My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/06/2013
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2013
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/06/2013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:18:05 AM
Creation date
6/6/2013 9:18:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
06/06/2013
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
383
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
Regular Planning Commission 5. 4. <br />Meeting Date: 06/06/2013 <br />Submitted For: Chris Anderson By: Tina Goodroad, Community Development <br />Information <br />Title: <br />PUBLIC HEARING: Consider Request for Site Plan Review and Variance to the Front Yard Setback on the <br />Property Located at 6815 McKinley Street NW; Case of Sharp & Associates, LLC <br />Background: <br />The applicant is proposing an 11,659 square foot addition to the south elevation of an existing building located at <br />6815 McKinley Street NW. The addition will accommodate warehousing needs for Cullinan Rigging, which <br />currently operates on this site. The addition meets all required setbacks except for the thirty-five (35) foot front <br />yard setback. The southwest corner of the proposed building addition would be twenty-two (22) feet from the front <br />property line. Only a small portion of the building addition would encroach on the required setback. The applicant <br />is requesting a thirteen (13) foot front yard setback variance for this southwest corner to accommodate the addition. <br />Notification: <br />All property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property were notified of the Public Hearing via Standard US <br />Mail. A Notice of Public Hearing was also published in the official newspaper. <br />Observations/Alternatives: <br />The property is a corner lot and abuts both Ebony Street to the east and McKinley Street to the south. The building <br />addition is to the south portion of the building, which is the front elevation facing McKinley Street NW. The main <br />building entry at the southeast corner will remain as is. The exterior finish of the proposed addition will match the <br />exterior building materials, colors, windows and accenting band on the building's existing southern elevation. Staff <br />is supportive of the proposed building elevation. <br />The proposed building addition will require twelve (12) parking stalls. The original site plan provided twenty-eight <br />(28) stalls with an additional thirty (30) stalls shown as proof of parking in the northwest corner of the site. These <br />stalls would not be initially installed but available in the event additional parking is needed. With the proof of <br />parking stalls the site meets the required fifty-eight (58) parking stalls with the building addition. Staff is supportive <br />of the proof of parking plan. <br />The proposed addition will require the relocation of an existing storm sewer line. The proposed relocation of this <br />line, as well as the storm water pond calculations, have been reviewed and are acceptable. <br />Recent statute changes renames the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," <br />but otherwise retains the familiar three -factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. <br />Also included is a sentence new to city variance: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with <br />the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the <br />comprehensive plan." <br />In evaluating this variance request under the new law, findings must be adopted that address the following <br />questions: <br />Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? The proposed use is an existing permitted <br />use in the E-2 Employment District. The addition will accommodate expansion of permitted warehousing use. A <br />variance is necessary to accommodate that warehouse expansion as it is thirteen (13) feet too close to the front yard <br />setback (at its closest point, the entire addition is not out of compliance). The site is triangular in nature, making <br />full use of the site for proposed addition challenging. The rear of the site narrows such that an addition in this <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.