My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01554
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1500-1599
>
pf_01554
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2024 3:36:42 PM
Creation date
2/15/2024 3:36:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1480
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.
/
40
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
0 <br />0" <br />0 <br />T <br />2660 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE TELEPHONE <br />E <br />4$4-337 1 <br />r(isevi <br />*11 <br />e MINNESOTA 55113 <br />To: Ron Morse, Planning Coordinator <br />From: David Drown, Assistant City Engineer <br />Re: Comments on November Planning Commission Agenda Items <br />Date: October 29, 1984 <br />Planning File 1554: American Redevelopers Revised Site Plan <br />1. The Site Plan filed with the city contained a number of problems with <br />the southern most parking area. The city has received a revised plan, <br />however, which incorporates changes that address most of the previous <br />deficiencies. This revision should be incorporated into the plans <br />presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. <br />2. The applicants propose to share a common driveway along their west <br />property line with the development to the west. We agree this is an <br />excellent idea, and would like to see a joint agreement prepared <br />between the two land owners specifying mutual rights and obligations. <br />Further, we need to assure that the entire driveway is constructed with <br />whichever development takes place first, as a half -width driveway will <br />not operate adequately. Finally, the city's approval process should <br />incorporate a variance to a zero lot line condition along this Blest <br />property line. <br />3. No drainage or grading plan was submitted. However, the overall <br />approach to drainage remains essentially the same as the previous plan, <br />and we anticipate no problems. However, we suggest that any city <br />approval be conditioned on receipt and approval of grading and drainage <br />plans by city staff. <br />Planning File 1555: Muska Electric <br />No comments. <br />Planning File 1556: Proposed Kreitz Subdivision at 921 Parker Street <br />1. No right-of-way has ever been dedicated for Burke Street on the <br />north. Thirty feet is required. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.