Title
RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S DECISION TO DENY PARK POINT MARINA INN AND SUITES, LLC A VARIANCE FROM THE MIXED USE WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AT 1003 MINNESOTA AVENUE.
Body
CITY PROPOSAL:
RESOLVED, that the city council finds as follows:
(a) On October 16, 2015, Globe Duluth Enterprises, Inc. and Park Point Marina Inn and Suites, LLC, submitted a complete application for a variance from the Mixed Use Waterfront development standards;
(b) In April 2012, the city council approved rezoning 1003 Minnesota Avenue from Industrial Waterfront (I-W) to Mixed Use Waterfront (WU-W). The planning commission approved a plan for a 55 room, 3 story hotel in April 2012. An amended plan was reviewed, and approved, by the planning commission in May 2012 that allowed 12 additional guest rooms and 13 off-street parking spaces. The planning commission also approved a variance from the MU-W development standards related to transparency (50-15.6.E.4) in May 2012. The certificate of occupancy for the 68 room hotel was issued May 30, 2014;
(c) The property is zoned Mixed Use Waterfront (MU-W); this zone district has several development standards that impact development and redevelopment. Section 50-15.6.E.2 states that “to protect public views to the waterfront from the closest landward public street running approximately parallel to the water, all primary structures shall have a maximum width of 200 feet measured along the shoreline and shall be separated from other primary structures by a minimum of 50 feet. These requirements shall not apply to portions of buildings that do not block public views of Lake Superior, the harbor and the St. Louis River from the closest landward public street running approximately parallel to the water due to topography or the location”;
(d) The applicant is seeking a variance from Section 50-16.5.E.2 to allow an addition on the southeast corner of the existing hotel. The proposed addition would exceed the 200 foot limit for structures blocking public views of the waterfront; the proposed addition would be 100 feet long, of which 84 feet would be in excess of the 200 foot limit.
(e) The planning commission considered the application at its December 8, 2015, regular meeting. The applicant provided additional information, including images of the property from the street. The public hearing was opened and several public comments were received at the meeting. The Planning Commission voted 7-1 to deny the variance request. The denial was based on the fact that the variance application did not meet the general criteria for variances Section 50-37.9.C, it did not demonstrate that the strict application of the requirements of the city's zoning code would result in practical difficulties to the property owner, and there was no environmental regulatory reason why soils unsuitable for development could not be safely removed from the site. In reaching its decision, the planning commission reviewed comments from the public and the applicant, information from city staff, and applicable regulations from the Unified Development Chapter;
(f) On December 17, 2015, the city received an appeal from Terry Anderson requesting the city council reverse the planning commission’s decision to deny the variance;
(g) The city council heard the appeal at its January 25, 2016 meeting;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the decision of the planning commission to deny the application for a variance is affirmed on the following grounds;
[ Note to Council: any of the following grounds are sufficient reasons to deny the requested variance:
The applicant has failed to demonstrate that a practical difficulty exists related to the land that supports the granting of a variance as authorized by 50-37.9.C.1;
The applicant has failed to demonstrate that special circumstances or conditions exist that support the granting of a variance as authorized by 50-37.9.C. 2 and 3;
The need for the variance is supported only by the economic convenience of the applicant , and not required to preserve a substantial property right, and as specified by 50-37.9.C.4 such economic convenience is not an adequate reason to grant the requested variance.]
Statement of Purpose
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: The resolution affirms the planning commission’s decision to deny Terry Anderson and Park Point Marina Inn and Suites, LLC a variance from the MU-W development standards.
City Council Appeal Received: December 17, 2015
Complete Variance Application Received: October 16, 2015
Action Deadline for Variance Application: February 13, 2016