My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/03/2020
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2020
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/03/2020
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2025 11:06:39 AM
Creation date
12/2/2020 12:51:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
12/03/2020
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Technician McCann replied that the surface is concrete. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked if the concrete base was installed by the applicant or part of the <br />legal nonconforming. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl replied that those things were done within the last six months and <br />are not part of the legal nonconforming. <br /> <br />Deputy City Administrator Gladhill stated that if there are more types of these requests, perhaps <br />the variance is not the tool the City would like to use in the future. He stated that typically these <br />small structures want to be closer to the back property line and could be considered for a Code <br />adjustment in the future. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff asked if this would be considered a structure if it were just the concrete <br />sides and did not have the metal hoops. He stated that he has worked at a landscaping company <br />and it was not uncommon to have concrete walls between materials that could be loaded in a truck. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl replied that if there was not a roof it would not be considered a <br />structure. She stated that the preference of staff would still be to have it within the yellow area <br />behind the building. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff asked for details on the traffic flow of the site and why the proposed <br />location would make the most sense. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl commented that unfortunately the applicant is not present but in <br />past discussions the applicant stated that this was the best location. She commented that this is a <br />large site, so most likely other sites could work. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff asked where the entrance to the site is. <br /> <br />Senior Planner McGuire Brigl identified the entrance to the site. <br /> <br />Commissioner Woestehoff stated that he does not feel that is an adequate reason to put it so close <br />to the fence. He stated that he would be more likely to support the request if it were in a different <br />location, as suggested by staff. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />No comments made. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Peters, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to close the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br />A roll call vote was performed: <br /> <br />Commissioner Anderson aye <br /> <br />Planning Commission/ November 5, 2020 <br />Page 6 of 19 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.