My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012_0521_Packet as amended
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2012
>
2012_0521_Packet as amended
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2012 2:57:26 PM
Creation date
5/18/2012 9:30:18 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
682
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
From:BryanLloyd[mailto:bryan.lloyd@ci.roseville.mn.us] <br />Sent:Tuesday,May01,201210:07AM <br />To:TerryGilberstadt <br />Cc:JoeHerzog <br />Subject:RE:2507WalnutStreet <br />Ms.Gilberstadt, <br />Thankyoufortakingthetimetoprovidetheconstructivecomments <br />pertainingtotherequestforapprovalofoutdoorstorageoffleet <br />vehiclesat2507WalnutStreet.I'llcertainlypassyourcommentstothe <br />PlanningCommissionersfortheirinformationastheyconsiderthe <br />request,andIwantedtoreplytoyouinthemeantimeincaseIcan <br />addresssomeofyourconcerns. <br />Ithinkthatacoupleofyourcommentsstemfromthefactthatthey're <br />treatedrathergenerallyinthereport,sotheymayseemtobe <br />overlooked.Specifically,thegeneralrequirementsdiscussedinSection <br />5.1ofthereportrequireanyapprovedconditionalusetocomplywith <br />allapplicablecoderequirements;oneofthezoningregulationsworth <br />highlightinghereisthatifanapprovedconditionalusefailstocomply <br />withstandardcoderequirementslikekeepingvehiclesonpavedareas, <br />keepingthegrassunder8inchesinlength,andsoon,theCitymay <br />begintheprocessofrevokingtheconditionaluseapproval.This <br />providesrathermoreleverage(comparedtotheoldzoningcode,priorto <br />2011)totheCityforensuringthatapropertyconformstothestandard <br />Coderequirementsaswellasanyspecialconditionsofapproval.The <br />CityCouncilResolutiondocument,whichtypicallyisn'tprovidedtothe <br />PlanningCommission,willbesomewhatmoreexplicitaboutthesemore <br />categoricalrequirements. <br />sgeneral <br />Thereasonwehavecometorelyonthi <br />"youstillhavetoadheretothecode"kindofconditionaluseapproval <br />isthatintroducingconditionswhichareredundantwithstandardcode <br />requirementscanbeabitconfusing.Forexample,whydidtheCouncil <br />requirethatthegrassbemaintained?Doesthatmeantheydon'thaveto <br />properlymaintainthebuilding?Doesitmeantheycan'teliminatesome <br />ofthegrassforadditionalpavedfleetparkingareainthefuture? <br />We'vefoundthatit'ssimplertobespecificaboutanyspecial <br />conditionsofapprovalbecausesuchconditionsareintendedtorelateto <br />cificlocation,andtoleaveeverythingelseto <br />theproposeduseinaspe <br />beregulatedbythestandardCoderequirements. <br />Youdidcatchaninadvertentomissiononmypart,however:thebusiness <br />abouttheslatmaterialtobeusedinthefence.Inmycommunicationsto <br />theapplicant,I'vebeenclearthatwestillneedtodeterminewhatslat <br />materialwillbereasonablyattractiveandeffectiveatscreening <br />withoutbeingunreasonablyexpensive.ThatissomethingthatImeantto <br />includeasarecommendedconditionofapprovaland,sinceitwasn't <br />includedinthestaffreport,Iwilladdressitduringmypresentation <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.