pf_01585 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• 0 CASE NUMB ER: 1585-85 APPLICANT: King of Kings Lutheran Church Page 2 3. On 20 March we met with Mr. Olson again and he informed us that they have determined that substituting concrete for the proposed asphalt curb would cost them an extra $4,390.00. He informed us that inasmuch as they do not have sufficient funds to carry the extra costs, that they elect to seek a variance from the City of Roseville so as to allow them to build a parking lot with an asphalt surface and asphalt curbs. As you know, the City's policy with respect to the construction of new parking -facilities requires asphalt or concrete surface and a concrete curb around the periphery of drives and parking areas. 4. Attached is a copy of the letter from the Church addressed to the City of Roseville, dated 13 March 1985, outlining their position. Also attached is a reduced co plan indicating the proposed location of the py of the site aking the northeast corner of Dale Street and Highwayr36. area at 5. Though the parking spaces are not delineated, it would appear that the new parking lot will accommodate an additional 35 cars, making their total pacity approximately 130 spaces. According to the Roseville g aZoning Ordinance, the total parking would accommodate a seating capacity of 390 persons in their principal auditorium. At our 20 March meeting, Mr. Olson estimated that the seating capacity of the nave and the gyr,inasium is approximately 500 persons. We have asked them to determine more precisely the capacity of the nave, that being their "principal auditorium" for purposes of the Ordinance. 6. In any event, the Church is taking the forward step in providing additional off-street parking, which is wholly inadequate at the moment. Past experience in the City of Roseville with the use of asphalt curbing for parking lots, suggests that it is not a good long term investment. We had suggested to church representatives that they might consider applying for a variance giving them more time to add the concrete curbing later. This, of course, is not easy inasmuch as their is a difference in elevation between the top of the curb and the parking lot surface and forming the concrete below grade can result in breaking up the asphalt in the process. 7. There is also the problem of the existing parking lot not having an asphalt surface nor the concrete curbing (both of which are required by Ordinance). One alternative would be to install the concrete curbing in the new parking lot, and leave a gravel surface for a specified period of time. After perhaps two years the asphalt surface could be put on the gravel with the result