Correspondence 1985-1989 Dahlgren

Home

• C� • • Planning Office Hours October 22, 1986 He indicated he would review haps get back to us next response to such a solution. �- Page 4 this with his people, and per- week regarding the Dorso family 7. VFW, 633-6202 Mory Rheaume, representing the Vetrans of Foreign Wars Club in Roseville, was in to review their proposal to extend a 10' x 30' "Greenhouse" expansion on their dining room toward the south of their existing structure. He did not have exact seating capacity figures or car parking capacity numbers. His drawings also were not indicative of the exact setback of the existing structure. The land is zoned SC, Shopping Center, requiring a one hundred foot setback, and our records indicate that a variance to a fifty foot setback was issued at the time of construction. Mr. Rheaume is going to recheck plans of the structure, and will regarding their expansion proposal. his dimensions and floor be back with us next week 8. Dreesen, 636-6906 Jim Dreesen, representing Ryder Truck Rental, was in to discuss their sign proposal on the easterly side of their property, closest to the 35W freeway. They want to construct a sign 45 feet in height, with a sign area of 35' x 6' 4-1/2" deep, and approximately a 220 square foot signage area. I noted that the freeway sign regulations allow a 225 square foot sign, 45 feet high, and that an expressway sign is allowed at 175 square feet by 30 feet high. A local thorough- fare frontage sign (such as Long Lake Road) is allowed at 100 square feet by 25 feet high. These sign areas are based on traffic speeds from a study done about a dozen years ago, at the time the sign ordinance was revised for the City of Roseville. The problem is that the westerly portion of what appears to b� their property is actually owned by Johnson Brothers, and thus the Ryder Truck Company property is not contiguous to the freeway service road. This strip of land is approximately one hundred feet wide, and thus is relatively unusable, but the Johnson Brothers refuse to sell it at this time (so Mr. Dreesen informs us). We suggested that they consider a sign smaller than that proposed and, that under the circumstances, they may request a variance though there is no obvious hardship present. I noted that many properties not contiguous to the freeway would be desirous of a larger sign so as to be readable from the freeway. In their case, however, in view of the slim sliver of land separating them from the freeway, some appropriate accommodation may be considered.