My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01604A
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1600-1699
>
pf_01604A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2010 3:10:14 PM
Creation date
7/21/2005 3:36:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1604a
Planning Files - Type
Special Use Permit
Address
1870-1880 SHADY BEACH AVE N
Project Name
CON/SPEC CORP
Applicant
CON/SPEC CORP
Status
Approved
Date Final City Council Action
8/26/1985
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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 />e <br /> <br />)mith <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />AH(.tllTECTS <br /> <br />TO: City of Roseville Planning Staff <br /> <br />FROM: Steven A. Jensen <br /> <br />DATE: July 2, 1985 <br /> <br />f <br /> <br />RE: <br /> <br />Development Proposal for 171 Center Street <br /> <br />The following arc concerns that have been expressed regarding <br />the resideutial develop~nt of 171 Center Street. <br /> <br />1. ~haracter: There was a fear th~t the earlier propos~ls would not <br />"fit In" with the existing neighborhood housing. The original <br />proposals were for large, two story contemporary styl( houses. <br />We ar~ now proposing smaller 1% story traditional bungalows with <br />low pitched roofs. We feel this is more appropriate to the <br />character of the neighborhood. <br /> <br />2. HeiRht: The original proposal called for a two story house <br />with a height of 3410". A second proposal was offered as Et <br />two story house with a height of 2810". We are now proposing a <br />story and one half bungalow with a height of approxi~tcly <br />20.0" above finished grade. <br /> <br />3. Traffic and the Commuritv Drive: It was determined that a <br />community drive is appropriate fer this project for several <br />reasons. The foremost is that the c~nity drive is a method <br />of limiting the dcstruc:ion of the existing landscape and vegetation. <br /> <br />The neighbol to the north otjected to the community drive being <br />adjacent to his property. ~,everal propo"'als were developed tc\ <br />improve this situation; <br /> <br />a) The driveway was moved from S feet to 10 feet so~th of <br />the property line. <br />b) The driveway was lowered below existing grade and a be~ <br />was constrycted to the north of ~he drive. This bean was <br />heavily landscaped to furt~cr shield the n~ighbor to the north. <br />c) The entrance tc the d~4veway was shifted to the south oway from <br />the ncightor's p~:~lng area to further isolate the traffic. <br /> <br />tdlS CAMRHI(,GE STHE rr MIN~f APOll~ MINNfSOIA ')')416 6' 2 925 1788 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.