pf_02364 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 Ji\1 11 (; ¡{j .~ 1\: S 1 tARl)1 ~( )\\/ J\j,\ 1 ) . (.J })/\ i\T CONSULTINC PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ,00 FIKST AVENUE r\!ORTH SUITE -" ,. MINNEAPOLIS M N SS401 CoIl ,,9 ,WO 20 December 1991 Richard Simmons SMC Associates 6120 72nd Lane N. Minneapolis, MN 55429 RE: Proposed Rosedale Medical Center Dear Mr. Simmons: The Roseville City Staff has reviewed your application for variances to the Zoning Code for the proposed Rosedale Medical Center, and we have a number of concerns that we want to discuss and tIy to resolve before the project would actually be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council. Before going into these issues, I want to make it clear that we fully support the idea of a medical facility in Roseville such as you are proposing, and we are committed to doing whatever we can to help you get this project under way. Our concerns at this point have to do with design considerations, which we hope can be solved quickly and satisfactorily. The former Mack Hotel property is zoned B-3 and medical facilities are a permitted use in that district. However, the site is non-conforming in a number of respects, and the project proposes a change in use from the current hotel use. The Code clearly indicates how to deal with this situation. Section 4.020 states that "no building, structure, or land shall be occupied or used which is not in conformity" with the Code, and Section 11.020 states that "any non-conforming use may be continued, but may not be extended, expanded, intensified, or changed unless to a conforming use" (italics mine). The "use" of the property implies all the ways in which it is developed and built upon, not just the nature of the business within the building. Weare, therefore, reviewing the Rosedale Medical Center proposal from the standpoint of conformity with all provisions of the Roseville Code, including not only the B-3 District standards, but the design standards in Chapter 19 as well. You were given a copy of these design standards at our meeting some months ago. Even if the use were not changing from hotel to clinic, significant remodelling is proposed (adding 20% to the value of the building), which triggers at least partial site improvements as provided for in Section 19.030. That section of the design standards requires a determination by the City Staff of the level of site improvements that will be required for a project. There are, I believe, five major issues involved with the site plan you have presented. There are also other issues, such as building materials, engineering issues, and signage, which have not been fully explored at this point, but will need to be studied in more detail. These issues are not all part of one approval process. They call on different aspects of City review and one of them will be dealt with differently than the others. I have outlined these issues below, as well as the process for review and approval of each: