Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br /> September 17, 1996 <br /> Page 10 <br /> 1 Mr. Jones stated he felt the City could make the drainage requirements a condition of the <br /> 2 variance. He noted this parcel of 2.5 acres is below the Rice Creek Watershed standards for <br /> 3 requirement of ponding. He was concerned that if Mr. Miller was not associated with the project <br /> 4 in the future,the plans may be changed. <br /> 5 Mr. Bill Zawislak, 2500-34th Avenue, stated he was in favor of the proposal. He stated he felt <br /> 6 this situation was unique in that the proposal is trying to take a tire store and make it into a liquor <br /> 7 store while retaining the same color scheme that has existed for many years. That is why extra <br /> 8 signage is required and why it is necessary for it to be placed in a specific area. This is a chance <br /> 9 for a fresh start and if it is done right the Liquor Store could be restored to what-it was in the <br /> 10 past. A hardship would be created if the City does not approve this project. <br /> 11 Chair Bergstrom closed the public hearing at 8:25 P.M. <br /> 12 Commissioner Franzese noted that the current off-sale liquor location only has 4 to 5 parking <br /> 13 stalls in front of the store. <br /> 14 Commissioner Horst expressed his concern that if the variance was granted for what was good <br /> 15 for the City, it should be good for all business who face the same problem. He did not want to <br /> see an inequitable situation created between the City and other businesses. He stated he did not <br /> feel the drainage issue had anything to do with the variance request. <br /> 18 Commissioner Gondorchin stated his concern with the parking on the north side of the building. <br /> 19 He also did not feel approval of the variance should be contingent on ponding requirements. <br /> 20 Motion by Gondorchin, seconded by Franzese, to recommend City Council approval of the sign <br /> 21 variance request for business right-of-way frontage on the north side of the proposed addition as <br /> 22 it meets the variance criteria as follows: <br /> 23 1. The hardship is not created by the owner but is due to traffic patterns and multiple <br /> 24 tenancy <br /> 25 2. This condition is unique to the structure and redevelopment of the parcel itself. <br /> 26 3. It is in spirit of redevelopment of the site and is consistent with previous requests and/or <br /> 27 plans for redevelopment of the site. <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Motion carried unanimously. <br /> 30 Commissioner Makowske stated he found it difficult to justify the hardship for the rear yard <br /> 31 setback variance. <br /> Motion by Franzese, seconded by Delmonico,to recommend City Council approval of the rear <br /> it yard setback variance of 18 feet, 6 inches from the required setback of the west lot line of the <br /> 34 Tires Plus site as it meets the variance criteria as follows: <br />