My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1999_0125_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1999
>
1999_0125_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2011 11:31:39 AM
Creation date
9/30/2011 11:14:08 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
191
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
Deb Bloom responded that a petition from Mr. Seaberg for a vacation would be <br /> accepted. <br /> Deb Bloom noted that the low area would be drained to the storm sewer. The <br /> applicant is providing the same right-of-way dedication on Fairview. <br /> Chair Harms asked for detail of the right-of-way and setbacks. Deb bloom <br /> stated if the road was unproved,a right turn would not be needed. The new <br /> curb would be approximately ten feet from the sideway. <br /> Mr. cox held an open house;three residents reviewed the concept. The plan is <br /> to totally renovate the existing structure. The applicant described the"land <br /> rnarle"nature of the existing building,which is over 60 years in age. It is <br /> structurally sound and an asset to the neighborhood. This is a low impact user <br /> who grill not have many customers in the office.The addition will be <br /> approximately 3,800 s.f.. <br /> Barbara wool,3092 Fairview, stated there is a blind spot at the intersection of <br /> "Y"and Fairview because of the building location. <br /> Dave Seaberg,3098 Fairview,part owner of property along county Road"Y' <br /> asked for County interests in this road(none at this time). He is concerned with <br /> the closeness of the building to the curb. A green boulevard will be constructed <br /> between building and curb or a sidewalk if required. Is the new parking lot to be <br /> lighted.? (only if required by city). <br /> Dan Seaberg noted that his major concerns are 1)the existing building, ) the <br /> blind spot created at the corner. <br /> Mr. cox said he is sensitive to the green space,landscaping and safety will <br /> increase because of new street lighting and new paving/definition to the corner. <br /> This will be a positive impact. <br /> Chair Harms asked for clarification of the setback from the curb to the building. <br /> There is 25-27 feet of distance from curb to building. <br /> Dave Seaberg said he originally owned most property in this area. He asked if a <br /> PUD had to account for all run-off. (late control will help).A sidewalk on the <br /> north side would help also. <br /> Member Olson asked for details on impervious surface and ponding}staff <br /> explained the policy on commercial impervious surfaces. <br /> Chair Harms asked if conditions could be attached to the PUD. <br /> Motion: Member Rhody moved,seconded by Member Cunningham}to <br /> recommend approval of the concept P.U.D.development plan for a 3,800 s.f. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.