Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Amoco pipeline company, Case No. 2181 <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />within the definition of normal maintenance and alterations, since <br />the new buildings will serve the same functions as the old <br />obsolete equipment. The new buildings do not expand the capacity <br />of the facility and, therefore, do not require a separate action <br />for a special Use Permit. The city Attorney concurs on this. <br /> <br />The proposed buildings are a 44' x 32' (1,408 sq ft) Pump and <br />Motor Building and a 34' x 12' (408 sq ft) Control Building. Both <br />will be located in the small cluster of buildings in the <br />southwestern corner of the site, about 1,000' west of Long Lake <br />Road and 1,300' south of County Road C. To the west of the <br />buildings is railroad right-of-way and then over 800' to the <br />nearest adjacent industrial building. To the south is a storm pond <br />and the Murphy truck terminal, over 500' to the nearest building. <br />The adjacent Amoco buildings include several large metal storage <br />tanks, the largest of which are 120' in diameter and 48' in <br />height. <br /> <br />Variance Issue <br /> <br />The purpose of the design code is to establish and maintain a <br />ml.nl.mum standard for visual aesthetics in the community. The <br />proposed buildings will be part of a large and unusual existing <br />development (the tank farm) which does not easily fit within the <br />type of proj ect envisioned by typical zoning standards. Amoco's <br />proposed buildings will be plain and functional. They will be, in <br />our opinion, an insignificant part of the overall facility and <br />will be located far from the view of adjacent streets and <br />neighboring properties, and will barely be noticed, given the <br />context. To require them to conform to the building materials <br />standards in the Code would defy common sense and constitute a <br />practical difficulty. <br /> <br />4. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />complying with the strict letter of the building materials <br />standard would present a practical difficulty to Amoco, given the <br />specific buildings being proposed in this specific context. We <br />recommend approval of the variance request. <br /> <br />On the question of land use, based on our interpretation of the <br />Code and of Amoco's proposal, Amoco can add the new buildings and <br />still keep its status as a legal non-conforming use without <br />applying for a special Use Permit. <br />