Laserfiche WebLink
ftr' <br />A <br />C <br />Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. <br />U R B A N P L WI N I y D $ � ^ IG N • M A R K. E T R E S E A R C H <br />Post•ItTM brans fax transmittal memo 7671 <br />To <br />2 March 1993 <br />Mr. Rick Jopke <br />Assistant Community Development Director <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, MN 55113 -1899 <br />RE: Little Canada - Zoning Regulation Review <br />FILE NO: 758.10 - 93.03 <br />Dear Mr. Jonke: <br />Fax <br />I have reviewed the summary of regulatory differences which you <br />prepared. There are just a few comments which may be helpful, but <br />otherwise the list is generally accurate. <br />Under Design Standards, Little Canada's Building Materials are <br />substantially the same as Roseville's, with the exception of wood, <br />which Little Canada allows, but Roseville doesn't, and stucco which <br />Little Canada allows in limited amount. <br />Under Sign Regulations, the height of freestanding signs is scaled <br />based on the size of the building from 16 to 25 feet in height, up <br />to an additional five feet can be added with increased setback. <br />Under Other, Little Canada's rear yard setback is 20 feet. <br />Requirements in Roseville's Ordinance which I think are <br />particularly good are additional setbacks for freestanding signs, <br />and the scaled compliance requirements for the expansion of <br />existing non - conforming structures. Although on the latter, a more <br />firm regulation would seem more enforceable than the negotiated <br />requirements which you are using. <br />page 1 <br />5775 Wayzata Blvd, • Suite 555 • St. Louis Park, MN 55416 • (612) 595- 9636•Pax. 595 -9837 <br />