My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 06-08-1987
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
CCP 06-08-1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:07:58 PM
Creation date
11/3/2006 2:42:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
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
<br /> Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting, May 26, 1987 . <br /> Page 2 . <br /> ASSMTS. (CONT'D) Council requested the Clerk Administrator explore the <br /> zoning classification possibilities for recreational <br /> areas with Planner Miller; discuss with the State Senator and Representative <br /> exactly what provisions are allowed by law for this type of land use <br /> classification and report back to Council at a future meeting. <br /> HWY.96 PLANNING Thomas Mulcahy. 3530 Siems Court, reported on the <br /> MTG. REPORT Highway 96 Corridor Planning Committee meeting. Mulcahy <br /> advised that the development of Highway 96 would <br /> probably begin on the east end of the Highway. in the White Bear Lake Area. and <br />. it this time Arden Hills should closely watch the development process by <br /> continuing to attend the meetings. He also stated the meetings are very <br /> informative and presented the Clerk Administrator with the State Report for the <br /> office files. Mulcahy added that the Council should give careful consideration <br /> before approving any additional access points along Highway 96. over the next <br /> few years. The next meeting will be held on 6/25/87, 7:30 p.m., Shoreview City <br /> Hall. <br /> Council thanked Mulcahy for his interest and information. <br /> CASE NO. 87~l4; Council was referred to the Board of Appeals minutes <br /> SETBACK VARIANCE 5/28/87. recommending approval of the Rear Setback. <br /> ALPO FOODS, INC. Variance for Alpo Foods, Inc. <br /> Harvey Stewart. General Manager of Alpo Foods, appeared before the Council to . <br /> answer questions. , <br /> Council discussed the proposed location for the addition which will house the <br /> tallow for storage and processing. Stewart explained that the Engineering <br /> consultant hired by Alpo had studied the placement of the addition to determine <br /> the best location for processing. <br /> There was discussion relative to height of the addition, plantings, tallow <br /> processing and odor emission. Stewart advised the company had purchased a <br /> charcoal filtering system that meets EPA standards to alleviate odors from the <br /> processing at the plant. Mayor Woodburn noted that Arden Hills does have an <br /> odor inspector and his standards are based on the EPA standards for odor <br /> emission. <br /> Councilmember Winiecki advised she is not convinced the addition must be placed <br /> in this location; she illustrated how the addition could be located so that a <br /> variance would not be necessary. <br /> Hansen moved, seconded by Sather. that Council approve <br /> Case No. 87-14, Site Plan Review and Setback Variance. Alpo Foods, Inc. , based <br /> on the Board of Appeals unanimously recommending approval and their reasons <br /> listed in the minutes of 5/21/87: 1. The General Manager's assurance that the <br /> system is sealed and should not emit additional odors; 2. The new tallow <br /> processing promotes better safety inside the plant; 3. The applicant has <br /> provided plantings to screen the building from adjacent residences, 4. The 50 <br /> ft. public pedestrian walkway provides additional separation from the adjacent . <br /> residential lots; and 5. The fact that the zoning boundary line was moved to <br /> the applicant's property line, due to the City obtaining the 50 ft. easement <br /> for a pedestrian pathway, necessitating the variance request. Motion carried. <br /> (Hansen, Sather, Peck voting in favor, Winiecki and Woodburn opposed) (3-2) <br /> In discussion, Councilmember Winiecki stated that although the reasons listed <br /> in the motion are reasonable; it is her opinion that there is no necessity for <br /> a variance request if the tank placement was moved to t.he location she <br /> illustrated. <br /> Councilmember Sather commented that. the Engineering Consultant for Alpo has <br /> designed the location of the tank in immediate. proximit.y to where it is used <br /> and it is his opinion that it would not be reasonable for Council to place <br /> restrictions on the design. He.stated that if the Alpo company were planning a <br /> major expansion in the future which would change t.he interior design of the . <br /> plant, Council could request the applicant to move the addition in conjunction <br /> with that expansion to an area that would conform without a variance. <br /> Harvey Stewart explained that the location of the addition is more accessible <br /> for deliveries and better facilitates snow plowing. <br /> ----- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.