Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - APRIL 6, 2005 7 <br /> 3. The driveways shall be constructed within the City standards for driveway widths <br /> . of a 12 foot minimum and a 22 foot maximum. <br /> 4. There shall be at least 60 feet between each driveway access. <br /> 5. Auxiliary signage shall be installed which identifies the entry driv~ and the exit <br /> drives. <br /> 6. The access drives shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and County Traffic <br /> Engineer, installation of the access drives can only proceed after approval of the <br /> access drive design by both the City Engineer and County Engineer. <br /> 7. Parking shall comply with the Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance requirements of no <br /> parking on any areas except for driveways and parking lots, and shall not have <br /> more than 4 vehicles parked on any driveway. <br /> Chair Sand stated it appeared applicants had addressed some of the concerns the <br /> Commission had last month. He asked if staff was comfortable with this new proposal. <br /> Mr. Hellegers replied he believed this was a better proposal than what had presented at <br /> the previous meeting. <br /> Chair Sand statcd it helped applicants included the photographs with the computer <br /> generated lines and thanked the applicants for these. <br /> . Commissioner Modesette asked how wide the existing driveway was. Mr. Hellegers <br /> replied the existing driveway was 19'. <br /> Chair Sand stated one of their concerns was if the new driveways were not allowed, then <br /> the existing driveway might have to be widened to allow cars to pass each other easily. <br /> Chair Sand moved, seconded by Commissioner Thompson to recommend approval of <br /> Planning Case No. 05-09: David Radziej and Roger Sabot, 4365 and 4367 Lexington <br /> Avenue; Driveway VaJiances, subject to the seven conditions as outlined in staffs April <br /> 6, 2005 report. <br /> Commissioner Modesette asked if staff had received any further comments from the <br /> neighbors regarding the concerns with this additional driveway being added. Mr. <br /> Hellegers replied the neighbors had not becn notified of this meeting as it was not a <br /> public hearing, but he had checked with the City Engineer and he did not have a concern <br /> with this proposal and it also met the County requirements. <br /> The motion carried (3- I) (Commissioner Modesette opposed). <br /> B. DISCUSSION ON FENCE HEIGHT <br /> . Mr. Hellegers stated recently a resident inquired about amending the City's regulations <br /> for fence height. The resident had just constructed a red cedar fence which was 6 feet 6 <br /> inches in height with ornamental post caps somewhat higher still. Apparently, the <br /> materials are sent to the fence company pre-cut and when the frame is assembled the <br /> fences would he taller than the 6 foot height currently permitted. The resident stated the <br />