05-09-12-PC - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

guidance for evaluating these types of applications. The PUD process itself permits the City to be flexible with signage standards depending on the needs and impact of a particular use. Staff believes that the signage request is excessive and that the drive-up can be adequately advertised, and all signs reasonably visible from the adjacent street, within the existing wall signage allotment. Findings of Fact The Planning Commission must make a finding as to whether or not the proposed application would adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood or the community as a whole based on the aforementioned factors. Staff offers the following findings for consideration: General Findings: 1. The Cub Foods building was approved by the City on September 9, 2002, in Planning Case 02-018. 2. The current grocery/pharmacy/liquor use is a conforming use in the B-3 Zone. 3. The addition of a drive-up window and additional signage requires an amendment to the planned unit development permit. Drive-up Window Findings: 4. The drive-up window would be located within 1,320 feet of another drive-up window. 5. The proposal meets all requirements of the Zoning Code pertaining to drive-up windows, with the exception of the 1,320 foot separation requirement. 6. The Zoning Code specifies criteria for waiving the 1,320 feet separation requirement. 7. The proposal meets all criteria specified in the Zoning Code for waiving the 1,320 foot separation requirement. Conditional Use Permit Evaluation Findings: 8. The proposal will not negatively impact traffic flow or parking on the site because the modifications to the parking are minimal, and the pharmacy is a preexisting use. Furthermore,the site is sufficiently large, with traffic circulation patterns in place to handle large amount of traffic and parking demand. 9. The proposal will not permanently change noise, glare, odors, vibration, smoke, dust, air pollution, heat, liquid or solid waste. 10. The proposal will not affect drainage on the property. 11. The proposal will not affect the population density on the property. 12. The proposal would not be incompatible with the other buildings in the B-3 Zone. 13. The proposal is unlikely to significantly affect land values on the subject property or on neighboring properties. 14. The park dedication requirement does not apply imthis application. City of Arden Hills Planning Commission Meeting for May 9, 2012 P:Wlanningl Planning Casesl2012112-008-Cub Foods-PUD Amendment(Pending)105-09-12-PC report-Cub Foods PUD Amendment.doc Page 6 of 8