My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014_0609_CCpacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2014
>
2014_0609_CCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2014 1:53:18 PM
Creation date
6/5/2014 1:38:57 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
378
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Attachment D <br />1 PLANNWG FILE 14-009 <br />2 Request by Lakewest and Commers Enterprises Southtown for VACATION of unused right-of-way at 2501 <br />3 — 2699 Patton Road <br />4 Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 14-009 at 6:55 p.m. <br />5 Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed the request for VACATION of a small area of right-of-way adjacent to 2501 <br />6 — 2699 Patton Road, adjacent to County Road C in west Roseville. Mr. Lloyd noted that this right-of-way remained <br />7 unused after subsequent platting of nearby property after the original platting of the Patton Business Addition in <br />8 1985; as detailed in Section 4.2 of the staff report. Mr. Lloyd provided staff's analysis, and advised that they <br />9 recommended approval, based on their comments and findings as outlined in Sections 4— 6 of the staff report <br />10 dated May 7, 2014; and the vacation survey dated March 20, 2014 reviewed as part of this application, and in <br />11 conjunction with the City's Public Works and Engineering Department's review. <br />12 Member Murphy questioned how the curved area would impact the holding pond; with Mr. Lloyd responding that <br />13 he was not sure of a technical response, and if the Public Works/Engineering staff review had found the need to <br />14 retain an easement on the property, it would remain even with the requested vacation. <br />15 Member Daire questioned the length of the cul-de-sac Patton Road; with Mr. Lloyd responding that even if longer <br />16 than current standards as a pre-existing and non-conforming condition under State Statute, the property owners <br />17 would still be required to provide solutions for emergency vehicle access and turnaround areas. With the <br />18 assistance of Mr. Paschke, Mr. Lloyd noted the current maximum length was 500', but staff was unable to find a <br />19 record of variance action that addressed the street length as part of their review and analysis. <br />20 Member Daire noted that, in Section 4.2 of the staff report, the business addition was done in 1985, at which time <br />21 Patton Road was 600' long; and then in 1987, that length was extended to 1200'. <br />22 Mr. Lloyd noted that the current code standards and maximum lengths could have been incorporated or revised <br />23 after the fact, but remained as legal, non-conforming provisions. <br />24 Mark Rancone, Applicant Representative with Roseville Properties, and representing the building owner <br />25 partnership <br />26 Mr. Rancone noted that this business park consisted of four buildings on Patton Road, and owned by those <br />27 business partners listed in the staff report. <br />28 Mr. Rancone noted that, when the buildings were built in the 1980's, their use was for a combination <br />29 office/warehouse use, with 30% office and 70% warehouse with loading docks. Over time, Mr. Rancone noted <br />30 that the use had evolved to medical start ups and other office business uses, and had now been converted to <br />31 almost 100% office use, and little warehouse use remaining. Mr. Rancone noted that part of this was due to a no <br />32 longer efficient warehouse use with 14' access doors as had been used in the 1980's. In order to accommodate <br />33 this higher office percentage use, Mr. Rancone advised that the business park owners were attempting to <br />34 accommodate additional parking requirements of employees; and that this request would serve to extend the <br />35 parking by an additional seven stalls, which would extend into the public right-of-way. Mr. Rancone advised that, <br />36 therefore, it had been determined that it was a good time to clear up the right-of way and lot lines and incorporate <br />37 all parking on their own land, including that corner of the property. <br />38 At the request of Member Daire, Mr. Rancone addressed intended stall sizes and restriping of those stalls. Mr. <br />39 Rancone clarified that, even though there were no code restriction on stall size, if necessary, they could post <br />40 signs for compact car use if deemed too small for regular vehicles; but that their intention was that most would be <br />41 9' - 10' wide and 16' — 18' deep, depending on the total area available. Mr. Rancone noted that the intent was to <br />42 provide as many stalls as possible to accommodate employees. <br />43 Chair Gisselquist closed Public Hearing at 7:10 p.m.; no one appeared for or against. <br />44 MOTION <br />45 Member Boguszewski moved, seconded by Member Gisselquist to recommend to the City Council <br />46 APPROVAL of the proposed VACATION of the unused right-of-way at 2501 — 2699 Patton Road; based on <br />47 the comments and findings of Sections 4— 6 and the recommendation of Section 7 of the staff report <br />48 dated May 7, 2014. <br />49 Ayes:5 <br />50 Nays:O <br />51 Motion carried. <br />Page 1 of 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.