Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2.0 Background <br /> <br />2.1 On March 10, the Roseville Planning Commission held the required public hearing <br />regarding the above request. At this meeting a number of adjacent residents addressed <br />the Commission regarding concerns with the location of the proposed structure and its <br />proximity to the north and east property lines. Further, concerns were raised regarding <br />screening and landscaping of the building that would be provided along the north and east <br />property boundary. The residents also suggested that the entry tower be lowered. <br /> <br />2.2 The Planning Commission also raised a number of these concerns and requested further <br />information by the petitioner regarding side (north) and rear yard (east) setbacks, <br />landscaping, and architectural modifications, prior to receiving a vote on the concept <br />PUD request. <br /> <br />2.3 On March 22, 1999 the City Council, by resolution, approved a 60 day extension of the <br />60-day review period, from April 24, 1999 to June 23, 1999, in response to the adjacent <br />resident concern and Planning Commission's request of the applicant for further <br />information regarding the development proposal. <br /> <br />The applicant met with City Staff and held a neighborhood meeting to discuss the <br />concerns and present alternative modifications to the site plan. <br /> <br />2.4 The City Council, at their meeting of April 26, continued action on the Olson request so <br />that a number of issues could be addressed. <br /> <br />2.5 The hearing and action schedule for this project has been revised is as follows: <br /> <br />10/14/98 <br />10/19/98 <br />03/10/99 <br />03/22/99 <br />04/14/99 <br />04/26/99 <br />05/10/99 <br />OS/24/99 <br /> <br />Planning Commission review of sketch plan <br />Council sketch plan review of project <br />Planning Commission - continuation of hearing & action on concept plan <br />City Council meeting extending 60 day review until June 23 <br />Planning Commission hearing & action on concept plan <br />City Council action on concept plan (continued) <br />City Council action on alternative concept plan (one story with parking) <br />City Council action on final development plan & PUD agreement <br /> <br />3.0 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE CONCEPT PLAN <br /> <br />3.1 Cryogenic Laboratories has experienced rapid growth over the past two years. The <br />company currently employs 12 people of which over 50 percent are technical laboratory <br />people who are at a wage level above what is considered living wages. <br /> <br />3.2 The Cryogenic property has a land use designation of Business "B" and a zoning of B-1, <br />Limited Business District <br /> <br />PF3077 - RCA (05-10-99) - Page 2 of 6 <br />