My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03251
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03251
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 1:11:32 PM
Creation date
12/9/2004 7:00:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
173
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
<br />Mayor and City Council Members <br />City of RoseviJle <br />September 29, 2000 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />Secondly, we have a much more substantial concern about the screening which is <br />required for any 24-hour use. The ordinance only requires something with a height of 6 <br />feet, which could be something as unattractive as a chain link fence with a plastic <br />covering. However, because you are allowed the evaluate this as a conditional use, the <br />City has a great deal more flexibility in requiring more a.ttractive screening, such as <br />landscaping and berms. In this regard, I hope the Council will be extremely specific <br />about which boundaries of Ham line Center will need to be screened. The parking <br />required for this operation could be in severaJ locations around the Center, and the Center <br />, is virtua.l1y surrounded (except for the office and Roseville CovenaI\t Church) by <br />residential areas. Accordingly, the screening should be on all appropriate bounda1"ies of <br />the Center, and should include extensive landscaping, as opposed to merely chain link <br />fences. An enclosed survey of1he property indicates that, because parking is located very <br />closely to the property boundaries, there may be minimal room for appropriate screening, <br />without removing existing parking spaces. Obviously, this would only exacerbate the <br />existing parking deficiency. All of this soggests that this is not an appropriate location <br />for this proposed 24-bour use. ' -. <br /> <br />IV. Impositio.n 9f Additional Conditions. <br /> <br />As we indicated at the meeting, we hope that, if this conditional use is approved, a <br />number of additional conditions not previously suggested by Staff wiJI be imposed. The <br />specific suggestions are as follows: <br /> <br />A. Limit the l1umber of permitted seats to 300. <br />B. Limit the permitted games to bingo and pull tabs. <br />C. Prohibit tbe possession or seNing of alcohol on the premises. <br />D. Impose a parking and traffic circulation plan, to accommodate the <br />"surges" of traffic when the game sessions begin and end, and to <br />accommodate the needs of existing merchants for short term parking. <br />E. Impose additional conditions such as those indicated in Section 303.08, <br />regulating "amusement devices". <br /> <br />V. ~Iternate Locations. <br /> <br />As indicated by Pastor Carlson, the Church is not opposed to gambling in <br />every location in RosevilJe, but feels that this location is inappropriate, for all of the <br />reasons mentioned above. It has come to our attention that a number of alternate sites for <br />this operation are available. In particular, the former "Lyndale Ga.rden Center" is <br />available, and apparently, its owner and The gambling operators have expressed an <br />interest in leasing that facility. As you know, it is direct1y adjacent to the Knigh~ of <br />Columbus Building where the existing charitable gambJing operation is located. I believe <br />that this property coDtajns about 10,000 leaseable square feet, and has more thane <br />J lis d 6Sgg9V29gS 'ON/6t: 2 [ 'lS/2s: 81 00 i6~ '60 (IHd) <br /> <br />WOHd <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.