CC PACKET 01241984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-3- i i •- 1 Commis.s:ione , Jones indicated: he.-agreed_ with- Commissioner Bjorklund 2 that there were many landscaping .and security concerns which could ' 3 not be addressed without the full set of plans. Commissioner Franzese 4 indicated she wanted to wait until she had an opportunity to see just 5 .how the western side of the- building which faces the parkway would - 6 be treated-.:and Commissioner Hansen-- indicated he shared her concerns 7 about the.-view. of the 'building from the front and the concerns of 8 the other Commissioners related to--the- provision .of- security and 9 fire protection for the building. 10 11 ,Mr.. Madsen said he knew there was. an elaborate alarm system planned' "12, for the building- which would: be". paid for- by the park- board and indi- ' 13- Gated a delay of a month could pose real problems for the park board 14 since they planned to advertise for bids the next day and to submit 15 a building permit right away. 16 17 Commissioner Jones indicated he wanted specific concerns about the 18 proposal addressed before a recommendation was made to the Council 19 and wanted the curb cut tied. into the Minneapolis ' intentions re- 20 garding the maintenance of the roadway. Commissioner Bowerman ihdi- 21 Gated he:. did--_ not think that.-should be .the Commission's concern at 22 that time since no formal request for a curb cut- had been made and 23 the only matter before them was actually the determination of whether 24 -or not the proposed building was to be constructed in such- a manner 25 as to be compatible with the natural environment and reminded them 26 that the 'llanager ,had indicated the -proposed construction would meet - -27-7-a•11• the --Zoning Ordinance---requ>irements .-and J"merely -needrs Comm• s-s•ion - 28 and Council approval as a matter of formality" unless the-.Commi-ssion 29, perceives the material. or design would have a -detrimental environ- 30 mental effect. The Commissioner said the Building Inspector has - 31 been working with the planner all along .and he questioned whether 32 the Commission would be acting- in a legal manner to enter into the 33 planning process at this stage by questioning how the security would 34 be provided and whether or not the. glass. or interior- -finish was = 3-5 vandal proof. He s-a-id "how-'can- you trade of f 'a curb cut which- -hasn-'-t 36 even been requested yet, for a building which is being constructed 37 by the park board on their own property? 38 39 -Commissioner Wagner indica-ted• he believed the Commission was acting 40 properly 'when they wanted to know about the security which would be 41 provided, Ls.in,ce .that is the- City ' s responsibility and agreed that they 42 had a right to see all specific plans for the proposal before acting 43 on the request. 44 45 Commiss,i-oner ,B:j.6rkl 'nd reiterated •that he believed the connection 46 between the provision of a ,quality road for a quality building was 47 .a valid one ;and he believed the City of Minneapolis should be willing 48 to negotiate in good faith on the matter.. ,He did not see them as 49 acting in a fair manner and said he didn'.t want to see his tax moneys 50•--•-spent -for. a road they would..-bene.f t_mos•t-f rom,. •- -- 5-L: - °552t,'The`.Manager commented that' f-when* they, -first saw the agenda.-packet, 53 the Commissioners had called him to let him know they' wanted.,to dis- 5`4 cuss' the matter directly with the Minneapolis officials, • he .could 55 : have: had them come -to the meeting and would have made certain all