CCP 10-15-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . . ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - SEPTEMBER 5, 2001 7 replied that was correct. Staff was not going to set that type of a precedent. He stated they wanted to make sure that this met the major standards. Chair Baker stated this was a good opportunity to see if they had some leverage at this point to get some more landscaping. He asked ifthey approved this tonight, would it be possible for the City Engineer to run the calculations, and if it did not meet the minimum requirements, then the variance would be denied. Mr. Cronin stated they could make the approval conditioned upon meeting the minimum requirements. Commissioner Erickson stated if they came up a couple of percentages short, they could rework their plan by adding more landscaping or reworking the parking lot. He indicated he could not deny or recommend this based on the 300 square feet and the percent of landscaping. Commissioner Galatowitsch stated it appeared that they had in the past attempted to screen their dumpsters and asked why they were requiring the brick enclosure. Mr. Cronin stated the dumpster was not going to be against the building and the brick would match the environment better. He stated long-term, the stucco material, which would match their building, would not last as long as a brick enclosure. Commissioner Zimmerman asked if they had any elevation issues. Mr. Cronin stated he did not know for sure, but he did not believe there was going to be a problem with the elevation. Commissioner Zimmerman stated they also needed to look at how much additional lighting would be required in the area. Commissioner Zimmerman moved, seconded by Commissioner Sand, to recommend approval of Planning Case #01-24, TJ. Food Ventures (Perkins), 3855 N. Lexington A venue, as required by their site plan, for the following reasons and the following conditions: I. The dumpster enclosure be completely enclosed and faced with brick and all trash containers at all times be located within this enclosure. 2. Generate no negative impact on the image of Lexington Avenue and remainder of the district. 3. A void the introduction of any new traffic congestion on local streets. 4. They conform to landscaping, parking and lane size Ordinances. The motion carried unanimously (5-0). This Planning Case will be reviewed at the Monday, September 24, 2001, regular meeting of the City Council.