Laserfiche WebLink
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL—NOVEMBER 24, 2014 12 <br /> 8. That after completion of the parking lot expansion project the property will contain 73 <br /> parking spaces. <br /> 9. That the new parking area will have access from the adjoining parking area to the east <br /> with access from Grey Fox Road. <br /> 10. That a variance is being requested to reduce the amount of landscaping coverage from <br /> 15.75%to 10.98% and to increase the impervious coverage from 84.25%to 89.02%. <br /> Variance Findings: <br /> 11. 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 /> 12. That the proposal is consistent with the Arden Hills Comprehensive Plan as it allows for <br /> the reasonable use of property within the B-4 Retail Center Zoning District. <br /> 13. That surface parking lots are permitted within the B-4 Retail Center Zoning District. <br /> 14. 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 existing <br /> parking area. <br /> 15. 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 /> 16. That the proposed parking area is unlikely to have negative impacts to the property or to <br /> the neighborhood as a whole. <br /> 17. That the proposed plans and requested variance for the additional parking area does not <br /> appear to be based on economic considerations alone. <br /> City Planner Streff explained that the Findings of Fact for this Site Plan Review and Variance <br /> do not directly support a recommendation for approval or denial. However, if the City Council <br /> chooses to either approve or deny, the Findings of Fact would need to be amended to reflect these <br /> reasons. He reported that during their meeting on November 5, 2014, the Planning Commission <br /> did not approve, deny or table this request. The motion to approve resulted in a split vote (3-3). <br /> Therefore, the Planning Commission forwarded this Site Plan Review and Variance request to the <br /> City Council with no recommendation. If the City Council approves the Site Plan Review and <br /> Variance, staff has offered the following nine (9) conditions: <br /> 1. That the project shall be completed in accordance with the plans submitted as amended by <br /> the conditions of approval. Any significant changes to these plans, as determined by the <br /> City Planner, shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City <br /> Council. <br /> 2. That the variance shall permit a reduction in the amount of landscaping coverage from <br /> 15.75% to 10.98% and increase in the amount of impervious coverage from 84.25% to <br /> 89.02%. <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 />