Laserfiche WebLink
<br />spaces. Neither of which allows a practical development. The "pond front" plan also would <br />require additional filling to support the building, disrupting informal water flow in that comer of <br />our site for us and our neighbors, and would not allow the efficiency of using the naturally <br />lowest part of the site for the pond. <br /> <br />We then began testing the ability to increase the setback from Roselawn by installing a retaining <br />wall in the pond where the pond is most securely protected by the building and partially covered <br />by the deck over the pond extending the outdoor patio of the apartment. We found the retaining <br />wall will allow to reduce the north south dimension of the pond be 12 ft, permitting a 27 ft <br />setback from Roselawn. This became Plan D. The additional setback in this Plan opens the <br />view of our neighbor to the west from the windows of his home, and with the "notch" in our <br />facade, increases the distance from these windows and our building from 55 ft to 72 ft along <br />most of that side of his home. The Plan A Detail (Current Site Plan) and Plan D Detail <br />(Retaining Wall Plan) sheets illustrate this effect. <br /> <br />The proposed location of the apartment building in the Final Development Plan is that of Plan D. <br /> <br />B. Office Building Alternatives <br /> <br />In the Concept Plan the two story office "L" shaped building had a gross floor area of 17,941 sf, <br />a net floor area of 12,330 sf, and was supported by 58 parking spaces. As alternatives that pulled <br />the office building to the center of the site, away from Lexington and Roselawn to provide <br />building setbacks approximating the setbacks of the the other commercial buildings at the comer <br />and the buildings along Lexington, two effects became apparent. First, parking was much less <br />efficient, even when a partial third story was added to the center of the "L" to shorten the length <br />of the building. Second, retaining the "L" shape became less important from a design standpoint <br />and more costly from an efficiency standpoint as the building was pulled back from the comer. <br /> <br />After much investigation, a three story, rectangular office building with an gross floor area of <br />16,464 sf and a net floor area of 11,592 sf, supported by 60 parking spaces is proposed in the <br />Final Development Plan. The building is located at the generally established building setback <br />along Lexington and matches the setback of the apartment to our south. Like the commercial <br />buildings at the comer and most commonly throughout Roseville, the parking is located between <br />the building and the roadway. <br />