2013_0415_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Member Daire noted discussion from the March 2013 Planning Commission meeting related to painted 51 concrete surfaces, and sought clarification on whether paint was permitted on this exterior material, as 52 proposed by the developer. 53 Mr. Lloyd advised that staff did not yet know the exact composition of proposed materials, as there had 54 been no review of development specifics for this Preliminary Plat application. However, Mr. Lloyd assured 55 the Commission that each element would be reviewed upon receipt of detailed plans to ensure the 56 proposed building and site features met all City Code requirements. 57 In review of the area map, Member Cunningham noted the apparent existence of a structure on the site. 58 Mr. Lloyd responded that the structure had been demolished subsequent to the 2011 map as southern 59 buildings were under construction; but that not more current aerial photos were available since that time. 60 The civil engineer for the applicant was present in the audience, but offered no comment beyond staff’s 61 presentation. 62 Public Comment 63 Mr. Lloyd advised that staff had received a few phone calls with clarifying questions about the proposal, 64 but no comments had been offered thus far. 65 Chair Gisselquist closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:06 p.m.; with no one appearing for or 66 against 67 MOTION 68 Member Daire moved, seconded by Member Murphy to recommend to the City Council 69 APPROVAL of the proposed PRELIMINARY PLAT of Highcrest Park 5th Addition; based on 70 comments and findings of Sections 4-6 and the recommendation of Section 7 of the staff report 71 dated April 3, 2013. 72 Chair Gisselquist noted the limited activity in this heavy industrial area of Roseville to-date; and opined 73 that now that it was platted, it should fit in nicely. 74 Member Boguszewski concurred, noting that 60-70% of the cases coming before the Commission 75 appeared to be in that area. 76 Ayes: 7 77 Nays: 0 78 Motion carried. 79