PCAgenda_92Jul8_Special - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

six feet to eight feet in the sideyard and rearyard of their • residence at 1700 St. Mary's in order to screen the property and to reduce the excessive noise generated by delivery trucks and employees of Warners' Stellian and Ciatti's in the private alley that borders the east and south borders of their property. Hoyt explained this request for an eight foot fence may be considered reasonable because it will be a more substantial screen for the residents if they stand in their backyard or if they build and sit on a raised deck. An adequate screen or buffer between the residential zone and the adjacent commercial use is desirable and actually required in the zoning code. Hoyt said that Mr. Warner of Warners' Stellian called her today and left a message that he would be unable to attend the meeting but he is concerned about an 8 ft. high fence because of the possible visability problem when his trucks use this alley. The commission agreed there could possibly be a perpetual visability problem at the southeast corner. Several ways to deal with this visability issue were discussed. Options mentioned and discussed were mirroring the corner so drivers could see oncoming traffic, by signing with "no through traffic" (although this would be hard to enforce), requiring a fence that has slatting as opposed to a solid fence (this would not accomplish the sound buffer), or coming down lower at the corner and high elsewhere. Finegan asked if there was any potential danger with a visability problem at the corner. It is a private alley, not generally used by the public and trucks should not be going down it with any great speed. The commission agreed the only debate is the difference between 6 feet and 8 feet. Hoyt said she looked at the property and had a sense that the two feet difference between six feet and eight feet of a solid fence is probably not a critical difference. Boche moved to grant a variance from maximum fence height of six feet to a maximum height of eight feet in the side rear lot in accordance with the submitted sketch (attached) as it meets the conditions for granting a variance, primarily condition: 15.03(c), the granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights. The motion carried unanimously. STAFF DISCUSSION OF AMOCO PLANS FOR NORTHWEST CORNER OF SNELLING AND LARPENTEUR Hoyt explained that AMOCO would like to do some remodeling of the building and grounds on the northwest corner of Snelling and Larpenteur. They would like the city to dedicate Snelling Drive to AMOCO which the state is dedicating to the city in the next couple of months. AMOCO would like to reconfigure Snelling Drive to get rid of the deadend space and landscape this corner with • low shrubs, etc. They plan to change the entrance and exits to improve the corner and make both more accessible.