Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />! <br /> <br />Case #$: Request for Site Plan Review; Case of AMSCO <br /> <br />Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that A1 Harp and Larry Carlson have submitted a site <br />plan for!an expansion to their existing facility at 14021 Azurite Street N.W. Ms. Frolik <br />summarized the requirements of the City. <br /> <br />Mr. A1 Harp and Mr. Larry Carlson were present. They stated they do not want to totally <br />asphalt their driveway and parking area as Azurite Street N.W. is not an improved street <br />and they don't want to have to rip out any of their asphalt when the City does the <br />improvements to Azurite. They agreed to blacktop eight parking spaces and the loading <br />area and install curbing on the building side and along the new addition; but they do not <br />want to put up the financial guarantee for the required improvements beyond what they are <br />proposirlg. They indicated they intend to expand their business shortly and felt that having <br />to put up such a large financial guarantee would reduce their operating expenses and ruin <br />their chances to expand. They questioned the legality of the petition language and stated it <br />sounds as though they will be obligated to petition for City sewer and water which they do <br />not want. <br /> <br />Mayor t3ilbertson stated that all other businesses were required to put up financial <br />guarantees for their required site improvements. <br /> <br />Mr. Harp suggested putting up a written promise and at the end of two years, or sooner if <br />Azurite is improved, he would put up the financial guarantee. <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder explained to Mr. Harp and Mr. Carlson that the petition <br />language initiates a feasibility study for sewer and water improvements. The Charter <br />providesi the opportunity for subsequent petitions to allow the property owners to vote for <br />or against the project. Also, the City will not initiate a petition. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Peterson and seconded by Councilmember Hardin to grant site <br />plan approval to ^MSCO contingent upon submittal of a corrected site plan to reflect the <br />requirenlents ;for paving and curbing and contingent upon the applicant entering into a site <br />plan development permit for the project with a two year time frame for the required site <br />improvements and contingent upon the applicants and the City Engineer verifying an <br />appropriate amount for the financial guarantee. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Motion carded. Voting Yes: Mayor Gilbertson, Councilmembers Peterson, Hardin, Beyer <br />and zimmennan. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #6: Introduce Franchise Fee Ordinance <br /> <br />City Administrator Schroeder stated that Staff's position is the City needs to initiate a <br />franchise fee ordinance for reasons of stability in revenue for unfunded items and to <br />recognize services the City provides to utility companies. <br /> <br />Discussion ensued regarding the City's need for money and the unknown funding cuts <br />from the State, <br /> <br />A resident present stated this should be called a tax because that's what it is, a "sneaky <br />tax". <br /> <br />Doug Fountain, 15255 Garnet Street N.W., asked if this fee is to cover "freebie services" <br />that have been provided by the City. <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder stated that the City has an estimate of what value the utilities receive by <br />using right-of-ways (the City has about 143 miles of right-of-ways). There was no charge <br /> <br />City Council/January 26, 1993 <br /> Page 7 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />