included. The City <br />cannot deny a project because it is not wit R oundary. <br />• <br />Council Member Carlson stated t t ars " pertaining to natural resources that the septic <br />system could pertain to. <br />Staff advised the septic to as an issue to the Environmental Board. A well-designed septic <br />system is not a threat t •v nment. <br />Council Member Carlso a' uggested the number of parking spaces also is included because it was not <br />harmonious to the area. <br />Staff advised they do not remember that being part of the discussion. The findings of fact should <br />support why the application was denied. <br />The City Attorney advised the number of parking spots could change the character of an area and <br />could be a finding of fact. <br />Mr. Gary Nordness, Developer for the project, stated the number of parking spaces was less than <br />required. He advised he strongly disagrees that the project was not harmonious with the area. He <br />recommended the Council look at what they are doing very carefully because the applicant will <br />pursue this. <br />