My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/08/97
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
1997
>
09/08/97
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/6/2004 2:47:07 PM
Creation date
2/5/1998 9:30:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
9/8/1997
SESSIONNUM
1705
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Session 1705, Minutes <br />September 8, 1997 <br /> <br />Mr. Schoomer said that he had visited one of Hollywood Video's operations in St. Paul just <br />this morning and feels that it would be a satisfactory addition to University City. Since the <br />representative is not here, they will have to comply with the conditions enacted tonight. <br /> <br />Hr. Schoomer moved approval of the site plan with conditions as stated by Mr. Ollendorff. <br />Mr. Hunkel seconded. <br /> <br />Hr. Ware said that one of the neighbors had asked him about the alleyway which is in front <br />of her house. Hr. Ware asked Mr. Oilendorff if he had any input from any of the <br />neighbors that live behind the site. Mr. Ollendorff replied that there had not been any <br />contact with the neighbors on the City's part. Mr. Ware felt that the neighbors should <br />have been notified of the plans, whether it met the code or not. He explained that the <br />alleyway is a current concern. Other stores do not actually use the alleyway, but others <br />may, which was his major concern. He does not have any problems with the company, but <br />does feel the neighbors should be notified. <br /> <br />Hr. Schoomer said that Hollywood was paving the alley at their expense and did not think <br />that the neighbors would object to a free alley. Council could put the same requirement <br />on any future operations on that block to finish the alley off. <br /> <br />Mr. Munkel asked the City Manager if we were requiring the applicant to pave the alley the <br />length of their property. Mr. Oilendorff said this was correct. Mr. Munkel felt that this <br />would benefit some of the residents who have garages on the backside. it will certainly <br />keep some of the dust down. <br /> <br />Mr. LieberTnan said that he did not notice Mr. Ollendorff's brick requirement in the <br />written report. Mr. Ollendorff said that it was not in the written report, and should have <br />been. Mr. LieberTnan asked if the driveway into the alley would remain. Mr. Ollendorff <br />replied that the driveway on the alley is acceptable, and has not changed from their earlier <br />plan. The earlier plan showed one driveway off of Olive, very close to Bartmet. it was <br />recommended that it be moved west. The revised plan shows two driveways on Olive. <br />The City is suggesting to delete the east one and use the west one. Mr. Lieberman <br />questioned the amount of brick to be included on the building. Mr. O!lendorff said an <br />amount was not clarified at this time. Mr. Ollendorff said that the question that the <br />Council needs to decide is whether or not they will allow an all metal building to be built. <br />it had not been Coundl's practice to do so in the past. Mr. Lieberman asked if the <br />applicant owns the property. Mr. Ollendorff said that they were under contract to <br />purchase. <br /> <br />The all aye motion carded unanimously. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.