My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-01-07_VB_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Variance Board
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Agendas
>
2015-01-07_VB_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2015 9:15:37 AM
Creation date
1/22/2015 9:15:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Variance Board
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/7/2015
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
PDC <br />LANNINGIVISIONOMMENTS <br />41 <br />In review of the Zoning Ordinance, the City Planner has determined that the following <br />42 <br />landscaping requirements apply to the Pizza Lucé redevelopment project: landscaping a new site, <br />43 <br />parking lot landscaping, and tree replacement for removal of trees. The City Planner has also <br />44 <br />determined that the Code offers no credit or limited credit for preserving trees regardless of the <br />45 <br />benefits of a redevelopment project that would improve a site. Further, although not many such <br />46 <br />wooded lots exist in Roseville, the Code does not provide Pizza Lucé relief in the required <br />47 <br />number of replacement trees when the site they seek to redevelop cannot accommodate the <br />48 <br />number required. <br />49 <br />Although the City Planner has not encountered this situation with any other development or <br />50 <br />redevelopment in Roseville since the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance in 2010, he has <br />51 <br />concluded that the cumulative impact of the landscaping requirements listed above is a <br />52 <br />significant hardship for this applicant. <br />53 <br />Once the situation became evident, the City Planner was in contact with representatives for Pizza <br />54 <br />Lucé about potential options, which include preserving a large grouping trees in the north central <br />55 <br />portion of the property, elimination of additional parking spaces, and establishment of joint <br />56 <br />parking agreements with neighboring properties. While these are all options, few are viable <br />57 <br />remedies for the applicant. Additionally, the uniqueness of this parcel and the Design Standards <br />58 <br />required create a difficult situation for this particular development. <br />59 <br />After the City Planner determined that tree preservation and replacement would be difficult to <br />60 <br />fully achieve, communication was sent to Pizza Lucé representatives to revise the proposed site <br />61 <br />plan to preserve the heritage and significant trees in the north central portion of the proposed <br />62 <br />parking lot. Having recently received comments from City Council Members that preservation <br />63 <br />of heritage trees was essential on all development sites, the City Planner analyzed the tree <br />64 <br />inventory to determine whether it was feasible to preserve the lone heritage tree and small the <br />65 <br />grouping of significant trees. The City Planner concluded that such a design was possible, but <br />66 <br />would require a creative parking lot design and, most likely, a couple of variances. <br />67 <br />The Planning staff met with Pizza Lucé and their representatives to review the situation and <br />68 <br />discuss options including parking lot setback, parking lot islands, and tree replacement <br />69 <br />variances that could be supported if measures were taken to preserve the heritage tree and a <br />70 <br />few significant trees. On December 11, 2014, the City Planner received the proposed parking lot <br />71 <br />plan, which included a large island design preserving the heritage tree and 3 significant trees in <br />72 <br />the north central portion of the lot. The design also proposed eliminating 4 parking lot islands to <br />73 <br />replace the parking spaces lost to the tree preservation island. The City Planner also noted that <br />74 <br />existing conditions on the property confirm that it is not possible to plant trees along the <br />75 <br />southern portion of the property due to existing utility services and limited ability to plant <br />76 <br />adjacent to Snelling Avenue for the same and due to roadway and Light Rail Transit easements. <br />77 <br />VA <br />ARIANCENALYSIS <br />78 <br />RV: Section 1009.04C of the City Code establishes <br />79 EVIEW OF ARIANCE APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS <br />a mandate that the Variance Board make five specific findings about a variance request as a <br />80 <br />prerequisite for approving the variance. In the case of Pizza Lucé, the proposal requires <br />81 <br />variances from §1011.03.C.1 and 1011.04.G.1 and 2a of the Roseville Zoning Ordinance. <br />82 <br />Specifically the Code requires the site to include 9 islands in the parking lot and the applicant <br />83 <br />seeks approval to install 5 islands. The applicant also seeks approval to install 25 3-inch <br />84 <br />PF15-001_RVBA_010715 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.