01-10-07-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Two of the businesses requested site plan reviews to modify the exterior of a building in . the B-4 District. Modifying the exterior of a building includes re- facing a building, moving doors and windows, and altering other aspects of the exterior of a building that ean be seen from neighboring properties or the public right-of-way. The two other business site plan reviews included a request to expand parking in the I-Flex District, and a request to deviate from the sign regulations in Sign District 4 to add an electronic messagc board to a sign. Two of the residential site plan reviews were requests to construct a six foot high fence in the secondary front yard of comer lots, which was not permitted in the old Zoning Ordinance. The updated Zoning Code now has provisions for constructing a six foot high fence in the sccondary front yard of comer properties in order to provide screening from adjacent roadways. The remaining residential site plan review was for the re-landscaping plan at 3433 Lake Johanna Blvd. The property was unfortunately clear-cut in July, which was in violation of the Shoreland Ordinance. The approved landscaping plan is meant to resolve the violation of the Shoreland Ordinance. In early 2006, Bethel Universities submitted an application to construct a new Welcome Center at their western entrance at Snelling A venue/Old Highway 10. Since the proposal was in compliance with their approved Master Plan, the Welcome Center only required site plan review as opposed to a PUD Amendment. . Variances Of the ten variance requests in 2006, four were approved, three were denied, two were withdrawn, and one is still pending. While the variances were somewhat varied, they do fall into three general categories: setback variances, subdivision variances, and lot use variances. All ten variance requests were related to rcsidential properties. Five of the variances requests were to construct or expand a structure into or farther into a setback. One of the setback variance requests was approved, one was denied, one is pending and two wcre withdrawn. Three of the variances requests were related to subdivisions. Two of the requests, one of which denied and the other withdrawn, would have created new nonconforming lots. The third subdivision variance, which was approved, split a small slice of land from one lot and consolidated the slice with an adjacent lot to resolve a misunderstanding regarding the property line between the two property owners. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission IIIeeting for January J 0, 2007 iIMetro-inet.lIslardenhillsIPlanningIPlanning CommissionINell'-Olt! BlIsiness\2007\/22706 - 2006 Year in Reviell',doc . Page 4 of5 ------