Laserfiche WebLink
MIPH Report to Council <br />March 26, 2001 <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />minutes from 1997 and 1998 to determine if any such assurances had been conveyed to <br />Mr. Winiecki. Staff found no such documentation regarding setbacks, although we did <br />find one passage from the December 8, 1997 meeting minutes regarding Mr. Winiecki’s <br />testimony which is somewhat related: <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />While this is certainly not proof that setbacks weren’t discussed at this meeting, the issue is not <br />documented in this passage or in any other meeting minutes. Furthermore, in response to a <br />comment from Mr. Winiecki about something “less desirable” that might be constructed in the <br />future, Mayor McCarty indicated that the Council has the authority to approve or deny any changes <br />to the PUD and that any changes would need to be brought before the Council for consideration. <br />This is exactly the reason that MIPH has requested a development review for this site, and that the <br />decision to approve or deny the change rests with the Council. <br /> <br />For MIPH, it’s an issue of economics. If forced to pull the building back an additional 23 feet, <br />there would be significant expense incurred with soils corrections, fill, earthwork and an <br />engineered retaining wall alongside the stormwater pond. This is not a variance situation, so <br />MIPH does not need to show hardship. The proposed site plan meets and exceeds all zoning and <br />PUD requirements and the applicant has already made concessions to help address Mr. Winiecki’s <br />concerns.