Laserfiche WebLink
l <br />I1/Iou�ds Viev� PIar►ning Conamission Aprii 16, 2003 <br />Regular 1`/�eet�g Pa�e 9 <br />Director Ericson agreed that it is important to establish a fee that at a minimum covers the costs <br />but, if the initial fees set is not appropriate to cover costs, then it will be changed. <br />Coxnmissiotier Hegland indicated he would like the information up front ta discuss the <br />Director Ericson indicated he wouid discuss the rnatter with the police depart�nent onie last time <br />and provide information to the Cocnmission. <br />Connniissioner Scotch commented that a pawnshop with high-�nd jewelry would�-equue =_ <br />, <br />additional security. <br />Mr. Przetycl�i indicated that most businesses have cameras and said he does not want to mcrea�e <br />the police workload and that is why the City joined the autonlatic pawri system. The systein is <br />designed to save tixne and assist with locating stolen goods. He then said he wants to run a <br />legitimate business and doing any differently would not be, beneficial to his business. He further <br />cotnmented that he is using a lot of his own money to siart this busi�less anci it wouid not make <br />good financial sense to run a business that would jeop�dize his reputation c�r harrri his <br />znvestment. <br />Mr. Sonterre indicated there is an inter� <br />limits, is tv�ro officers down and this pa <br />department but the City cannot charge. <br />handle the increased woz•k load. <br />MOTION/SECOND: <br />� <br />the <br />To <br />n <br />Nays—Q <br />� is a police fQree that, because of levy <br />te si�nificant woric for the police <br />the fu11 costs of adding officers to <br />� `724-03 to May 7, 2003. <br />Motion carried. <br />Zev�ew �ro�Q�eci PiTID A�enclinent l�egarc�ing the Property �,�catecl at 2442 <br />:ount� I-���h��y,10 <br />, ::. <br />Zrty"Development I7irector Ericson reviewed the proposed PUD amendment regarding <br />erty at 2442 County Higllway 10. He then indicated that when the PUD was established <br />was ve�y specific tllat it would like a restaurant use for that lot. However, after <br />�g the site for that;`type of use and being unsuccessful, the owner wouid li�Ce the use <br />to allow for an`pffice bu.ilding. <br />Ericson han�led out drar�vings of the proposed two-story office building. He then <br />..t�at he had reviewed the criteria for recommending approval of this type of request in <br />Director Er'reson indicated that in reviewing the criteria Staff was not able to ascertain any <br />potential adverse affects the difference between the restaurant and office building may have and <br />noted that the office building may be even less of an impact ta the adjoining residential complex. <br />