Laserfiche WebLink
Senior Planner McGuire Brigl presented the Staff Report stating that staff recommends retaining <br />the existing PUD as is. This guides land along Highway 10 for retail/commercial and leaves viable <br />commercial pads with visibility on Highway 10. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Bauer stated that he would follow the guidance of the EDA, noting that most retailers <br />want Highway 10 visibility. He stated that he would prefer to leave the area as retail. <br /> <br />Commissioner Peters agreed that would be too much residential next to the highway and the retail <br />portion should remain. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy concurred. <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson stated that when this parcel has come up in the past, the Commission <br />worked hard to determine the land use and found that commercial use along the highway was the <br />best use of the space and he still agrees with that. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff agreed, stating that there has already been a compromise for this parcel <br />to meet the current PUD and would not want to amend it further. <br /> <br />Commissioner Gengler agreed. <br /> <br />7.02: Discussion Item: Potential Interim Use Permit of Storage Containers for Ve-Ve Inc. <br />(Project No. 20-136); Case of John Vevea on behalf of Ve-Ve Inc. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Planning Technician McCann presented the Staff Report and asked the Commission to provide the <br />applicant with any feedback, recommendations, and/or concerns related to the use of two storage <br />containers for Ve-Ve Inc. <br /> <br />Commission Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Bauer commented that currently an accessory building is supposed to match the <br />color/materials of the primary structure. He stated that the storage container could be painted to <br />match the building, which would at least be closer to the Code. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that even if painted to match, the containers would not <br />meet City Code provisions. She stated that if there are two of these structures located on a <br />commercial property in Anoka, noting that they blend in with the building when driving by. <br /> <br />Commissioner VanScoy commented that he could see considering this on a temporary basis as <br />there is a need to have additional space while the business grows. He commented that five years <br />seems like a long time and does not seem temporary. He stated that he would not support this <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ November 5, 2020 <br />Page 16 of 19 <br /> <br />