My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_00449
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF001 - PF999
>
400-499
>
pf_00449
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/13/2024 2:12:57 PM
Creation date
2/13/2024 2:12:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
178
Planning Files - Type
Rezoning
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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 />sRA � <br />�H.u..�.. <br />7[N�Ow <br />�[S�D[N�IAL <br />������sc� <br />RAY M. ANTRYM <br />1751 WEST SKILLMAN AVENUE <br />SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA SS i I 3 <br />Mr. Karl F. Keller <br />The Keller Corporation <br />1350 West County Road � <br />St. Paul, Mir�nesota 55113 <br />Dear Mr. Keller: <br />� <br />R� 2231 North Hamline Avenue <br />A proposed office building <br />Roseville, Minnesota <br />� <br />june 4, 1968 <br />, <br />AMERICAN <br />i UE . <br />R ri <br />APP Al�� RS <br />Your two alternate proposals for an office building to be located between Hamline <br />Avenue and Albert Street, near Sandhurst Drive, in Roseville, Minneso�ta, have <br />been reviewed by me personally. One proposal is for a 1-1/2 story building, 60 <br />feet by 564 feet on the foundation, while the second proposal is for a 6-story <br />building, 60 feet by 150 feet plus 30 feet by 50 feet on the foundation. The lot <br />size is understood to be approximately 198 feet by 624 feet. <br />The purpose of my review of these two proposals was to deterrrine the estimated <br />------------ --- - -- --�---- -- -------_ _ _ ------- <br />adverse effect, if any, that the 6-story proposed bui' .�ng would have on the <br />adjacent residential�properties, as compared to the effect of the 1-1 2 sto <br />rY <br />proposed building, assumin �bY -- <br />—,-�__--._______.__ _____________g __oth commercial_developments wuuld be somewhat <br />---les:s desirable than additional residentia? properties__of similar ualit to those <br />---------------- <br />already in existence. q---- -Y_--_ <br />It is my conclusion that the view, iight, and air, which are the amenities r�lated <br />— - ------------------------------- <br />to the rEsidential properties in question, would not be effected to an <br />---- <br />- -�- -" " y greater and <br />_ .. <br />--- -- <br />_ <br />easura E degree by the proposed b story buiiding than b the <br />�-- <br />-- --y- y_. pro Po s e d 1-1 /2 <br />__ ----- <br />story building, because of the reduced size of the former building �n the founda- <br />tion . With - --- ---- <br />-- - <br />_ ___ -- <br />---- - ---- <br />---------- -- - <br />_ per an reasonable setbacks, as �utlined by you_ in your proposal, <br />it is my opinion that the 6 story building might, in fact, be somewhat less offen- <br />--------- -- <br />..-- --- _- -- -- <br />.-_--sive and tend to create a more impressive, modern ne�� or ooc�t an t eT--arger <br />-- _____-_ -- <br />- — ------------------- <br />----- � <br />appearing 1-1/2 story buildin g, T h i s w o u l d t hen become the key factor for con- <br />__ <br />__ __ - - - ---- - <br />---- -- <br />si eration in determining the market values Qf the properties throughvut the area <br />_. -- - _ <br />- -- - <br />in the future . - <br />Yours very truly, <br />�� Q <br />�_ ��_ <br />Ray M . �lntrim <br />Apprai�er <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.