Laserfiche WebLink
Gary Vogel, Case No. 2494 <br />i# <br />3e gONCLUSION & REcOM-ENDATION <br />Page 3 <br />While the City has an interest in assuring high quality, <br />attractive development on its public roadways, this Faust be <br />balanced with the real -world needs of businesses When a new <br />business is built, these two issues can usually loth be met, with <br />some reasonable compromise. In the ease of Midway Ford, an <br />existing business is renovating its site in response to a city <br />action to vacate the frontage road. To comply with the Zoning <br />Code standards for the relocated fence, Midway Ford has two <br />options: <br />1 ) Build the f ence less than 41 high in the front yard, or <br />2 ) Build the fence across the new parking area to keep the <br />view open from Snelling Avenue to the- building, in keeping <br />with the previous variance. <br />Both of these options, in our opinion, present serious practical <br />difficulties. The first because it would not provide the needed <br />security, the second because it would impose unreasonable demands <br />for access through the fence within the parking lot, and would not <br />reasonably meet the aesthetic intent of the Code. The City, in <br />its previous variances acknowledged implicitly that the fence-was <br />necessary for the site. For these reasons, we recommend approval <br />of the variance request. <br />