Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-16-1999 PC PROCEEDINGS OF THE MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY,MINNESOTA Regular Meeting June 16, 1999 Mounds View City Hall 2401 Highway 10,Mounds View,MN 55112 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Peterson at 7:00 p.m., June 16, 1999. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Chairperson Peterson, Commissioners Berke, Hegland, Kaden, Laube, and Miller. Members Absent: Commissioners Braathen, Johnson, and Stevenson, with prior notice. Also Present: Planning Associate Jim Ericson, Community Development Director Rick Jopke, and Recorders Carla Wirth and Trish Pearson. Index to Minutes Page Planning Case No. 554-99, 2523 Highway 10 (Moundsview Square) Craig J. Gilb (Merryville Farm Market), Applicant Consideration of a conditional use permit to operate a produce stand 2 Planning Case No. 557-99, 7690/7692 Silver Lake Road Meiho Lee, Applicant Consideration of a minor subdivision 4 Planning Case No. 561-99, 7613-7619 Woodlawn Drive PMJ Group (Mike Juaire), Applicant Consideration of a development review request for a four-unit residential rental dwelling 6 Staff Reports/Items of Information 8 Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Reports 9 Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 2 • 3. Citizens' Requests and Comments on Items Not on the Agenda There were no citizen requests or comments on items not on the agenda. 4. Approval of Minutes A. May 19, 1999 Planning Associate Ericson stated that he had spoken with the recording secretaries regarding the meeting minutes,and that it was agreed that a more summarized version be prepared for presentation to the Commission. He stated that there had been concerns among some of the Commissioners regarding the length of the minutes. He stated that staff had revised the May 19 Meeting minutes to more generally reflect the intent of the Commissioners, and a copy would be provided to the Commissioners for review. Chair Peterson stated that although a verbatim rendering of the minutes was not required, it was important to properly convey the intent of the Commissioners. MOTION/SECOND:Miller/Kaden to table the May 19, 1999 meeting minutes until the next Meeting of the Planning Commission. • Ayes—6 Nays—0 The motion carried. 5. Planning Case No. 554-99 Property Involved: 2523 Highway 10 (Moundsview Square) Consideration of a conditional use permit to operate a produce stand Applicant: Craig J. Gilb (Merryville Farm Market) The applicant was not present. Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: The applicant, Craig Gilb, representing Merryville Farm Market, is requesting a conditional use permit to operate an outdoor produce stand in the parking lot of Moundsview Square Shopping Center from July 1, 1999 to September 30, 1999. The produce stand would be open seven days a week from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and would be selling produce home-grown in Waverly, Minnesota. The stand is a five-sided gazebo-like structure with a canvas roof, and is 14 feet wide at its widest point and 9 feet high at the peak. The stand requires no utility hook-ups. The produce stand was granted a conditional use permit the last three years at this same location. Staff is not aware of any problems associated with this operation. • AIM Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 3 • Ericson presented staff's analysis, noting this will be the same operation that was approved last year for this location and no changes have been proposed. The dates of operation for the farm market, if approved as requested, could possibly overlap by 10 days with Linder's Greenhouses, which was granted an outdoor sales conditional use permit through July 15, 1999. In the occurrence of an overlap of uses,there should be little impact to parking, as the produce stand would occupy only 110 square feet of the parking lot. Signage for the produce stand will be accomplished with small banners affixed to the gazebo base and lettering on the canvas roof. Ericson noted the conditional use permit for Merryville is drafted in such a way so that future appearances before the Planning Commission and City Council are not required. The conditional use permit will remain in effect indefinitely so long as there are no changes to the operation and there have been no problems or reasons which would warrant the Planning Commission and City Council to re- examine the conditional use permit. Ericson reviewed the conditional use permit requirements as contained in Municipal Code Section 1115.04, Subd. 2,and indicated that all required criteria have been met. Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit. Ericson stated that staff had drafted a resolution to approve a conditional use permit for Merryville Farm Market to operate an outdoor produce stand at Moundsview Square Shopping Center annually from July 1, 1999 to September 15, 1999, with stipulations. Commissioner Miller requested that the first page, second paragraph of Resolution 581-99, be corrected to indicate Mounds View. Ericson noted an inconsistency between the staff report and the resolution, explaining that the staff report indicates the hours of operation of the produce stand to be from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and that the resolution allows for operation between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. He added that Merryville Farm Market had requested to operate within the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., noting that staff could amend the resolution to reflect the period that the produce stand would be operating. Chair Peterson noted the longer daylight hours during the dates of the proposed operation. He explained that if an amendment was to be made to the resolution, it should be done at the present meeting. Ericson explained that the Commission could approve the resolution as drafted, and the produce stand could still operate within the requested hours of 10:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Commissioner Miller requested that the resolution indicate the operating hours to be from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Chair Peterson stated that he believed that Merryville Farm Market was an asset to the City, and was not aware of any problems associated with the produce stand. He asked if the stipulations therein included the contingency of the property owner's annual approval. Ericson stated that Item 5a of the resolution provides for this stipulation. • Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 4 • MOTION/SECOND: Laube/Peterson to adopt Resolution 581-99, a Resolution Recommending Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Outdoor Produce Sales at Moundsview Square,Requested by Merryville Farm Market; Planning Case No. 554-99, as corrected and amended. Ayes—6 Nays—0 The motion carried. 6. Planning Case No. 557-99 Property Involved: 7690/7692 Silver Lake Road Consideration of a minor subdivision Applicant: Meiho Lee The applicant was not present. Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: The applicant,Meiho Lee, is requesting City approval of a minor subdivision to create two lots from her property located at 7690/7692 Silver Lake Road. The City's subdivision regulations allow for approval of a surveyor's certificate in these situations, however, a more complex and detailed full plat • may be substituted. This property, located at the southwest corner of County Road I and Silver Lake Road,currently has 202 feet of frontage on County Road I and 116 feet along Silver Lake Road. There is a twin home existing on the lot that takes access from Silver Lake Road. The applicant proposes to split off an irregular portion of land from the west half of the existing lot to create a new, 12,500 square-foot lot with 102 feet of frontage on County Road I. The dimension of both of these lots, as shown on the survey, would meet the City's minimum requirements as specified in Chapter 1104 of the Zoning Code. Ericson presented staff's analysis, noting that the lot is 25,450 square feet in area, which is enough land area to be subdivided pursuant to the City Code requirement of 12,500 square feet per R-2 lot. He stated that a problem exists in that, in an effort to obtain the minimum land area for the lot, and maintain the setbacks and the 100 foot lot width requirements, the proposed subdivision is rather irregular in shape, which does not lend itself well to an easy legal description. He stated that the applicant, under advisement of her surveyor, has proposed to replat the property which would eliminate the need for a confusing legal description, and result in a more simple lot and block description of the proposed subdivision. Ericson noted that the Land Development section of the Comprehensive Plan discourages the approval of any subdivision creating"flag lots" or other irregular lots. He noted that the proposed subdivision, while it is irregular, is not a flag lot. Ericson noted that there were drainage issues. He stated that a pond exists, as indicated on the Certificate of Survey, which remains throughout the year, and that at times of rain, the pond tends to spread and cover a significant area of the backyards, as well as a property with an existing twin home . to the south. He stated that the property owner to the south has been pumping water out onto County Road Ito relieve the flooding which has been a long standing problem. He indicated that staff was concerned about the possibility of flooding, not only in the backyards, but the possibility of water Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 5 4110 damage occurring to the structures themselves because there is no drainage from the area. He stated that a wetland exists two properties to the south that could theoretically accommodate any runoff from the area, but noted that there was no way to divert the water to the wetland, at this point, due to changes in elevation. He explained that it was believed that by constructing a channel, one to two feet deep, directionally toward the wetlands to the south, the excess drainage could be accommodated. He noted that this would be contingent upon the cooperation of the adjacent property owners. He stated that the Certificate of Survey had been forwarded to the City Engineer who agreed that the drainage issues would have to be addressed before the issuance of a building permit. He stated that the matter before the Commission was consideration of granting the Subdivision, and that the drainage considerations would not preclude this. He explained, however, that the applicant should be aware that the granting of the Subdivision would not necessarily mean that a building permit could be issued. Ericson stated that the Certificate of Survey would require revision to a form that would be acceptable to the County, and there were also issues regarding highway and roadway easements. He stated that those would need to be shown on the plat as rights of way,as opposed to easement areas, which would affect the way the plat was drafted. He stated that staff had not provided a resolution at this time, as they would require more information regarding preparation of the final draft. Ericson stated that when the application was first submitted, there had been discussion regarding the possibility of a variance for a non-conforming lot, and that the applicant had chosen to avoid that process at that time. He stated that it was possible that a variance might be a better approach to the situation, noting that a hardship may exist as the County had taken some of the subject property along County Road I, for improvements. He stated that had this not been done,the applicant would have been able to subdivide the property in a more conventional fashion. Ericson requested that the Commission direct staff on how to proceed with the matter in regard to drafting the resolution, and what other information would be required to be submitted with the application. Commissioner Hegland asked if the elevation of the wetland was lower than that of the property. Ericson stated that the wetland elevation was 899, while the lowest elevation of the subject property was 904,and most of the backyard area was 906. Commissioner Hegland noted that he had seen the water accumulation at the location,and was aware that the property required pumping. He noted that the addition of another twin home would make the flooding worse, impacting the property owner to the south. He asked what type of drainage plan and implementation would be required to resolve this. Ericson stated that according to the City Engineer,grading a swale along the back side of the property to the wetland would provide a workable solution. He stated that this would require the approval of the adjacent property owners, and if that was not possible, there was the option of installing a storm sewer or catch basin along County Road I or Silver Lake Road. He stated that this would be a costly solution, but reiterated that without properly addressing the drainage issues, there would be no possibility of the issuance of a building permit. Commissioner Hegland asked for clarification regarding the legal issues of denying or accepting the subdivision prior to the proposed construction. Ericson stated that granting the subdivision may indicate to the applicant, who's intention it was to develop the property, that she could obtain a • building permit, which was not necessarily the case in this situation. Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 6 Commissioner Berke asked if there had been any input from the neighboring property owners, and if it was required that they be notified. Ericson stated that he had not received any input regarding the matter from the property owners, and that it was not required that they be notified. He stated, however,that staff was attempting to communicate with the property owner to the south regarding the proposed subdivision. Commissioner Laube stated the adjacent neighbor to the west, on County Road I, should be notified, as he or she may be impacted by the proposed subdivision. He stated his concern regarding the possible necessity of a retaining wall between the adjacent properties, and whether or not an easement would be required for that purpose.Ericson stated that staff would notify the adjacent property owners, and ask for their input on the proposed development. Commissioner Berke asked if the drainage area to the south was situated on private land. Ericson said it was and stated that there were two intervening properties, in addition to the twin home located to the south. He stated that there was a through-lot,and a vacant lot adjacent to Silver Lake Road, which he believed was not buildable due to the wetland on the property and a wetland easement covers most of that property. He stated that staff believed that, although they could work with the applicant in notifying the adjacent property owners, it was the applicant's responsibility to come to an agreement with the property owners. Commissioner Berke asked if the area would accommodate the additional runoff, if the developer of • the homes located further to the south continued to build. Ericson stated that it should be sufficient, given that it is a large area with the elevation of 899. He added that there was also an outlet under Silver Lake Road to assist with the drainage. Commissioner Miller suggested that the applicant should work on this aspect of the drainage plan, prior to the Commission acting upon the subdivision. Chair Peterson stated that he would be uncomfortable until all aspects of the possible impact to the other property owners were resolved. He stated that he was uncertain that the various drainage issues could be properly resolved,and that by granting the subdivision, the City may be faced with potential problems. He added that, although the subdivision was a legal possibility, it might not be an ideal so u ion "or a neig •or oo•. Commissioner Kaden stated that he concurred with the other Commissioners regarding the drainage issues,and was concerned regarding the impact to the two properties to the west. Ericson stated that staff would contact the applicant and ask him to come forward with evidence the drainage issues could be resolved. He stated that staff was aware of the sixty day deadline, and with this in mind, would continue to gather information regarding the issues to present to the Commission at a future meeting. He added that staff could obtain an extension of the deadline, if necessary. 7. Planning Case No. 561-99 • Property Involved: 7613-7619 Woodlawn Drive Consideration of a development review request for a four-unit residential rental dwelling Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 7 • Applicant: PMJ Group (Mike Juaire) The applicant's representative, Phil Juaire, was present. Planning Associate Ericson gave the staff report as follows: The applicant has requested approval of a development review for the fourplex to be located at 7613-7619 Woodlawn Drive,currently vacant property. The applicant has purchased this lot through the Ramsey County tax-forfeit auction and is also the owner of the adjacent lot to the west, for which the Planning Commission already recommended approval of a separate development review. He stated that the City Council has approved the first Development Review, and that construction on the project has commenced. He stated that all of the Planning Commission's and staff's requested modifications had been accomplished. He also stated that the applicant had agreed to sign a statement indicating that he would dedicate an easement. He provided the Commissioners with the updated and revised landscape plan, with minor modifications, which were recommended by the City Forester. He stated that the property owner to the north had indicated that she would dedicate an easement to the County Road I storm sewer catch basin. He explained that this was the City's preferred option to address the drainage issue. He stated that the encroachments from Woodlawn Terrace would be removed. • Ericson provided the Commissioners with the site plan and floor plan for the second development, which show a two-story structure built at grade level (no basements) with the four dwelling units lined in a row. Ericson stated that the fourplex would consist of three 3-bedroom units and one 2-bedroom unit. All of the units,with the exception of the 2-bedroom unit, will have a two-car tuck-under garage. The 2-bedroom unit will only have a one-car garage, but will have two parking spaces in front of the unit. He stated that the setbacks, lot width and area, and all dimensional requirements have been met. He stated that the applicant is not proposing to finish the lower level at this time. He stated that Housing Inspector Steve Dorgan had indicated that,although this was not the optimum situation, there was nothing in the Housing Code to prevent this.. Ericson gave a brief overview of the stipulations, which were identical to those included in the previous reso u ion. -e s . es a t ey were in t e process of being met, and that staff would require these be accomplished prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Commissioner Miller asked if the encroachments referred to in Item 3 of the resolution should be identified. Ericson stated that the stipulation could be re-written to refer to the site plan for identification of the encroachments. Chair Peterson asked if the lower level of the 2-bedroom unit would be finished. Phil Juaire, applicant, stated that it would, and that they believed the variety provided by the two bedroom unit would be a positive marketing asset. Chair Peterson asked if the portion of the foyer that was visible upon entering the four-plex would be finished. Mr. Juaire stated that it would. Chair Peterson asked if there would be a partition wall around the utility room. Mr. Juaire stated that there would be. Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 8 • Commissioner Hegland noted that there was only one exit provided for each unit, and inquired about fire considerations. Mr. Juaire stated that the fire requirements had been met, and that they would be installing additional fire extinguishers for safety purposes. He stated that they were considering the additional utilization of a double layer of 5/8 inch sheet rock between the units. Commissioner Kaden asked if the tree represented on the landscaping plan was an existing tree. Mr. Juaire stated that it was a cottonwood, approximately 20 inches in diameter, which would remain at the site. MOTION/SECOND: Kaden/Berke to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 583-99, Recommending Approval of a Development Review for a Four-Unit Multiple Family Residential Dwelling Located at 7613 - 7619 Woodlawn Drive; Planning Case No. 558-99, with stipulations, as amended. Ayes—6 Nays—0 The motion carried. 8. Staff Reports /Items of Information A. Previous Council Action • Community Development Director Jopke reported on the previous City Council Work Session where discussion had taken place in regard to the billboard issue. He stated that the Council was still interested in pursuing the issue,and had directed staff to prepare an ordinance for discussion with the Planning Commission and the community, which would allow for billboards along the Highway 118 corridor and at the golf course. He stated that staff was drafting the ordinance, which would allow for billboards by Conditional Use Permit, for presentation to the Planning Commission at their first meeting in July. He stated that staff had also been directed to investigate the existing zoning at the golf course,and to provide their recommendations regarding the matter, as well as amendment of the Sign Code, for clarification of the requirements. He stated that the Council had discussed the Development Review for the initial four-plex on Woodlawn Drive, the amendment to the Building Code for issuance of Contractors Licenses, as well as an amendment of the language of the Code to provide for consistency with State requirements. He stated that discussion took place in regard to the potential issuance of an additional gas franchise requested by Reliant Energy/Minnegasco, to operate within the City of Mounds View. Jopke reported that at the City Council meeting on June 14, the Council approved first reading of the ordinance amending the Building Code for contractor's licenses. He stated that the Council voted to accept the public improvements at the theater project, and had approved a resolution requesting an additional six month extension to the Comprehensive Plan update. He stated that the Council had approved the Development Review for the initial four-plex located on Woodlawn Drive. Ericson stated that staff had received over one thousand responses to the Internet Survey. He stated . that one of the questions posed in the survey was in regard to what types of information the community would like to keep abreast of. He stated that they had received over three hundred E-mail addresses from people who were interested in being kept informed regarding the happenings within Mounds View Planning Commission June 16, 1999 Regular Meeting Page 9 • the City. He stated that he felt the Internet was an exciting medium, which would provide greater communication between the City and the community. He added that, in the future, it was conceivable that many City processes could be accomplished over the Internet. Commissioner Laube asked if staff had received any communication from the State regarding the billboard issue. Jopke stated that he had spoken with two State Representatives, who indicated that Commercial or Industrial zoning requirements were firm. He stated that the Council's reaction was that the City could get its `house in order', and if a developer was unable to obtain a permit from the State,it would be their problem. Commissioner Laube asked if a sunset clause could be added to the billboard ordinance to allow the ordinance to be null and void if the State denies permits. Jopke stated that the language of the ordinance could be reviewed. Jopke updated the Commission regarding the Mermaid project. He noted that they are still negotiating with the adjacent property owners,and have reached tentative agreement with two of them. He stated, however,the Lambert site was not willing to cooperate. He stated they had preliminary notification from the State that they might obtain a redevelopment grant. He noted that the developer may simply decide to scale the project back,and that there were a number of different options available. He stated that he had spoken to a developer who was working to acquire a site for the development of a Walgreen's drug store. 9. Chairperson and Planning Commissioners Report • No other reports were considered. 10. Adjournment There being no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Peterson adjourned the meeting at 8:16 p.m. (The meeting immediately adjourned to the Agenda Session) Respectfully submitted, < 1 Rick Jopke Community Development Director Transcribed by: Trish Pearson TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION • RESOLUTION NO. 581-99 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW • COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR PRODUCE SALES AT MOUNDSVIEW SQUARE, REQUESTED BY MERRYVILLE FARM MARKET; PLANNING CASE NO. 554-99 WHEREAS, Craig Gilb, representing Merryville Farm Market, has applied for a conditional use permit to conduct open and outdoor sales at Moundsview Square Shopping Center; property zoned B-4, legally described as follows: That Part Lying Northeasterly of the Centerline of State Trunk Highway 10 of NE' of NE I/ (Subject to Roads and Highways) in Section 7, Township 30, Range 23 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Zoning Code allows open and outdoor sales in the B-4 Regional Business District with the approval of a conditional use permit; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this proposal: a. Planning Application b. Zoning Map c. Site Plan d. Letter from Property Owner WHEREAS, The Mounds View Planning Commission makes the following findings that the criteria for approval in Section 1115.04, Subd. 2 have been met: a. Outdoor service,sales and equipment rental connected with the principal use is limited to thirty percent(30%)of the gross floor area of the principal use. The shopping center contains 102,035 square feet of building area. The applicant proposes to occupy 110 square feet of the parking lot, which is less than 1% of the building square footage on the site. This criterion has been met. b. Outside sales areas are fenced or screened from view of neighboring residential uses or an abutting residential district in compliance with Subdivisions 1103.08(1)through(5)of this Title. The parking lot fronting Highway 10 does not abut any residential properties. The nearest • residential property is Wildwood Manor, an apartment building for senior citizens, which would be well screened from the proposed use by a stand of trees. Merryville Farm Market Planning Commission Resolution 581-99 • June 14, 1999 Page 3 a. Letter of permission from property owner. b. Complete set of site plans c. Narrative description of the proposal. 6. This Conditional Use Permit may be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council if any problems develop or if there are any changes to the operation deemed substantial enough to warrant such review, in the estimation of the Director of Community Development or the City Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Conditional Use Permit shall have no expiration date and shall remain in force so long as the conditions agreed upon herein are observed. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 16th day of June, 1999. • s5 , JerryPetern�air erson Attest: jc., 1 Rick Jopke, Community Aevelopment Director (Seal) N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\55499\581-99PC.RES • MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 583-99 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR A FOUR-UNIT MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING LOCATED AT 7613 - 7619 WOODLAWN DRIVE; PLANNING CASE NO. 558-99 WHEREAS, PMJ Group, represented by Mike Juaire, has requested City approval of a development review for a four-unit multiple family residential structure to be located at 7613 - 7619 Woodlawn Drive, legally described as follows: Lot 10,Block 1,Parkview Terrace Ramsey County,Minnesota WHEREAS, Chapter 1006 of the Mounds View Municipal Code requires that a development review be conducted for all commercial and industrial development and all residential development where more than two dwelling units are being erected within the City; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission has reviewed the following • documents regarding this proposal: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Site and Parking Plans,date-stamped 6/7/99 4. Elevations and Floor Plans,date-stamped 6/4/99 5. Drainage Plans,date-stamped 6/7/99 6. Landscape Plan,date-stamped 6/11/99 WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission finds that the site plan date-stamped I . ••• • 1 • •u • •' • - •' • • •• -• - 14 • • . setbacks, parking requirements, building height, minimum floor space, open space, and floor area; and, WHEREAS, the Mounds View Planning Commission is aware that City staff has reviewed and the City Engineer has approved two alternative drainage plans for the site. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the Mounds View Planning Commission recommends approval of a development review for a four unit multiple family residential structure to be located at 7613 - 7619 Woodlawn Drive, subject to the following stipulations: S1. The landscape plan shall be revised to include a row of plantings or decorative fencing along the southwestern-most property line of Lot 9. Any plantings shall meet with the approval of the City Forester to ensure compatibility with Mounds View soils. Resolution 583-99 Juaire Development Review June 16, 1999 Page 241111 2. Drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated to the City prior to building permits being issued for those areas to be utilized for drainage purposes where none have been previously dedicated. A signed and notarized"Intent to Dedicate" agreement document will be acceptable in the event easement document preparation is not completed prior to building permits being issued. 3. Those areas of the Woodlawn Terrace apartment complex encroaching upon the subject property as shown on the site plan date-stamped 6/7/99 shall be removed and relocated according to City setback requirements in conjunction with grading activities on the site. In no event shall a certificate of occupancy be issued before this has occurred. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission directs Staff to forward this resolution to the City Council prior to approval of the minutes. Adopted this 16th day of June, 1999 Jerry Peterson, Chairperson • ATTEST: Rick Jopke, Communi Development Director SEAL N:\DATA\GROUPS\COMDEV\DEVCASES\558-99\583-99PC.RES S