HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Commission Resolution 513-97
.
.
.
MOUNDS VIEW PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 513-97
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPROVING A VARIANCE IN PARKING RATIOS FOR THE
SILVER LAKE COMMONS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT,
PROPOSED AT 2625 - 2665 HIGHWAY 10;
PLANNING CASE NO. 487-97
WHEREAS, MSP Real Estate, Inc. has applied for a variance of parking ratios associated
with the renovation of the existing Red Oak Apartments and the development of 16 townhouse
units on parcels located at 2625 - 2665 Highway 10, property zoned R-3 and R-4, Medium and
High Density Residential Districts, legally described as follows:
LOTS 78 THROUC,'J/ 82 AND LOT 83, EXCEPT THE REAR 15() FEET THEREOF;
SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 3(), RANGE 23, RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, Chapter 1121 of the Mounds View Zoning Code establishes the parking
ratios by specific use; which, as they relate to this project, are as follows:
Multiple Family:
1.5 uncovered, surface parking spaces per unit and at least 1
covered garage space per unit, for a total of2,5 per unit.
WHEREAS, according to the Zoning Code, the number of parking spaces that would be
required for the 56 units proposed by the applicant are as follows:
Surface parking (uncovered):
Garage parking (covered):
Total parking spaces required:
56 x 1.5 = 84
56 x 1.0 = 56
140
WHEREAS, Statf has reviewed parking ratios used by other municipalities and parking
guidelines as developed by the American Planning Association and recommend the following
ratios:
Multiple Family:
1,15 uncovered, surface parking spaces per unit and at least 1
covered garage space per unit, for a total of2.15 per unit.
WHEREAS, utilizing the adjusted parking ratios, the number of parking spaces required
for this development would be 121 spaces, broken down as follows:
Surface parking (uncovered):
Garage parking (covered):
. Total parking spaces required:
56 x 1.15 = 65
56 x 1.0 = 56
121
.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 513-97
Silver Lake Commons Project
Planning Case No. 4R7-97
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 offact
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 elIectivc
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 lUlder the tenns of this title,
d. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special
pnvilege 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 have been granted for other recent projects,
.
Planning Commission Resolution No, 513-97
Silver Lake Commons Project
Planning Case No, 487-97
July 16, 1997
Page 3
e. That the variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the
hardship, Economic conditions alone shall not be considered a hardship,
The ratios proposed for the project are as follows: 1,15 uncovered spaces per dwelling
unit (65 spaces) and one garage space per dwelling unit (56), These ratios are consistent
with surveys of other jurisdictions and information from the American Planning
Association, and represent a suitable adjustment. The conditions on this resolution require
that sufficient space be reserved on the site plan for providing the 19 spaces needed to
meet the City's current parking ratios,
f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this title or to other
property in the same zone.
.
The granting of this variance will not conflict with the purpose of this Title in that parking
will be provided using accepted parking ratios for multiple family developments,
Sufficient room is available to build the additional parking required by the ratios in the
City Code, if it becomes evident that parking is needed in the future, The approximate
3,420 square-foot reduction of impervious surface is an environmental and aesthetic
benefit,
g, The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to
adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the
danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property
values within the neighborhood.
The granting of this variance will be a benefit to neighboring properties mainly for
aesthetic reasons by preserving additional greenspace and reducing impervious surface,
Traffic will not increase on the adjacent streets as a result of this variance.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the criteria for granting a
variance in this case have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Planning Commission
does hereby approve a variance in the parking ratios applicable to the proposed Silver Lake
Commons development as submitted by MSP Real Estate, Inc. with the following stipulations:
I.
The parking ratios applicable to this property shall be as follows:
.
Surface Parking (uncovered): 1,15 spaces per dwelling unit
Garage Parking (covered): 1 space per dwelling unit
2,
Prior to action by the City Council on the development review for this project, and
in order for this variance to remain in effect, the applicant shall:
.
.
.
Planning Commission Resolution No, 513-97
Silver Lake Commons Project
Planning Case No, 487-97
July 16, 1997
Page 4
a, Revise the parking layout to show one additional future parking space so
that the total number of possible surface parking stalls is 84, of which 19
spaces are shown in parking areas which could be added if deemed
necessary by the City or property owner,
b. Add a notation to the site plan which states:
"A variance in required parking ratios was approvedfor this property by
Planning Commission Resolution No. 513-97. The parking ratios approvedfor
this property are asfollows:
1,15 sll1/ace space per dwelling unit
1 garage .\pace per dwelling unit
The property owner is ohligated to build up to an additional 19 parking spaces,
Ivhich would meet the parking ratios required by the Zoning Code, if deemed
necessary hy the City hased onfuture parking pattel'lls and evidence that parking
need" cannot he sati,~fied on-site. The property owner shall he notified in1vriting
that additional parking must he huilt, and upon sllch notice, shall construct the
additional parking within 3 months, with consideration for weather conditions. "
,..,
-, ,
Approval of this variance shall be null and void if anyone of the following
approvals are not obtained for this project:
a, Minnesota Department of Transportation permit approval
b, Development Review approval by the City Council
Adopted this 16th day ofJuly, 1997,
~~
Jerry ete on, Plannmg CommIssIon Chairperson
ATTEST
~~~~
James Ericson, Planning Associate
(SEAL)- ,
N :\D:\TA \(J ROUP:;\CO/vlD E \\DE YCASES\4!<7 -97\1' AR~- Y AR. RES