01-12-15-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL – NOVEMBER 24, 2014 12 8. That after completion of the parking lot expansion project the property will contain 73 parking spaces. 9. That the new parking area will have access from the adjoining parking area to the east with access from Grey Fox Road. 10. That a variance is being requested to reduce the amount of landscaping coverage from 15.75% to 10.98% and to increase the impervious coverage from 84.25% to 89.02%. Variance Findings: 11. That when compared to other properties in the direct vicinity this parcel may not be considered unique to the surrounding area because of similar nonconforming site conditions. It is unclear if the proposal is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as the Ordinance generally allows flexibility for unique parcels and situations when impacts to surrounding properties are minimized. 12. That the proposal is consistent with the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan as it allows for the reasonable use of property within the B-4 Retail Center Zoning District. 13. That surface parking lots are permitted within the B-4 Retail Center Zoning District. 14. That the lot is currently fully developed making an expansion of the surface parking lot to other areas on the property very limited due to the size of the current building and existing parking area. 15. That the proposed parking area would be visible from neighboring properties; however, increased landscaping and tree plantings will help soften the impact of the additional parking area on surrounding property owners. 16. That the proposed parking area is unlikely to have negative impacts to the property or to the neighborhood as a whole. 17. That the proposed plans and requested variance for the additional parking area does not appear to be based on economic considerations alone. City Planner Streff explained that the Findings of Fact for this Site Plan Review and Variance do not directly support a recommendation for approval or denial. However, if the City Council chooses to either approve or deny, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect these reasons. He reported that during their meeting on November 5, 2014, the Planning Commission did not approve, deny or table this request. The motion to approve resulted in a split vote (3-3). Therefore, the Planning Commission forwarded this Site Plan Review and Variance request to the City Council with no recommendation. If the City Council approves the Site Plan Review and Variance, staff has offered the following nine (9) conditions: 1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. 2. That the variance shall permit a reduction in the amount of landscaping coverage from 15.75% to 10.98% and increase in the amount of impervious coverage from 84.25% to 89.02%. 3. That the applicant shall submit a financial surety in the amount of 125 percent of the estimated costs of landscaping prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The financial surety shall be in the form of a letter of credit issued by a FDIC-insured Minnesota bank. The purpose of the letter of credit is to ensure that landscaping is completed in the event that the developer defaults on the approved plan. The City will hold the letter of credit for