2015-01-07_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment F spaces and involve a very unique parking lot design to protect a majority of the existing mature trees. The impacts of the Tree Preservation and Replacement requirements coupled with the requirements for landscaping in the Property Performance Standards seek little relief for preservation or existing conditions and instead require numerous tree plantings. It is these restrictions that represent the practical difficulty of the variance request; b. The proposed development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that it represents reinvestment in a dilapidated commercial property in a way that is compatible with the surrounding developed commercial area. Moreover, the project represents continuing investment in an existing commercial property and achieves efficient use of the land, provides safe vehicular and pedestrian movements, adequate parking, generous landscaping, and creative quality ensuring aesthetic character. The proposal also achieves a number of the General Land Use Goals and Policies identified in Chapter 4 of the Roseville 2030 Comprehensive Plan; c. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinances because although the redevelopment will result in a larger building footprint, more paved surface, and some tree removal, the proposed improvements address all other Code requirements other than the ability to install 52 trees (under replacement formula) and maintain 95 on-site parking stall at the expense of 4 parking lot islands. Such substantial reinvestment is the basis of the current Zoning Ordinance; d. “Reasonable” use of the property would be constrained without a variance because strict compliance with the Zoning Code would effectively require some type of variance since it is impossible to preserve a majority of the trees without eliminating required parking spaces. There would also be some amount of replacement required on a site with preexisting conditions that limit where trees can be placed. Moreover, trees required specific spacing versus being planted similar to the existing grove of oaks and, therefore, the site is limited in the number of trees it can support; e. The property possesses the kind of unique characteristics that justify approval of the requested variance for a number of reasons: first, the parcel is long (410 feet) and narrow (150 feet) limiting the creative design necessary to achieve numerous Design and Performance Standards; second, the property has frontage along Lincoln Drive (its access point) and Snelling Avenue (its primary street frontage without access), which creates challenges for building placement, appropriate vehicle movements, and public entry to the building; third, the site is one of the few developed sites that includes numerous mature trees that are difficult to work around; fourth, redevelopment can be challenging and it becomes more challenging when the property is faced with preexisting constraints; lastly, the site cannot support the number of replacement trees required by the Zoning Code, even if additional trees were preserved and the required parking reduced. It is also worth noting that this proposal or others would require some type of variance, since the previous development underutilized the property Page 2 of 4