Skip to main content
File #: VA-2411    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Planning Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 6/5/2024 In control: Planning and Zoning Board
On agenda: 6/12/2024 Final action:
Title: VA-2411: Request for a variance from Article V, Section 21-54.04, Table V-5 to allow for a Class A, 10 foot landscape buffer in lieu of the required Class C landscape buffer for the property at 1517 and 1525 S. Ridgewood Avenue.
Attachments: 1. Public Notice Map, 2. Plot Plan

ITEM DESCRIPTION:

Title

VA-2411: Request for a variance from Article V, Section 21-54.04, Table V-5 to allow for a Class A, 10 foot landscape buffer in lieu of the required Class C landscape buffer for the property at 1517 and 1525 S. Ridgewood Avenue.

Body

APPLICANT: 

David Rasmussen

 

PROPOSED USE: 

In order to accommodate the need for overflow parking, stormwater, and emergency access to the rear of the building, the applicant is requesting a reduction in the required Class C Landscape Buffer to a 10’ Class A Landscape Buffer between B-3 Zoning and Residential Zoning.

 

REQUESTED ACTION:

1.                     Article V, Section 21-54.04 Table V-5 Buffer Yard Planting Options to allow a 10’ Class A buffer between B-3 Zoning and Residential (R-3) Zoning.

 

PARCEL IDs:

8402-31-00-0280 & 8402-31-00-0270

 

AREA:                     

1.23 acres

 

CURRENT LAND USE: 

Office Building, Automobile Repair

 

FLUM DESIGNATION: 

Commercial

 

ZONING DISTRICT:

B-3 Highway Commercial

 

VOTING DISTRICT: 

District One - Councilwoman Charlotte Hope Gillis

 

According to Article IX, Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance, City of Edgewater’s Land Development Code;

In order to grant a non-administrative variance, the P. & Z. Board shall make the following findings of fact:

 

1.                     That granting of the proposed variance is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan;

2.                     That granting of the proposed variance will not result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area;

3.                     That granting of the proposed variance is the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property;

4.                     That the physical characteristics of the subject site are unique and not present on adjacent sites; and

5.                     That the circumstances creating the need for the variance are not the result of actions by the applicant, actions proposed by the applicant or actions by the previous property owner(s).

6.                     That granting of the proposed variance(s) will not cause substantial detriment to the public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code.

 

Explanation of hardship by applicant:  Existing 10,000 SF structure and site complete renovation need emergency rear of building access, overflow rear yard parking for business owners, employees.  

 

1.                     Will granting the proposed variance result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan?

a.                     Staff’s response: After review, Staff has determined that granting the variance would result in a conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.

i.                     Future Land Use Policy 1.5.7: Maintaining Site Design Requirements and Subdivision Regulations. The City shall maintain site design requirements and subdivision regulations in the Land Development Code, which adequately address the impacts of new development on adjacent properties in all land use categories and zoning districts.

 

                     This criterion has not been met.

 

2.                     Will the granting of the proposed variance result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses in the area?

 

a.                     Applicant’s Response: No. Planned new business is compatible (sic).

b.                     Staff’s response: No, granting the variance will not result in creating or continuing a use which is not compatible with adjacent uses.

i.                     The following nearby properties currently have similar layouts to the proposed variance with regards to parking and/or stormwater swales adjacent to residential zoning:

1.                     1501 S. Ridgewood Ave.

2.                     1401 S. Ridgewood Ave.

3.                     1317 S. Ridgewood Ave.

 

This criterion has been met.

 

3.                     Is the proposed action the minimum action available to permit reasonable use of the property?

 

a.                     Applicant’s response: Yes. Redevelopment will require rear yard emergency access, and overflow parking.

b.                     Staff’s response: The applicant could meet the required landscape buffer by eliminating the parking spaces in the rear of the building.

 

This criterion has not been met.

 

4.                     Are the physical characteristics of the subject site unique and not present on adjacent sites?

 

a.                     Applicant’s response: No. All S Ridgewood Ave frontage parcels likely have same rear yard landscape issue.

b.                     Staff’s response: The subject property is a conforming lot meeting the minimum lot size and width.

 

This criterion has not been met.

 

5.                     Are the circumstances creating the need for the variance the result of actions by the applicant or actions proposed by the applicant?

 

a.                     Applicant’s response: Applicant has plans submitted for review Complete renovation of entire site and building.

b.                     Staff’s response: Yes, the applicant is looking to add additional parking spaces to the rear of the building abutting residential zoning and decreasing the required landscape buffer.

 

This criterion has not been met.

 

6.                     Will the granting of the proposed variance cause substantial detriment to public welfare or impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code?

 

a.                     Applicant’s response: No. Site is located in CRA, redevelopment is encouraged, existing code for landscape buffer is excessive, 10’ landscape buffer is reasonable.

b.                     Staff’s response: Yes, although granting the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare it will impair the purposes and intent of the Land Development Code Article V.

 

This criterion has not been met.

 

 

Staff Notes:

 

                     Environmental Services: Environmental Services understands that the nature of this request is to reduce the horizontal distance of the rear landscaped area in an effort to bring the existing site into conformance regarding parking and access standards. Further, the landscaped buffer yard is anticipated to contain a newly constructed stormwater management system which will capture and retain the first flush of runoff and discharge the remainder into a public conveyance system in a controlled manner. Both of these improvements to traffic and stormwater quality and quantity routing are preferable to the current configuration of the site. Environmental Services recommends approval of the requested variances for this redevelopment proposal.

 

Staff Recommendation:

 

Staff does not recommend approval for VA-2411 because the applicant could not meet all six criteria of Article IX, Section 21-100.04(d), Non-Administrative Variance, City of Edgewater’s Land Development Code.