My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-06-01_PC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
2011-06-01_PC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2011 2:27:58 PM
Creation date
12/20/2011 2:27:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/1/2011
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, June 1, 2011 <br />Page 3 <br />Public Comment <br />94 <br />95 Staff referenced numerous e-mails received to-date by staff; each attached hereto <br />96 and made a part hereof. <br />Gene Anderson, 1707 Alta Vista Drive <br />97 <br />98 Mr. Anderson had provided his questions in a previous e-mail to staff, and thanked them <br />99 for their timely responses. Mr. Anderson briefly reviewed his concerns and comments <br />100 from that e-mail; and opined that it was a compatible use for that corner and advised that <br />101 he was looking to it being located on that corner; and appreciated the location of the <br />102 building on the current site plan versus the 2008 proposal. Mr. Anderson sought <br />103 assurances that there would be no noise from the A/C unit(s) and questioned who would <br />104 maintain the right-of-way on Alta Vista once the facility was built. Mr. Anderson advised <br />105 that the portion owned by Ramsey County was not currently well-maintained. <br />106 Mr. Lloyd advised that the items of concerned addressed by Mr. Anderson were still <br />107 pending: the mechanical equipment design which would determine how to address noise <br />108 issues of the equipment chosen and its location in the trash enclosure. Mr. Lloyd noted <br />109 that the City currently had noise and nuisance ordinances that would need to be met; but <br />110 that staff would continue to work with the applicant as the specifics of the final design <br />111 elements were completed and it was determined where the actual location would be, at <br />112 which time staff would address any off-site and/or on-site issues. <br />113 Mr. Anderson advised that noise was a concern for him, opining that once the unit was <br />114 installed it would be difficult to move it. <br />115 Mr. Anderson questioned the time of day trash would be removed. <br />116 Mr. Lloyd advised that City Code addressed trash pick-ups; however, noted that some <br />117 commercial businesses needed to be serviced depending on the type of use and type of <br />118 trash. <br />119 Mr. Lloyd, in addressing the right-of-way concerns, advised that the adjacent property <br />120 owner was usually required to maintain the boulevard. <br />121 Mr. Anderson opined that the fence din area and sidewalk along the property line would <br />122 be an improvement to current conditions; and further opined that the proposed parking <br />123 stalls were an improvement to the 2008 plan; and liked the building fronting Larpenteur <br />124 Avenue, but sought assurances that there would be a sufficient buffer between the <br />125 subject parcel and adjoining properties. <br />126 Mr. Anderson noted his other concern related to traffic; and expressed his preference that <br />127 staff and visitors be urged to become quickly familiar with signage in the area to avoid <br />128 illegal turns and traffic stacking. <br />Georgiana Gjertson, 1703 Alta Vista Drive <br />129 <br />130 Ms. Gjertson noted her location fifteen feet (15)’ from the parking lot now and the hedge <br />131 of old Lilacs and trees right up against the curb, and advised that she had painstakingly <br />132 pruned and hired people to remove deadwood and install mulch in that area; and hoped <br />133 that her efforts were not for naught. Ms. Gjertson questioned the location of existing <br />134 trees, some of which needed to be removed; whether a fence would be installed and if <br />135 so, it’s proposed location; and sought assurances from the applicant that they would <br />136 make sure the property looked nice. <br />Mr. Winges responded to concerns of Mr. Anderson and Ms. Gjertson (off <br />137 <br />microphone) <br />138 advising that every effort would be taken to value engineer the <br />139 mechanicals to determine the best placement; and it was intended to leave the trees <br />140 where they were to provide a buffer for adjacent properties as well as the new facility. Mr. <br />141 Winges reiterated his interest in making sure the property looked nice; and assured <br />142 neighbors that they wanted to be good neighbors and invited them to tour existing <br />143 facilities and address any concerns to them. Mr. Winges advised that their firm was very <br />144 proactive about talking to their neighbors, and preferred to address these issues ahead of <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.