Laserfiche WebLink
The project does include an exterior trash enclosure near the northeastern corner of the building. As of the writing <br />of this case, Staff has not received a rendering or description of the enclosure materials. The Applicant is working <br />with their architect to provide additional details on the enclosure. Since it is not internal to the building, the design <br />of the enclosure should appear essentially like an extension of the building itself. <br />Variance <br />The COR-2 zoning district does not have minimum required setbacks from the side or rear property boundaries. <br />However, there is a build -to requirement from the building front to the public road right-of-way of no more than <br />fifteen (15) feet (Sunwood Drive is designated as a Destination Street). As proposed, no part of the building meets <br />the build -to requirement. The northeast corner of the building (the portion nearest to Sunwood Drive) is about <br />seventeen (17) feet from the right-of-way boundary. <br />Sunwood Drive was realigned circa 2012-2013 to accommodate the Armstrong Boulevard overpass. While the road <br />was realigned, the existing utilities, including trunk sewer and trunk water lines, remained in place, as they were <br />serving the western most building within this retail node. These utilities, as well as the existing drainage and utility <br />easement that encumbers the northern half of the Subject Property, prevent the building from meeting the build -to <br />standard. Furthermore, not just the drainage and utility easement, but the utilities themselves, create barriers to a <br />knee wall or other decorative means to create the desired street presence. Even as proposed, a small portion of the <br />building encroaches into the drainage and utility easement (Staff is working with the Engineering Department to <br />determine whether a partial Easement Vacation or an Easement Encroachment Agreement would be the most <br />appropriate way to address this matter). Due to these constraints, the Applicant has requested a variance to the <br />build -to standard. <br />When considering a Variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the following factors: <br />1. Will the variance allow the property owner to use the property in a reasonable manner? <br />2. Is the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the <br />landowner? <br />3. Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? <br />The Subject Property is irregularly shaped as a result of the realignment of Sunwood Drive. The irregular shape, <br />combined with the existing utilities and easement, were not created by the Applicant and are unique to the Subject <br />Property. The proposed multi -tenant building is a permitted use and will hopefully attract more retail and restaurant <br />options to the area, a strong desire of the residents. The proposed building location will not impact the essential <br />character of the locality as there are already two (2) buildings within this retail node that sit much further away <br />from the public road right-of-way. <br />Alternatives <br />Alternative 1: Motion to adopt Resolution 422-029 approving a variance to the build -to requirement and <br />recommend City Council approve the Site Plan for the new, multi -tenant building on the Subject Property. The <br />proposed building not only provides more opportunities for retail and restaurant type businesses to enter Ramsey, <br />but also is very similar in style to the other four (4) buildings within this retail node. Due to the realignment of <br />Sunwood Drive and the location of existing sewer and water utility lines, the building cannot meet the build -to <br />requirement for a Destination Street. The circumstances appear to satisfy the 3-factor test outlined above. Staff <br />supports this alternative. <br />Alternative 2: Do not approve the requested variance and recommend that the Site Plan be modified to comply with <br />The COR Design Framework standards (specifically the build -to requirement). Based on the unique shape of the <br />property, existing access into the Subject Property, and location of utilities, this does not seem to be a reasonable <br />action and Staff does not support it. <br />Funding Source: <br />All costs associated with this request are the Applicant's responsibility. <br />