06-04-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Resolution No.513-97 Silver Lake Commons Project Planning Case No. 487-97 11 July 16, 1997 Page 2 WHEREAS, the applicant is proposing to provide 65 surface spaces and 57 garage spaces for a total of 122 spaces, one more than what would be required using the adjusted parking ratios. There is sufficient room on the property to convert greenspace into an additional 19 spaces to meet the 140 spaces required by the Zoning Code. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the following documents regarding this request for a variance in parking ratios: 1. Planning Application 2. Zoning Map 3. Revised Site, Grading and Landscape Plans, date stamped 7/1/97 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby make the following findings of fact regarding the requirements for granting variances as set forth in Section 1125.02, Subd. 2 of the Mounds View Zoning Code: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances over which the owners of the property since the effective • date hereof have had no control. c. That the special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. The existing Red Oak Apartments presently do not meet the parking requirements as established in Section 1121.13 of the Zoning Code. This condition is pre-existent to the development project under consideration as Silver Lake Commons and was not caused by the applicants or the current owners of the Red Oak Apartments. While there is ample room to provide the full amount of parking required by the Zoning Code, the applicant would prefer to bank the stalls as greenspace in order to beautify the site and to provide additional open areas for recreation. Research has shown that the Mounds View'parking requirements are much higher in comparison to neighboring communities and communities across the country. The applicant should not be responsible for the City's parking requirements. It is advantageous to bank excess stalls as greenspace if the parking provided will be adequate for the use proposed. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Title would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this title. d. _ That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this title to owners of other lands,structures or • buildings in the same district. The granting of variances to allow for"Proof of Parking" is considered to be a benefit to the environment by not maximizing impervious surfaces in a development. Similar variances havebeen granted for other recent projects.