My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Minutes PC 11.16.1976
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
1976
>
Minutes PC 11.16.1976
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/27/2015 11:48:25 AM
Creation date
1/19/2015 2:06:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/16/1976
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
allowed around the building wondering whether the park planners had <br />abandoned their efforts to provide the landscaping originally agreed <br />to. Mr. Hiebel said he saw "only a concrete building in a sea of <br />blacktop". Both agreed that the building was too tight a fit for <br />the lot especially because of its central location in the park where <br />the project sould be more attractive. It was felt an overuse of the <br />land could hinder development of adjacent properties. <br />Mr. Hiebel also questioned whether the John Deere, Inc. business with <br />a showroom fit into the office park concept of the development, say- <br />ing he did not see the park as a high traffic area. Por. Fornell <br />said the proposal could be allowed with a liberal intrepretation of <br />usages permitted under the zoning ordinance. Mr. Johnson said he <br />liked the truck bay design and felt the backside of the building was <br />more attractive than the front. <br />Saying he would be very uncomfortable granting a building permit for <br />a proposal with so few specifics, Mr. Hiebel said he would move for <br />recommendation of disapproval of the building, permit based on a need <br />for more specific building, landscaping, elevation, lighting and <br />signing plans as well as a desire for more relaxed parking plans. <br />Before a second was obtained, Por. Nielsen withdrew his request asking <br />for more time to work the plans over in an effort to incorporate the <br />Board's suggestions into a mroe acceptable proposal. <br />Mr. Hiebel then withdrew his motion. <br />Mr. Fornell's memo of November 12th regarding Mr. Joe Sroga's plans <br />to improve the appearance of his Standard Station at 3201 Stinson <br />Boulevard was discussed with Mr. Sroga after Pyr. Hiebel explained <br />how the Board's request for such information had resulted from atten- <br />tion which had been focused on that neiq_hborhood when the Board was <br />considering the proposal for rebuilding the Jiffy Market a block away. <br />Mr. Sroga said he did not want to completely enclose the area in <br />which the City's impounded or abandoned cars are stored because he <br />wanted to be able to see that area from his home at 3204 Roosevelt <br />Street N.E. for security reasons. He defended erecting an opaque <br />slot cyclone fence rather than a wood fence comparing the maintenance <br />costs of each and pointing out the successfuly use of such a fence <br />for ten years by the Clark station down the street. <br />He said he would be willing to donate the land to the south, which he <br />has cleaned up, for use as a mini park if the City is willing to <br />take over its maintenance. <br />Mr. Sroga also said only the farthest east end of the City's sewer <br />easement would be affected by the erection of the fence. He also <br />mentioned the good relations he enjoyed with his neighbors attributing <br />(2) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.