CR 05-26 Height Variance - Supervalu - South Side
e,TY OF
~
,,-/:::: P K \ N S
Council Report 05-26
March 30, 2005
VARIANCE - HEIGHT
Proposed Action.
Staff recommends the following motion: Move to adopt Resolution 05-19, approving a
height variance for the addition to Supervalu.
Overview.
Supervalu is proposing to construct a 120,000-square-foot addition to the existing
building at 300 Second Avenue South. The proposed addition will be located on the
south side of the existing building. SuperValu is proposing to remove the existing fence,
and construct a new fence that would meet the requirements of the Fire Marshal if the
neighborhood wants the fence replaced. There would be no dock doors or truck traffic
on the south side. When the existing building was constructed, a height variance was
granted. If the building addition is to match the existing building, a height variance will
have to be granted.
The industrial district maximum height for a building that abuts a residential district is
35 feet. The existing building was granted a height variance.
Primary Issues to Consider.
. What does the ordinance require?
. What are the specifics of the applicant's request?
. What special circumstances or hardship does the property have?
Supportin2 Documents.
. Analysis of Issues
. Site Plans
. Resolution 05-19
'Th'n( lJ ~.~
NanCY!;. Anderson, AICP
Planner
Financial Impact: $ N/ A Budgeted:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.):
Notes:
YIN
Source:
CR05-26
Page 2
Primary Issues to Consider.
. What does the ordinance require?
The height for an industrial building abutting a residential zoning district is 35 feet.
. What are the specifics of the applicant's request?
The applicant is requesting a height variance of 12.5 feet.
. What special circumstances or hardship does the property have?
The Zoning Ordinance states the following: a variance is a modification or variation
from the provisions of this code granted by the board and applied to a specific parcel of
property because of undue hardship due to circumstances peculiar and unique to such
parcel. The Zoning Ordinance also states the following: that the Commission must find
that the literal enforcement of the provision of the Zoning Ordinance would cause an
undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under
consideration and that the granting of a variance to the extent necessary to compensate
for said hardship is in keeping with the intent of this code.
In this case, the applicant has an undue hardship that is unique to the property. The new
addition will match the existing building if the new addition does not receive a variance
there will not be enough interior clearance for material handling and storage equipment
to utilize the building.
Alternatives.
1. Approve the variance. By approving the variance, the applicant will be able to
construct the addition with a height of 47.5 feet.
2. Deny the variance. By denying the variance, the applicant will not be able to
construct the addition as proposed. If the City Council considers this alternative,
findings of fact will have to be stated that support this recommendation.
3. Continue for further information. If the City Council indicates that further
information is needed, the item should be continued. This alternative is an option
if the applicant agrees.
CITY OF HOPKINS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
RESOLUTION NO: 05-19
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND
APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR HEIGHT
WHEREAS, an application for Variance VN05-1 has been made by Supervalu; and
WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows:
1. That an application for Variance VN05-1 was made by Supervalu on January 28,
2005;
2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to mailed notice,
held a meeting on the application and reviewed such application on February 22
and March 8,2005: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard;
3. That the written comments and analysis of the City staff were considered;
4. The Hopkins City Council considered the application for the variance on March
15 and AprilS, 2005;
and
5. Legal description of the parcel is as follows:
Lot 1, Block 1, Supervalu Addition
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that application for Variance VN05-1 for a
variance of 12.5 feet from the maximum building height of 35 feet is hereby approved based on
the following Findings of Fact:
1. The height of the applicant's existing building located on the subject property
is 47.5 feet. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed building
addition requires a continuation of the existing building's 47.5 foot height to
achieve the interior clearance heights necessary to install and operate the
material handling systems and equipment to be installed by the applicant on
the interior of the proposed addition. Continuation of the pre-existing use of
the subject property by applicant is a reasonable use of such property.
2. That the subject property has a natural elevation that rises over 37 feet from
the west to the east, limiting the location of the existing building and the
proposed addition on the site.
3. That a street right-of-way and public park are located south of the subject
property separating the proposed addition from the adjacent residential area
located south of the park. The presence of the street right-of-way and park
reduces the negative effect of the proposed addition on the residential
neighborhood located to the south.
4. The approved site plan and landscaping plan for the proposed addition include
the planting of larger trees and trees of different varieties, new landscaping
and a fence, all of which will reduce the negative effect of the proposed
R05-19
Page 2
addition on the residential neighborhood located to the south.
5. When the existing warehouse building was constructed on the site by
applicant, applicant was required to design the building with the truck access
and loading and unloading facilities located on the north side of the building.
While an expansion of the building to the north would not be subject to the 35
foot maximum height limitation, it is not feasible to expand the building to the
north because it was designed and built with the truck access, loading and
unloading on its north side. There is no location on the site other than the
north side of the existing facility at which truck access is permitted.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that application for Variance
VN05-1 is hereby approved based on the following conditions:
1. That the Site Plan is approved.
Adopted this 5th day of April 2005.
ATTEST:
Eugene J. Maxwell, Mayor
Terry Obermaier, City Clerk