06-26-2000 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR JUNE 26, 2000 • (LMCD, Continued) Mayor Jabbour stated the fees are calculated on the tax base of the city. Jabbour stated no individual city shall be required to pay more than 20 percent of the LMCD's budget. Kelley noted the LMCD's budget has been increased by 15 percent for the upcoming year. Mayor Jabbour stated the LMCD typically increases its budget by the maximum allowed under its levy authority. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Liz Hawn, Representative Hawn was unable to attend tonight's meeting due to a family emergency. PUBLIC COMMENTS None ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #4) #2555 HENNEPIN COUNTY, 3380 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 4485 • Guy Nowlan, Greg Chock, and Jim Grube appeared on behalf of Hennepin County. Weinberger stated Hennepin County is proposing to construct a 60' by 40' indoor storage facility for salt and sand operations at their facility located at 3880 Shoreline Drive in Navarre. The current building was originally constructed in 1962, with the property being zoned for commercial uses at that time. The City has since rezoned the property in the 1970s for residential use, with the County continuing to use the facility for winter highway maintenance as a non - conforming use since that time. The Planning Commission, at the time it reviewed this application requested, the County look at other alternate sites for this facility outside of the Navarre area. The County did give some consideration to this option, with the County making the determination that no other sites are available to enable them to serve the area effectively. Hennepin County has indicated the proposed building would actually be less intense than the use that currently exists because the number of sand /salt deliveries will be reduced by 60 trips annually and the sand /salt mixture will be relocated indoors. The new facility would also eliminate the need for nighttime deliveries. The Planning Commission reviewed this application previously, recommending denial of the previous application, finding that the proposed expanded use was more intense than what the property is currently used for and would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Since that time, the County has reviewed other locations as well as this site and has submitted a revised plan which is more in keeping with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. Weinberger stated the revised plan would not require a zoning amendment but would permit a variance to the non - conforming section of the ordinance which would allow an expansion of the site without requiring the zoning code • amendment. Page 3