pf_01559 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CASE NUMBER: 1559 -84 Page 2 APPLICANT: First Grand Avenue Liquors 4. We are concerned with some elements of the site plan. The configuration of the right-of-way contiguous to County Road D as shown on the section maps is different from that shown on the site plan proposal. Near the corner of the property the section map RoadcDte16t5hat feetthe ofladditional width is only 33 feet. Thus, on County , dedication is required by normal policy. We will ch eck this discrepancy P Y further with the County and ascertain whether additional right-of-way is necessary here. To the west, where land has been platted in Roseville (westerly of Uld Highway 8) the additional right-of-way has been dedicated as a part of the platting of that property within the last six years. 5. You will notice that the boulevard area (land between the right-of-way and the traveled street) is fairly wide. Thus, the impact of the ten foot reduction and the 15 foot required setback for parking may be less severe under these circumstances. Obviously, the hardship here is due to the small scale of the lot and the location of the existing structure. One of the solutions, of course, is to tear the existing structure clown and start over. 6. Certainly, the proposed development would appear to be a considerable improvement over the existing vacant gas station structure. The building has been used for a variety of other purposes since being vacated as a gas station site. It has, however, appeared to have been an aesthetic problem for a number of years. 7. The Planning Commission and Council may wish to consider the condition that the entire structure be finished at one time. You will notice in the northeast corner of the building that the 19000 square foot floor area is proposed as "future expansion". It would appear that the building could be done more attractively, and site development completed if the entire structure were to be built at one time. 8. The site development drawing does not indicate the construction of curbing as required for the parking area. If the special use permit is approved, a condition should be added that such curbing be constructed. as required. 9. The plans as submitted do not indicate the method by which drainage will be accomplished. An arrow at the southwest corner of the site seems to indicate drainage flowing down the driveway to Old Highway 8. This is expressly prohibited in Roseville, where catch basins are required to catch the drainage prior to discharging through the driveway access. 10. Where the triangular shaped landscape area is indicated on the plan as an option, we suggest that the landscape feature here somewhat as proposed would be an attractive addition to the site. The landscape plan, in general, is minimal, with no indication of landscaping along the south or