My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01704
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1700-1799
>
pf_01704
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2016 2:12:12 PM
Creation date
1/27/2016 2:23:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1704
Planning Files - Type
Variance
Address
2545 Hamline Ave N
Project Name
Rosepointe
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
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
PO_�NTE I}EVELOPMENT CORPORATIaN, 1618-85 <br />Page 2 <br />propose to manage the project, and a letter from the <br />research firm of Maxfield, I'alm, Cevette and Company. Also <br />attached is a"booklet" incorporating eigh't reduced drawings <br />of the site plan, floor plans, exterior elevations, a <br />grading and utilities plan, and a landseape plans <br />�I. The development, as currently proposed, is i:. conformance <br />with all yard requirements, density requirements, and floor <br />area ratio requirements. This is somewhat unusual in the <br />sense that the i'our othe� senior citizens pro�ects in <br />Roseville were all built at densities exceeda.ng the normal. <br />requi�ements for a,partment development. The City of <br />Rose�ville has not established specific density requirements <br />� for seraior ciLizens t�iousing projects in as mueh as each <br />project varies de,pendir�g up��� its design and approaeh to the � <br />market. It is recognized, however, that the aanount <br />of land <br />normally required for apartment gamily living is l�ss in the <br />ease of senior citizens housinga Thus, it; is common for <br />such housing proj�ets to be constructed at densities <br />exceeding norma � apartment requiremen�s around tihe <br />metropolitan area. <br />5. Two variances are requestedo One is for parking, wherefn <br />the parking proposed is at a ratio of 1:1-�-a total of 213 <br />parking spaces are proposed with 160 in the basement level <br />under tlhe proposeci new structures. The narmal requirem�ent <br />�or parkinl� in the R-3 Distriet i.s 1�1/2 spaces per unit. <br />The R-3A District, which was evolved in the late 196os, <br />ir�creased the parkfng requirement to two parking spaces per <br />uriit. We sugg�;st that the ratio proposed of one spac�e per <br />una.t is mt�re than adequaue and exceeds typical standards for <br />�enior eitizens housing o� the type prapased. <br />The seco�d varianee is for the height of the structure. The <br />code notes that buiZdings can be three stories or 30 feet in <br />hPight, whiehever is �ess. The buildings are three stories, <br />with two �tory uni.ts on the ends, as noted on the site <br />plans. Tl�e buildings could be constructed within the height <br />limitation� if a flat roof were used. However, the <br />develapers �ropose to construct, over a time period, a far <br />m�re d�sirable raof line Gtilizing intermittent gables. The <br />h�eight of a building is measured �o the mean distance of the <br />gable. This acc�unts for the additional seven feet of <br />height requested over the 30 foot limitation over the <br />a�rdinance. <br />6. The applicants have held � meeting with the neigi�bors so <br />that they may be well�informed about the p^oposal. <br />Initial�y, the applicants propuse to construct 242 �.��,,s on <br />the site with som�e of the strt�ctl,�res bei.ng five and six <br />stories high. �`�llowing tr.ie first meeting with the <br />neighbors, the devel.opers acc�ding to their concerns, <br />reduce�d trie height of the struc�ture and the number of units <br />f'rom 242 to 212. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.