pf_02483 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I)AHLGREN. SHARDIDW ANI) . UBAN ¡:--:CORPOR,:>,l[l) DATE: TO: FROM: RE: 2 November 1992 CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 612·339·3300 MEMORANDUM Craig Waldron John Shardlow, AICP Clarification of Screening Requirements for Proposed Walgreen's Loading Area At the City Council Meeting last Monday evening there was considerable discussion regarding the adequacy of screening between the loading area on the west side of the Walgreen's and the adjacent single family home. Some members of the Council wanted to attach conditions to limit the hours of operation for this loading area and we explained that since the application was not for a conditional use permit, we did not have the authority to do so. . In retrospect, I do not feel that I did as good a job of explaining the requirements for this screening as I might have. I also want to be certain that Rick and others in the building permit approval group follow through on this issue. Therefore, I am writing this memorandum and I ask that you transmit copies to the City Council. As you know, following the adoption of the Design Standards (Chapter 19) the Roseville Ordinance no longer requires permitted uses to go through a site plan review at either the Planning Commission or City Council level. Plans for such developments are reviewed by the staff and if they comply with all of the code requirements, a permit is issued. These plans mayor may not be reviewed by the Development Review Committee, basically at Rick Jopke's discretion. Consequently, our office may not ever see some plans, if Rick feels that they comply fully with the rules. This was the mode that the Walgreen's plans were proceeding in, until the requirement for additional right-of-way prompted the need for a parking setback variance along both Rice Street and County Road C. Section 19.010 (9) states: All extemalloading and service areas must be completely screened from the around level view of contiguous residential properties and adjacent streets, except at driveway ac:œss points. When this question came up at the meeting, I frankly did not know if the screening shown on the applicant's plans met the standard or not. There was no information about the grades on the adjacent lot, although it appeared to sit lower than the Walgreen's lot. Since the meeting, I have discussed it with Phil Carlson and the screening shown on the current plans does not meet the standard. Before a permit can be issued for this development, more analysis will need to be completed and the plans will need to be revised. A screen wall will need to be constructed with materials ·of a similar type, quality and appearance of the principle structure· - Section 19.010 (3). Finally, I would just like to add that completely screened, means completely and without gaining another variance (which would authorize the City to attach conditions such as hours of operation) the plans will need to add a screen wall that would totally hide trucks while they are loading and unloading. This would represent a substantial improvement over the existing conditions between this lot and the adjacent property .