My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-19-2000 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
2000
>
01-19-2000 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2012 9:42:25 AM
Creation date
2/24/2012 9:42:25 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br /> MINUTES FOR JANUARY 19, 2000 <br /> • <br /> (#2555 Hennepin County, Continued) <br /> Smith expressed a concern with the size of the proposed facility as well as the need for a <br /> zoning amendment. <br /> Hawn inquired whether the County has pursued other sites for this facility. <br /> Nowlan stated to his knowledge other sites have not been looked at, noting this is the only <br /> parcel in the City which is owned by the County. <br /> Hawn indicated she would like to see this application tabled to allow Hennepin County some <br /> additional time to explore other possible sites for this storage facility. <br /> Nowlan stated the advantages to this building include indoor storage of the salt and sand, which <br /> would eliminate the runoff into Lake Minnetonka, increased life to the salt and sand by being <br /> stored indoors, lower noise level, and fewer deliveries to this site. <br /> Stoddard commented he would like to see the height of the building kept at 20 feet, noting he <br /> would not be in favor of a height variance for anything over 20 feet. Stoddard noted he is an <br /> agreement that this is not the ideal location for this facility. <br /> Kluth inquired whether steel trusses inside the building had been considered by Hennepin <br /> County. <br /> Nowlan stated to his knowledge that has not been explored, noting that due to the salt being <br /> • stored inside the facility, corrosion may be a factor into why steel was not chosen. <br /> Smith suggested this item be tabled to allow the Applicant time to explore other sites for the <br /> facility. Smith stated she also has concerns regarding the size of the building as well as the <br /> need for a zoning code amendment. <br /> Chock remarked it would be difficult for the Hennepin to meet the needs of this area with a <br /> smaller sized building. <br /> Nowlan stated the County would like to have this building constructed in time for next year's <br /> winter season. Nowlan stated if the application is tabled, completion of the building by that <br /> time would be questionable. <br /> Hawn stated the Applicants can either have the Planning Commission vote on this application <br /> as it has been presented tonight or to table the application to allow the County additional time <br /> to review other sites. Hawn commented in her view it appears the application will be denied. <br /> Nowlan requested the Planning Commission act on this application. <br /> The Planning Commission noted the use of the property is not consistent with the Comprehensive <br /> Plan adopted by the City. <br /> Hawn moved, Stoddard seconded,to recommend denial of Application #2555, <br /> Hennepin County, 3880 Shoreline Drive,Zoning Code Amendment, Conditional Use <br /> Permit and Variances based upon issues dealing with the City's Comprehensive Code <br /> and Zoning. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. <br /> • <br /> Page 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.