My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02151
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2100
>
pf_02151
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:41:56 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 10:43:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2151
Planning Files - Type
Special Use Permit
Address
1655 COUNTY ROAD B2 W
Applicant
THOMAS N. THEISEN
PIN
092923140026
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
72
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
<br /> <br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Wednesday October 3, 1990 <br /> <br />The Public Hearing was closed. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated that he was concerned about the arcade because it <br />would attract kids away from school. <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Berry stated that she was troubled about the police report. She <br />stated that the places with no problems were smaller towns. <br /> <br />Wietecki questioned what <br />street that was denied. <br />the request. The owner <br />Council then approved. <br /> <br />Johnson stated that the policy states the Commission look at the <br />issue of public safety and that she supports denial of the <br />proposal based on pUblic safety. Johnson expressed her opinion <br />that the security plan is insufficient. <br /> <br />happened to the amusement center on Dale <br />Jopke stated that the Council denied <br />came back with fewer machines which the <br /> <br />Berry stated that the problem isn't with the owner or the use in <br />the mall, but in the problems that would occur in the parking lot <br />and with the clientele it might attract. <br /> <br />Wietecki stated that it is unfair to deny this proposal without <br />denying all other arcade uses. Wietecki stated his concern that <br />the Commission was creating a monopoly situation, promoting <br />existing arcades not competition. Wietecki stated that the <br />hockey rink causes problems but that the city accepts it. He <br />stated that the arcade isn't very big. Wietecki stated that he <br />would like to see more information on shopping centers with <br />arcades and shopping centers without arcades. Without that <br />information it is hard to compare the information received in the <br />police report. <br /> <br />Johnson testified that the Commission approved the Hamline Center <br />Arcade but then the Council denied it. Johnson stated that she <br />would not let that happen again. <br /> <br />stokes stated that he is concerned about having another center in <br />the city but is also aware that a person should have the <br />opportunity to make a living. stokes said that he was concerned <br />about the hours of operation and with the fact that there is only <br />one attendant. Stokes questioned whether the Commission could <br />recommend approval for a one year period. <br /> <br />Shardlow stated that it is common but courts have 'thrown out many <br />cases. Shardlow testified that a review process needs to be in <br />as one of the conditions for instance the security plan could be <br />periodically reviewed as conditions warrant. <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned why a game room was added to the Har Mar <br />expansion without Commission approval. Jopke stated that the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.