Agenda - Council - 08/28/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

neighbors would oppose the building. Twelve hands were shown in the aud~/~:ce,. Commissioner Sweet stated this would set a precedent. Motion Carried. Votina Yes: Vice Chair Kociscak, Commissioners Sweet, Reeve?:~d, Watson. Voting No: Commissioner Johnson. Absent: C~airperson Nixt. Case #9: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to Operate a 'wa~.ehouse; Case'~af North Suburban Steel Supply p.m. in order to call the public hearing to order .... Commissioner Sweet le~ the meeting at 10._9 p.m. .,~?;.¥?~;;:~ Vice Chair Kociscak called the public ' he~ng to order at 10:~0 p.m:~.~:_:..:-~... Co~udW Development Assist~t ~:~ ~ated aat the CiW received ~.2'4p/~:[i~tion ~om Scon and Pani Jamoluk of North Suburb~t~St~i-'Shpply~. Inc., to operate a steelT/~ehouse bus,ess . . ' . ,:, .-:' --. ' -'.-..:4 . . st :;¢-~¢' 6C ' ~n the accessow structure on ¢e.prope~ located at .8900,i81 Avenue:~:--As you may r ~1, m May of 2000 ~. B ame~ applier"for a C'~nditional us~p~i~Tt0~:op~ a woodwor~ng business on the prope~ ~ ~e non-confom~g ~CC~SSOW s~CGre. ~?.:'B~en w~ propos~g a 6,000 squ~e foot expansion, mployee and cust~'~v-~af~ng, daflT~delivehes, ~d ~mre plans for self-storage u~ts..~e CiW Council de~e'~.~fi. C0nditional use pemt on May 23, 2000 due in lage pan to ~e Ap~Hcma,desire for a l~e expansion, No~ Suburban Steel Supply, Inc. cu~enfly op~S' ~ the CfW¢~f Elk rover. ~y. ha~e,a total of ~ee employees with operating hours of 8:00.m - 5:30pm M6nday t~ Ffida¢7¢N/6~h Suburban Steel would like to utilize the existingS,O00 squ~e foot ac~essow building ,~?Ramsey for w~ehousing of steel products. ~e AppH3~k' fi~:stated ~at:{h~e_ would not, ~e;~k ~mployees stationed on the subject prope~. ~e pu, ose ~k~e acc~3'~';mg~;'~6~}~'be solely for storing steel products until a customer is m need of a p~bau~-'~e Applic~t has stated ~at track traffic to the site will v~ ~om day -~.¥:~ a:~yaepend~g oh~;'~'~aomer demur; on an average there would be a m~imum of ~o rocks ;h-~'~d;~ubject prop~'~kr_ day~'-~.~e ~cks are proposing to access the prope~ t~ough an e~sfing C~.5 dfiveway:'~;'~mc~ 1990, it has been ~e City's policy to not accept applications for b~iness~ST~at would:.'°~&te out of g~ag~and accessow buildings ~ residential dismcts. However, wheedle Ci~ C6uncil reviewed the conditional use pe~it request from ~. B~ett in May of 2000, ~by expressed a willY,ess to review a request for a co~ercial business on the prope~y in o~8~ to ga~ control of a non-confoming building that w~ established in a '"~:"L~:.~.z~?sidential ~s~'dt absent of a residential dwell~g on ~e lot. The dkection ~at cme ~om the ';':-;~CSW C°unc~review of the conditional ~e pe~it at ~at time w~ that ~e best c~e scenario ~°~}d be~fot a residential dwell~g to be const~cted on the prope~ and the accesso~ building util~fi~fd~} personal storage. ~ the event that this was not possible, ~e Council would comider reviewing a conditional use pe~it request to operate a small business on the prope~ ~at would -392- Planning Commission/August 7, 2001 Page 22 of 31