2016-04-06_VB_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment D EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE VARIANCE BOARD OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a public hearing was held at the regular meeting of the 1 th Variance Board of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, on the 6 day of April, 2 2016, at 5:30 p.m. 3 The following members were present: 4 and the following members absent: 5 Variance Board Member _______________ introduced the following resolution and moved its 6 adoption: 7 VB RESOLUTION NO. _____ 8 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE TO §1004.06.H, SURFACE PARKING, 9 OF THE ROSEVILLE CITY CODE AT 934 WOODHILL DRIVE 10 FOR UNITED PROPERTIES (PF16-009) 11 WHEREAS, City Code §1004.06.H, Surface Parking, does not allow surface parking 12 between the front of the building and the primary street except for handicapped stalls; and 13 WHEREAS, City Code §1004.06.H, Surface Parking, limits surface parking to no greater 14 than 40% of the primary street lot frontage; and 15 WHEREAS, United Properties (UP) seeks to construct Applewood Pointe of Roseville at 16 Central Park on the subject property, which includes a surface parking lot between the building 17 and primary street; and 18 WHEREAS, the subject property is legally described as: 19 Lot 1, Block 1, Applewood Pointe of Roseville at Central Park 20 WHEREAS, City Code §1009.04 (Variances) establishes the purpose of a is 21 VARIANCE “to permit adjustment to the zoning regulations where there are practical difficulties applying to 22 a parcel of land or building that prevent the property from being used to the extent intended by 23 the zoning;” and 24 WHEREAS, the Variance Board has made the following findings: 25 a. The code-compliant manner in which to meet the requirements of §1004.06.H, 26 Surface Parking, has been determined to be burdensome for this situation. Such 27 limitations/restrictions represent the practical difficulty of the variance request and 28 the proposal appears to compare favorably with all of the above requirements 29 essential for approving variances. 30 b. A significant part of the purpose for prohibiting standard parking stalls between a 31 building and the front street is to avoid an auto-oriented development type in which 32 buildings are set back on the site and large parking areas are placed near the street. 33 Page 1 of 4