2015-01-07_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

replacement trees due to tree removal, instead of the required 52 3 inch trees. Planning Division 85 staff has reviewed the application and offers the following draft findings. 86 a. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Planning Division staff finds 87 that the proposed development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 88 (Commercial Goals and Policies) in that it represents continuing investment in an 89 existing commercial property and achieves efficient use of the land, provides safe 90 vehicular and pedestrian movements, adequate parking, generous landscaping and 91 creative quality ensuring aesthetic character. The proposal also achieves a number of the 92 General Land Use Goals and Policies identified in Chapter 4 of the Roseville 2030 93 Comprehensive Plan. 94 b. The proposal is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning ordinances. 95 Planning Division staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the intent of the 96 zoning ordinances because although the redevelopment will result in a larger building 97 footprint, more paved surface, and some tree removal, the proposed improvements 98 address all other Code requirements other than the ability to install 52 trees (under 99 replacement formula) and maintain 95 on-site parking stall at the expense of 4 parking lot 100 islands. Such substantial reinvestment is the basis of the current Zoning Ordinance. 101 c. The proposal puts the subject property to use in a reasonable manner. Planning Division 102 staff believes that the proposal makes reasonable use of the subject property because the 103 proposed development is a permitted use with required parking, which are typical in 104 Roseville for commercial developments. The proposal will be similar to commercial 105 developments in the immediate area and provides a balance between economic 106 feasibility; thinning of trees that are dead, diseased, or overcrowded and installing new 107 landscaping compatible with recent nearby developments such as the Affinity Plus 108 Federal Credit Union and the Country Inn and Suites. 109 d. There are unique circumstances to the property which were not created by the 110 landowner.Planning Division staff believes that the unique circumstances that justify the 111 approval of the requested variances in this case are multiple: first, the parcel is long (410 112 feet) and narrow (150 feet) limiting the creative design necessary to achieve numerous 113 Design and Performance Standards; second, the property has frontage along Lincoln 114 Drive (its access point) and Snelling Avenue (its primary street frontage without access), 115 which creates challenges for building placement, appropriate vehicle movements, and 116 public entry to the building; third, the site is one of the few developed sites the includes 117 numerous mature trees that are difficult to work around and in some situations, crowding 118 each other; fourth, redevelopment can be challenging and it becomes more challenging 119 when the property is faced with preexisting constraints; lastly, the site cannot support the 120 number of replacement trees required by the Zoning Code, even if additional trees were 121 preserved and required parking reduced. 122 e. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. As a 123 property that was developed nearly 60 years ago the elimination of a few parking lot 124 islands and removal of 14 mature trees will not look out of character with either of the 125 properties adjacent to the subject site, nor with the commercial area that extends to 126 County Road C, where few properties have mature trees or parking lot islands. Further, 127 the applicants have made great effort to preserve 4 trees and to include numerous site and 128 landscape upgrades to mitigate the loss of trees and the islands. 129 PF15-001_RVBA_010715 Page 4 of 6