My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC PACKET 08272002
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2002
>
CC PACKET 08272002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 7:58:39 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 7:58:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
29
SP Folder Name
CC PACKETS 2001-2004
SP Name
CC PACKET 08272002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 1S <br /> August 20, 2002 <br /> Page 3 <br /> 1 <br /> 2 Mr. White stated the benefits to St. Anthony are to improve overall appearance, <br /> 3 maintenance free materials, upgrading fire protection and energy efficiency, they expect <br /> 4 vehicle traffic will be dramatically reduced on Macalester Drive, and providing a new <br /> 5 detention pond to control run off. He stated they are requesting variances so they can <br /> 6 proceed and requested input from the Planning Commission. <br /> 7 <br /> 8 Chair Melsha asked how much taller this building will be than those being removed. Mr. <br /> 9 White stated the buildings being demolished are about 25 feet in height. <br /> 10 <br /> 11 Chair Melsha asked if the setback requirement is being met. Mr. Murlowski stated the <br /> 12 proposed setback allow this building to line up with the recently finished vault building <br /> 13 at five feet from Macalester Drive and County Road D. <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Chair Melsha asked if that building needed a variance when it was constructed in 1972. <br /> 16 Mr. Murlowski stated it did not. Mr. White dted that building was upgraded about two <br /> 17 years ago and a variance was not required NNWlt time since the building footprint was <br /> 18 not changed. <br /> 19 <br /> 20 Chair Melsha explained the need to sho" hardship in order to receive a variance. He <br /> 21 asked if there is a unique feature that-would t' , It in a hardship consideration. <br /> 22 "f <br /> 23 Mr. White stated it will consolidate, e business operation and provide space for storage <br /> 24 and aisles. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 Mr. Murlowski stated th of y era ion is media and record storage as well as fine arts <br /> 27 storage. Thus the lay"ouf is° , Portant to maximize the volume that can be stored. <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Chair Melsha explainedhat both variance requests need to meet that finding as well as to <br /> 30 maintain the characteristic 'of the neighborhood, which don't appear to be impacted due <br /> 31 to the building height. He asked if there can be a reasonable use of this property without. <br /> 32 the variance. <br /> 33 <br /> 34 Thomas- stated if the 35-foot setback from Macalester Drive was required, there would <br /> 35 not be enough room for parking and the truck turning radius He noted there are 50 <br /> 36 parking spaces and asked if that is for employees or visitors. <br /> 37 <br /> 38 Mr. White stated there are 40 parking spaces, primarily for employees since there are few <br /> 39 visitors to this site. He stated that is adequate parking for their needs. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 Hall stated that level of parking complies with the City's requirements for this type of <br /> 42 facility. <br /> 43 <br /> 44 Chair Melsha asked what would happen to the feasibility of the project should the <br /> 45 buildings be required to comply with the Macalester Drive setback. <br /> 46 <br /> 47 Mr. Murlowski stated they don't know for sure but do know they could not make a <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.