02/06/78 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

· he two possible solutions purchase an sdd'i_tional numb or obtain a letter from the objections to the building and then obtain a variance he felt that NHC should not P& Z-4- ~ , a/6/78 ? discussed were to ezther have the },cKnights error feet from the ad3acent property owner~ a~jacent owners stating that they have no ~e~ing-. located so close to the property line ~r~m the !City. Phil Nereson explained that b~ allOwed'such an easy out. A major fact to consider is the small am~, u~t o'f side yard. Mr. Ben Deemer~ ~20 - 151st Avenue N.W. asked, i~ it wasn't possible to imoound NHC's bond. Phil Nereson explained that it i,, too long'of a process to-solve this particular ~roblem. ~rad Bodle sta~ed tha~ he ~1~ tha~ NHC definitely had so~e responsibility in this problem. There was~ f~rther-discussion on how to handle~'the matter. Motion by Brad Bodle~ secon~e~ bY A1 Sorteberg to table this matter un- til the Building Official 0~n'~approach NHC regarding their negotiating with the a~jacent property wmers for additional property. Motion carried 5-0 Ur. McKp~ght was asked if N..~C~]had indicated to him any desire to settle the prob].er~. Mr. McKnight pe~lied that Mr. Glen Barrot told him that he had ta].ke<] to the Ci.ty Off$2i~l several times and had not received shy g~atisfaction. Tom Gamec as ~e~ who had paid for the fee for the variance reeuest, and Mrs. McKnight -~tated that she had paid the fee even though NUC is the permit holder. ~r~ McKnight asked for a copY of all corre-, sponde~ i.n the matter~ and~'P~ll Nereson agreed to provide these copies. Item 7, Subdivision reques~ & HighWay 10 area West of Deziel'S. Mr. Dick Carson~ from carson'{H~mes[Was ~.prese{t to reques'~.~ance to sub,livable a parcel of land ~d~acent to Deziel's and to request a variance ali. owing them to o~tRin & buildin~ permit for same oarcel. Ph~.l Nareson expisined that~recent zoning ~ction changed thi~ parcel to 2.5 acre minimum lot size. ~:H~wever~ negotiations between Mr. Carson and DezJ.el's were started p~i~r to new zoning. Phil Nereson stated that in his o~inion ,he zoning c~d~ change was meant to control density in residential dev'elopment, bu; ~ot necessarily commercial areas. Mr. Carson presented a plan for ~,off~ce type 'facilities for this~site~ ~T'~4ort~herg stated that he a~a not see any problem with the r~q. uests, and asked what would be don ~ith2the remaining property, Mr. Carson stated that the remaining ~ar~el would be used by Kovar Mfg. for possible future relocation. The Corem]salon next address]ed:` themselves to the question of service road. location. The majority of ~th~ members favored having future service ro~od alon~ the rear of the PrSperty. Gerry Zimmerman stated that (~idn't believe rear service r~ads would be utilized. Mr. Tom ...................... and Mr. Mike g0var were pr e~t and asked how they fe_t about rear ~ccess. They fndicated that ~his would be fine with them and asked the Com~'ission their feeli~s~on Kovar Mgg. building a new and larger facility on Nwy f~]O. A] S~rteberg stated that he would prefer to see this ty~,e of facility on t~ ~ther side of the tracks~ Kovar indicated that the U]ghway frontage ~a.m~verY advantagous_to their business. Phil T ' ' L Nereson informed them that ~,h~y cOuld appear at a Council meeting to question the Council in re~.rds~to their feelings about such a f~.cility be transacted in such an o~fiCe building. Mr. ~Carson explained that Carson l]ome2 would be usin~ p~rt of it, and that he had:talked with a firm of atto'~neys and a t~_t~e company about use. He stated that was his intentions to buil~, aD attractive building for office type use.