CCP 12-16-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Memo to Planning Commission Planning Case #02-33 Page 3 of 4 As the new vaporizer will be 23 feet high (approximately the same height as the building) and the current screening enclosure is 16 feet high, staff rccommends that the enclosure also be extended vertically to prevent direct view of the vaporizer. The Arden Hills Zoning Ordinance also allows the height of screening fences and enclosures to extend above what usually would be allowed without requiring the proof of hardship required for a variance (Section 6, E, 4, m: Fences in Non-Residential Situations and Exceptional and Unusual Circumstances in Residential Districts): Deviation from these requirements for fences, walls and landscape screening may be permitted after planning commission review and council approval; of a site plan with documentation showing the unusual circumstancesjustifjling the proposed deviation and plans for the proposed fence, wall or landscape screening. This provision is intended to allow flexibility in meeting the purpose and intent of this paragraph 4 without the necessity of proving a hardship as is required in the variance procedure, The objective of this provision is to improve the livability, appearance and security of properties and their relationships to one another. In this instance, permitting the applicant to vary from the height requirements would allow the storage tanks and the vaporizer to be completely screen from view, Furthermore, the additional screening would not negatively impact any neighboring residential property. Currently there are no residential properties remotely close to the applicant's property; however, plans for the gateway business area have contemplated office and residential uses. The additional height of screening could be beneficial in that it would prevent direct view ofthe vaporizer from any of these potential future uses in the Gateway District. Deadline forA!!encv Actions The City of Arden Hills received the completed application for this request on November 8,2002. Pursnant to Minnesota State Statue, the city must act on this request by January 7,2003 (60 days), unless the City provides the petitioner with written reasons for an additional 60 day review period. The city may with the petitioner's consent extend the review period beyond the 120 days. Options 1. 2. 3. Recommend approval as submitted. Recommend approval with conditions. Recommend denial. If the City denies the petitioner's request, ".,. it must state in writing the reasons for the denial at the time that it denies the request". Table for additional information. 4.