Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 8, 1999 5 <br /> . Councilmember Larson asked where the temporary generator was currently located. Mr. Beck <br /> stated that the generator was placed on a trailer in approximately the same location of the <br /> proposed permanent location. <br /> Councilmember Larson asked what other locations had been considered. Ms. Randall explained <br /> that the applicant had considered a location within a berm in the southwest corner of the parking <br /> lot. This would require excavation of the berm to create a wall area and would have allowed <br /> shrubbery to be used for screening. The problem with this option was connecting to the junction <br /> box from this distance. Another location was at the southwest corner ofthe building on the <br /> sidewalk. This would have resulted in the removal of windows and blocking of the sidewalk. <br /> The other location was in the northeast corner of the parking lot. This would have required the <br /> power cables to be run through the entire length of the building. Although this location was a <br /> distance from the roadway, it would have been visible from the roadway and would have <br /> required screening with a fence or block wall. <br /> Considering the cost to install a block wall, Councilmember Larson asked if there were reasons <br /> not to reconsider the first option of placing the generator in the berm area. He acknowledged <br /> that, at the time of considering this option, the applicant had not wanted to incur the cost of <br /> burying the cable under the parking lot. Mr. Beck stated that the cost of this option would <br /> compare to the cost of a block wall. Placing the generator in the berm would require excavation <br /> across the parking lot and would most likely require a block enclosure around the unit with <br /> landscaping. This would result in the reduction of green space and would cause concerns for cars <br /> . parking along side the unit. Additionally, running the cable to this length would result in slight <br /> degradation of the power. Having the generator close to the building would ease in the operation <br /> and maintenance of the unit. <br /> Councilmember Aplikowski stated that she was totally opposed to requiring a block wall. She <br /> had driven by the building and, with the exception of the brown trailer, the generator was not <br /> noticeable. She would be willing to allow the generator to be placed against the building with <br /> only its current enclosure used for screening. However, since screening was required, she stated <br /> that she would prefer a cedar wood fence. She noted that there were many variations in wood <br /> fences, including horizontal and vertical lines. From a practical point of view, she felt that the <br /> City was asking too much to require a block wall. The block wall will encroach on the parking <br /> lot and the generator would be much more noticeable. <br /> Mr. Beck noted that his company had been working on the installation of the generator for many <br /> months. In that time the temporary generator had been placed on the trailer and many employees <br /> have asked when the generator and trailer will be arriving. He noted that the bottom ofthe <br /> generator was currently black and this would be painted to match the building. He felt that the <br /> proposed location without screening would be the best option. <br /> Councilmember Malone confirmed that the applicant had been given permission to install the <br /> temporary generator. Ms. Randall stated that this was correct. <br /> . Councilmember Malone stated that he had visited this site and felt that the generator stood out <br /> like a sore thumb in the front yard of the building. He would prefer that the generator blend in <br />