07/07/05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

10~ 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. That the current business operating on the Subject Property has 78% (seventy-eight percent) impervious surface lot coverage and is considered legal non-conforming. That the proposed additional off-street parking areas result in an impervious surface lot coverage calculation of 86% (eighty-six percent). That the subject property is approximately 1,000 feet from the Mississippi River. That the 30% impervious surface restriction is designed to limit site runoff to :the Mississippi River. That on April 1., 2004, the Applicant was granted a variance to the impervious surface restriction in the Critical River and' Wild and Scenic River Overlay Districts; however, . that variance is now null and void because it was not initiated or utilized within one (1) year of its approval. That the existing conditions on the Subject Property do not provide for any onsite stormwater detention and treatment. 'That the Applicant has submitted a Grading ~rid Erosi"on Control Plan prepared by Surveying & Engineering Professionals, Inc., dated March 11, 20041 revised on June 29, 2005 by City Staffper the Applicant's verbal instructions to show the building expansion' as a future expansion, which provides for onsite stormwater detention and treatment. That the proposed on-site ponding will provide a basin that is 98% effective as a basin designed to meet NURP criteria in the removal of suspended solids and 93% effective in the removal of total phosphorous. That the Applicant has applied for a permit from the Lower Rum River .Water Management Organization, which was approved on March' 11', 2004. That similar variances have been granted in the past. That there are unique circumstances applying to the subject proposal, namelyi a) the Subject Property was developed prior to the adoption of the Critical River Overlay District Development Standards and already exceeds the maximum impervious surface lot .coverage for the Critical River and Wild and Scenic River Overlay District; b) approximately one-third of the Subject Property is outside of the Critical River Overlay District boundary. That the unique circumstances causing th~ undue hardship did not result from the actions of the Applicant. That if granted, the variance will/will not igrant the Applicant any special privilege that is denied to other owners of lands, structures or buildi'ngs in the same district. RESOLUTION//05-07- Page 2 of 3