05-13-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 7 • May 13, 1996 Mounds View City Council Business in this city is not being done in the interest of the residents. If it were there would be a consistent openness in city government. All decisions would be made in public and with many opportunities for the public to try to influence the debate and decisions. The action taken by Mayor Linke and council members Trude and Blanchard on May 6 is a violation of trust and it adds fuel to the cynicism and apathy that already exists in the hearts and souls of voters. Having said all of this, the course we must take now is to give the staff the support they need to make the best of this situation. They need time to plan very carefully and to develop a project that will work to the extent possible. And, our role as a council ought to be one of having only public meetings on this issue and to collectively engage in problem solving strategies cooperatively with the staff. Building consensus with public input is what is needed." Ms. Trude explained that it was the Economic Development Commission that authorized the purchase of the property. There were no requirements for a public hearing, but there was a request for one by Council member Hankner. PUBLIC HEARINGS: • There were no public hearings scheduled for this meeting. COUNCIL BUSINESS: A. Consideration of Resolution No. 4952, Resolutions Regarding a Variance Request for Tom Manke and Leon Theis, Owners of Mounds View Fina, 2280 West County Road I. Ms. Joyce Pruitt, Acting Community Development Director, gave a brief description of the variance request. She explained that Leon Theis and Tom Manke, owners of the Mounds View Fina, had requested a variance from the Planning Commission to allow the placement of a 24' X 44' canopy atop a gas pump island at their station. They requested a variance fora 24' encroachment into the required thirty foot setback. She explained that the request was denied by the Planning Commission as they felt it would be granting the applicant a special privilege that is denied to other property owners in the same or similar zones. Mayor Linke noted that the Planning Commission did feel the canopy would be a benefit to the property, however they could not approve the variance and felt there were alternatives that could be examined for the site. He felt a 24 foot variance fora 30 foot setback requirement was rather extreme. Mr. Manke stated that he plans to update the site whether or not the variance is granted. All they are asking for is a canopy to upgrade it to the 90's, to give security to the customers and to provide weather protection for them. He would be willing to move it back and down towards Adam Street if it would help on the variance issue. A discussion followed as to whether or not a canopy would be considered a new structure (thus an • enlargement of anon-conforming use). Ms. Trude stated if the variance were to be granted, perhaps the