pf07-021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

� l�� � May 21, 2007 (via U.S. Mail and e-mail) Mr. John Livingston Cent Ventures 1660 Highway l00 S., Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 RE: A Response to your May 17 E-mail Correspondence Dear Mr. Livingston: • On May 17, 2007, City Planner Thomas Paschke received an e-mail correspondence from you regarding your proposed hotel/restaurant development at the Xtra Lease Site. (This e-mail has been attached to this letter.) The following narrative is in response to the above-referenced emaiL The concerns you identified in that correspondence have been addressed one-by-one. You wrote: At the Council meeting the other night I left confused. In that meeting you told the Council my application was incomplete. I am not aware of any incomplete iterrts. Can you please tell me exactly what remains incomplete? According to your letter ofApril 12, 2007 we had only one item listed as incomplete. You wrote our submittal "...is incomplete and in need of a preliminary plat application..." We made that application within by the deadline you set so it is our position that the application is complete. Community Development staff sent letters to you on both April 27 and May 4 outlining the ways in which your application is incomplete. Rather than reiterating these items here, I would refer you to the contents of those letters (attached). Furthermore, we met to discuss each of the incomplete items on May 1. In an e-mail dated April 27 (attached) and in a follow-up telephone conversation on April 30, I communicated that your application was removed from the May 2 Planning Commission agenda because staff deemed it incomplete. I also told you that if you had no intention of providing the outstanding information, but were insistent that the application be heard by the Planning Commission and, subsequently, by the City Council — I would get the application on their agendas, but would recommend denial of the application due to an incomplete application. There are two options to move this application forward. The first option is you can assemble the requested information prior to Planning Commission and City Council consideration — in which case staffs recommendation will be based on the contents of that material in addition to the materials already provided. The second option is that you can proceed without providing the requested information; however, staff will recommend denial due to incompleteness. The choice is yours. City of Roseville Community Development Department 2660 Civic Center Drive �. Roseville, Minnesota 55113 651-792-7005 :• TDD 651-792-7399 •3 w�vw.ci.roseville.mn.us