My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02505
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2500
>
pf_02505
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:55:40 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 11:48:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2505
Planning Files - Type
Special Use Permit
Address
10 ROSEDALE CENTER
Applicant
COMPUTER CITY/BEECHWOOD ACQ
Status
APPROVED
PIN
122923140002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
103
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 />EXTRACT OP MINUTES OP MEETING OF <br />THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP ROSEVILLE <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular <br /> <br />meeting of the City Council of the City of Roseville, County of <br /> <br />Ramsey, State of Minnesota was duly held on the <br /> <br />day of <br /> <br />, 1993, at <br /> <br />P.M. <br /> <br />The following members were present: <br /> <br />and the following members <br /> <br />were absent: <br /> <br />Member <br /> <br />moved that the following <br /> <br />resolution be adopted. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Beechwood Acquisitions for Computer City has <br /> <br />applied for a special use permit and a variance to the setback <br /> <br />requirement of the SC Shopping Center District; <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the application was submitted to the City and <br /> <br />the Council now determines that: <br /> <br />1) Traffic is a problem at this location and it is in <br /> <br />the best interest of the City to not exacerbate the traffic <br /> <br />problem. <br /> <br />2) The Plans as submitted by the applicant do not comply <br /> <br />with the City's adopted standards and further the development is <br /> <br />not in harmony with the commercial use to the north and would have <br /> <br />an adverse effect on same. <br /> <br />3) That the property in question has a useful use that <br /> <br />does not require any variance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.