Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 13, 2000 <br />Council Member Carlson moved to adopt Resolution No. 00 — 27, listing the following findings of <br />fact: <br />1. Section 2 Subd. 2.B.7 of the City's zoning ordinance provides standards for all <br />conditional uses permits. <br />2. Section 5, Subd. 2.H.5. of the zoning ordinance provides additional criteria for a <br />conditional use permit for churches in the R -X zoning district. <br />3 The applicant agreed to several extensions of the review period according to law. <br />4. The revised application submitted February 7, 2000, was not complete, as stated in the <br />staff report. <br />5. The applicant requested as decision by the City Council on the project at the February <br />28, 2000, meeting. <br />6. The proposed phase one building footprint is 26,01.�• '�a� � and the building <br />height would be 30 ft. <br />7. Number of parking spaces (the number <br />8. A majority of the City Council do <br />standards for a conditional <br />ordinance. Specificall • <br />erified). <br />that the project as submitted meets the <br />ted in Section 2 Subd. 2.B.7. of the zoning <br />Sec.2 Subd. 2 that e project must be "harmonious with the general and <br />applicable s. i ,1 d policies of the comprehensive plan of the City and this <br />ordin <br />Sec. 2 S.7.c. states that the project must be "designed, constructed, operated, <br />and main ned so as to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing <br />and/or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential <br />character of that area." <br />In the view of two (2) of the four (4) Council Members, the size of the building and the <br />extent of the project relative to the site are not harmonious with the rural character of <br />the neighborhood, and would change the essential character of the area, which is <br />guided to remain rural in the City's existing comprehensive plan and the draft new <br />plan. <br />Council Member Dahl seconded the motion. <br />• Council Member O'Donnell clarified that a yea vote supports the findings of fact, not necessarily <br />agreeing with the findings. <br />