CC 05-10-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Regular Council Meeting May 10,1982) Miller reported that the exterior of the building will be painted the same color as the service building; building is to be used for storage of electrical and metal parts. Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the Building Permit. Hicks moved seconded by McAllister that Council approve issuance of a Building Permit for the storage building. In discussion, con- cern was expressed relative to a bright light on the tower property which is very visible from the highway ramps on Hamline Ave. McAllister moved to amend the motion to re-direct the light or shield it so it is not visible from adjoining lots or streets, as approved by City Planner. Hicks accepted the amendment, and motion, as amended, carried unanimously (4-0). ~ Case No. 82-9, Variance and Building Permit for Addition to Harmony Sales Office/Warehouse BuildinR, 1212 Red Fox Road Miller explained that the existing building is sited about 15.5' from the west property line; current ordinance requirement is 20' for sideyard setback; therefore s second variance is needed to ex- tend the west wall of the building. Miller referred Council to a transparency of the site; noted that the proposed 5,000 sq. ft. addition will extend to within 16.7 feet of the south property line (3.3' variance from the required 20' rear setback). A transparency was shown of the east elevation of the proposed ex- pansion which will have two garage doors and a service door. Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of a Building Permit for a building addition, approving the vari- ance to extend the west wall of the building provided the plan is modified to not require the south setback variance. Miller reported that the Planning Commission did not find a hard- ship related to the land on which to base granting a south setback variance; felt the plan could be modified to conform to the 20' setback. Some membelli felt the variance should be granted since it has no major impact on the community or adjacent property own- ers and it is in the best interest of Arden Hills to encourage business development, especially in light of our current economic conditions. Miller reported that the Board of Appeals recommends approval of the variance and issuance of the Building Permit is requested. Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends spproval of the exterior lighting and landscape plan as approved by the City Planner; noted that exterior building material is to match the existing bUilding. Applicant, Martin Harstad, presented colored photographs of the existing building and indicated where the addition would be in relation to the building to the south. Harstad said the stand of trees between the two buildings is on the Roberts property. Harstad presented .letters from area property owners stating they have no objection to the requested variance (Roberts Construction, Inc., International Paper Co., Resistance Technology Inc.). Harstad explained the expansion is needed for enlargement of the promotional area, additional shelving and an additional conveyor line; explained that the aisle widths proposed are required by the Fire Dept.; noted that the building addition cannot be reduced in size and still provide the space needed by the owner to solve his problem. Harstad reported thst the building owner anticipated this addition, when the original building was built and always thought the setback requirement was 15 feet. ~ In discussion, Miller noted that the building to the south appears to be at, or near, the maximum building coverage so will probably not be expanded, to encroach on the approximate 80+ feet between buildings. McAllister moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve the BUilding Permit and west 4.6' and south 3.3' setback variances as requested; contingent upon approval of landscaping plsn by the -4-