My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_00542
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF001 - PF999
>
500-599
>
pf_00542
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/8/2024 2:35:43 PM
Creation date
2/9/2016 12:35:30 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 />� <br />� <br />� October 1, i 969 <br />CAS F NO: <br />APPLICANT: <br />LOCAT 10 N: <br />ACTION �EQUESTED: <br />� <br />�J <br />542-69 <br />John E. Boss <br />Northwest Corner of Garden Avenue and Lexir�gton <br />Avenue <br />Rezon ing fram "R-1 " to "f�-3" <br />1'ZANNII�IG C4NSIDERATIOl�15: <br />1, The prope�rty in qui�stian is immediate(y north of a B-2 Disfirict, the northerly <br />portiorr of which was originaf ly developed f�r a refiai I sho�e store . Under <br />normal conditinns, one would anticipate ihe praperty in questian to be developed <br />for some sort of transitional use betwsen the existing commercial area arrc! the <br />single family r�esid�enti,�l areas to the north and v,�est. Such transitional uses <br />might normally include an affice building, clinic, muiti�le dwelling, or perhaps <br />a garden store. In this c:ase, the proposed use i��fhiif.of a�Bridgemari � :. <br />restaurant with 125 persor; s�ating capacity. We have reviewed the propos�:d- <br />site plan with the a¢�pficant on several occasions wit�i. the intent of making it <br />as good as possible sho�ld the appl ication be approved. The site plan conforms <br />with the �/illage regulations and would in our opinion, work c�ffectively as a <br />restaurant site. There is ea sign proposed on the site plan which do�s not meet <br />the 30 foot setback requirements. It would appear passible to relocat� the <br />sign in a conforming locafion. The question is one of whether or not the proposed <br />use would •ffectively function as the transitional function suggested. If would <br />appear frorre the number of signatures obtained in the area, that a numb�r of <br />persons be i i eve th i s to be tru e. <br />2. You will note by the sicetch at the left that the structure is proposed ta be <br />located on �he nori�herly part of the propertyo The land between the structure <br />and the north prciperty line w�uld be landscaped and would not be occupied <br />by parking c�r servicgs. Access to th� site is proposed away from the intsrsection <br />of Garden and Larpenteu� avoiding ar�y undue traffic problem. The applicant <br />proposes a 5 foot high redwoad fence around the property to the west and the <br />north . <br />3. The applicant's development plan provides 44 parking spaces and conforr�s <br />to the arr�inance requirement, except that a sign is proposed less than the 30 <br />foot minimum distanc� required from the right-of-way. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.