Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Arden Hills <br />Planning Commission Meeting for March 4, 2015 <br /> <br />P:\Planning\Planning Cases\2015\PC 15-003 - CSM - Site Plan Review & Variance - Parking Lot\Memos_Reports_15-003 <br />Page 5 of 8 <br /> <br />Variance Evaluation Criteria <br /> <br />On May 5, 2011, the Governor signed into law new variance legislation that changed the review <br />criteria City’s must use when evaluating variance requests. The new law renames the municipal <br />variance standard from “undue hardship” to “practical difficulties,” but otherwise retains the <br />familiar three-factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. Also <br />included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: <br />“Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and <br />intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive <br />plan”. <br /> <br />Therefore, in evaluating variance requests under the new law, in order to find a practical <br />difficulty, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions: <br />• Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? <br />• Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? <br />• Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? <br />• Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? <br />• Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the Community? <br /> <br />As was the case before the new legislation took effect, economic considerations alone cannot <br />constitute a practical difficulty. Furthermore, the new law clarifies that conditions may be <br />imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough <br />proportionality to the impact created by the variance. <br /> <br /> <br />Findings of Fact <br /> <br />Staff offers the following sixteen (16) findings of fact for review: <br /> <br />General Findings <br /> <br />1. The property is located in the I-1 Limited Industrial Zoning District. <br />2. That a Site Plan Review is required in order to add or reconfigure parking areas on the <br />site. <br />3. That a Variance is required in order to allow the encroachment of the new parking area <br />within five (5) feet of an adjoining property line. <br />4. The properties at 4293 and 4255 Lexington Avenue North are owned by CSM <br />Corporation. <br />5. The lot is 148,975 square feet in size with approximate dimensions of 655 feet in width, <br />and 220 feet in depth. <br />6. The property currently consists of a principal building that has a footprint of 25,908 <br />square feet and an accessory structure that is 1,745 square feet in size. <br />7. Access to the property is provided off of Cummings Park Drive.