04-23-18-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — APRIL 23, 2018 5 12. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would be consistent with adjacent land uses and the goals included in the Land Use chapter of the Arden Hills 2030 Comprehensive Plan. 13. The applicant has requested a variance from Section 1130.07, Subd. 2 of the City Code, which requires the lot dimensions in the subdivision not be less than the minimum dimensions required to secure the minimum lot area specified in the zoning ordinance of the City. 14. The proposed Johanna Station 1 subdivision meets the other Minimum Subdivision Design requirements included in Section 1130 of the City Code. 15. The proposed Johanna Station l subdivision meets or will be required to meet the Required Improvements for subdivisions included in Section 1140 of the City Code. 16. The proposed development requires public use dedication, as required in Section 1130.08 of the City Code. 17. The park dedication requirement for this application is ten (10) percent of the buildable land area in the subdivision or a park development fee of $6,500 per unit. Ten percent of the development would be 0.28 acres which would not allow for a feasible park area. The park development fee of $6,500 per unit will be applied in this case. Variance Findings.- 18. indings:18. The applicant has requested a variance for the four proposed lots to have a width of 81.75 feet, or 3.25 feet less than the minimum 8546ot requirement for the R-2 District. 19. The variance complies with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Regulations as single- family residential dwellings at a maximum density of 5 units per net acre are a permitted use in the R-2 District. 20. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is required to re -guide the property for Very Low Density Residential use from its current classification as Public and Institutional. Should the Comprehensive Plan Amendment be approved, then the variance would comply with the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan. 21. A single-family residential dwelling with allowed accessory structures is a reasonable use of the property and can be constructed on an 81.75 -foot -wide lot while still meeting the required structure setback requirements. 22. Presumably, when the neighborhood was first developed, the lot lines were placed so that the landlocked pond was located nearly entirely on the subject property, which has resulted in the property having a depth and area significantly greater than the minimum requirement for the R-2 District. This, along with the topography and previous use of the property as a fire station are unique circumstances that require the creation of lots that far exceed the minimum lot area and depth requirement for the R-2 District, but require a minor variance for each lot from the minimum lot width requirement. 23. Approximately one-third of the properties within this block that have lot widths less than the required 85 feet for the R-2 District. While, the majority of the lots on this block are 85 feet wide or greater, few have the depth or area of the four lots proposed in the redevelopment. 24. There is an economic consideration in this case because the applicant is seeking to keep the homes at a more affordable price. This economic consideration on its own does not constitute a practical difficulty, but may be considered as a factor.