Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION – November 5, 2014 3 <br /> <br />Variance Findings: <br />12. That when compared to other properties in the direct vicinity this parcel may not be <br />considered unique to the surrounding area because of similar nonconforming site <br />conditions. It is unclear if the proposal is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the <br />Zoning Ordinance as the Ordinance generally allows flexibility for unique parcels and <br />situations when impacts to surrounding properties are minimized. <br />13. That the proposal is consistent with the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan as it allows for <br />the reasonable use of property within the B-3 Service Business Zoning District. <br />14. That surface parking lots are permitted within the B-3 Service Business Zoning District. <br />15. That the lot is currently fully developed making an expansion of the surface parking lot to <br />other areas on the property very limited due to the size of the current building and <br />existing parking area. <br />16. That the proposed parking area would be visible from neighboring properties; however, <br />increased landscaping and tree plantings will help soften the impact of the additional <br />parking area on surrounding property owners. <br />17. That the proposed parking area is unlikely to have negative impacts to the property or to <br />the neighborhood as a whole. <br />18. That the proposed plans and requested variance for the additional parking area does not <br />appear to be based on economic considerations alone. <br /> <br />City Planner Streff explained that the findings of fact for this Site Plan Review and Variance do <br />not directly support a recommendation for approval or denial. However, if the Planning <br />Commission chooses to make a recommendation for either approval or denial, the Findings of <br />Fact would need to be amended to reflect these reasons. If the Planning Commission <br />recommends approval of the Site Plan Review and Variance, staff recommends the following <br />seven (7) conditions: <br /> <br />1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended <br />by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by <br />the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City <br />Council. <br />2. That the variance shall permit the reduction of landscaping coverage from 24.06% to <br />20.32% and increase the impervious coverage from 75.94% to 79.68%. <br />3. That the applicant shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the <br />estimated costs of landscaping prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The financial <br />surety shall be in the form of a letter of credit issued by a FDIC-insured Minnesota bank. <br />The purpose of the letter of credit is to ensure that landscaping is completed in the event <br />that the developer defaults on the approved plan. The City will hold the letter of credit for <br />two years after the installation of landscaping. The letter of credit should not expire <br />during the two-year period. <br />4. That the final tree and landscaping plan shall be approved by the City before the issuance <br />of the grading permit to ensure that the plan meets the landscaping regulations stated in <br />Section 1325.05 of the City Code. <br />5. That any newly created parking space or parking area shall meet the parking regulations <br />stated in Section 1325.05 of the City Code. <br />6. That a Grading and Erosion Control Permit shall be issued by the City before the <br />commencement of any construction, grading or disturbance of soil within the parking lot <br />area.