My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-05-06_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Agendas
>
2015-05-06_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2015 10:36:43 AM
Creation date
5/8/2015 10:36:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
43
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
RA <br />EQUESTEDCTION <br />2 <br />Cities Edge Architects in cooperation with the owner of the Holiday Inn Express proposes to <br />3 <br />correct/modify Rosedale Corporate Plaza Condominium (condominium no. 266) a Common <br />4 <br />Interest Community (CIC) Plat. The Holiday Inn Express, as a condominium property, is a <br />5 <br />distinct real property interest. Therefore, modifications to the property lines require re-platting, <br />6 <br />just like any other property subdivision application. <br />7 <br />B <br />ACKGROUND <br />8 <br />The subject property, located in Planning District 11, has a Comprehensive Plan land use <br />9 <br />designation of Business Park (BP) and a Zoning District classification of Office/Business Park <br />10 <br />(O/BP) District. The CIC revision and proposal has been prompted by plans <br />11 PRELIMINARYPLAT <br />to develop a swimming pool addition to the south side of the building, which requires a <br />12 <br />modification in the Unit description. <br />13 <br />When exercising the so-called “quasi-judicial” authority when acting on a request, the role <br />14 PLAT <br />of the City is to determine the facts associated with a particular request and apply those facts to <br />15 <br />the legal standards contained in the ordinance and relevant state law. In general, if the facts <br />16 <br />indicate the applicant meets the relevant legal standard, then they are likely entitled to the <br />17 <br />approval, although the City is able to add conditions to a approval to ensure that the likely <br />18 PLAT <br />impacts to urban design, roads, storm sewers, and other public infrastructure on and around the <br />19 <br />subject property are adequately addressed. A CIC is not all that different from standard plats, but <br />20 <br />in this instance requires less review of our platting requirements since all that is being proposed <br />21 <br />is an addition to the existing building, which affects few platting standards in Chapter 11 of the <br />22 <br />City Code. <br />23 <br />PPA <br />RELIMINARYLATNALYSIS <br />24 <br />P proposals are reviewed primarily to ensure that all proposed lots meet the minimum size <br />25 LAT <br />requirements of the Zoning Code, have desirable lot layout and grading, protect natural <br />26 <br />resources, have adequate streets and other public infrastructure in place or identified and a plan <br />27 <br />to be constructed, and have addressed potential storm water issues to prevent problems either on <br />28 <br />nearby property or within the storm water system. As a of a property in the <br />29 PRELIMINARY PLAT <br />O/BP district, the proposal leaves no zoning issues to be addressed since the Zoning Code does <br />30 <br />not establish minimum lot dimensions or area. The proposed is included with <br />31 PRELIMINARY PLAT <br />this report as Attachment C. <br />32 <br />On April 16 and 23, 2015, the Development Review Committee (DRC) met to review/discuss the <br />33 <br />submitted plans. No substantial comments were offered as the proposal is to expand the <br />34 <br />building, triggering the need for a new legal description for Unit 6, for which the legal <br />35 <br />description and increase in unit size found no objections by the DRC. <br />36 <br />The building/unit addition space is currently “common elements” under the recorded Rosedale <br />37 <br />Corporate Place Condominium and is under negotiation with the other property owners for <br />38 <br />removal and inclusion into the modified Unit 6 description. Assuming final agreements can be <br />39 <br />reached with all property owners, the final description would be created and final plat sought <br />40 <br />from the City. <br />41 <br />PF15-005_RPCA_050615 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.