My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01831
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1800-1899
>
pf_01831
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/21/2024 11:09:28 AM
Creation date
2/21/2024 11:07:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1831
Planning Files - Type
Planning-Other
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
PRO <br />�1sn��sMr a:r�w Hour. <br />ppvard Dahlgran <br />April 13, 1988 <br />the total sq. ft. area would continue to conform to the <br />zoning ordinance. <br />With respect to the canopy sign, they agreed to redesign the <br />canopy and the sign so as to have it constitute a wall sign. <br />This could be done by carrying through the wall detail from <br />the building through the canopy signs, and reducing the sign <br />area so as to be an attached sign rather than constitute the <br />• <br />face of the canopy only (as originally proposed). <br />We noted that an electronic sign with a traveling message <br />has been ruled a flashing sign, but that in a previous bank <br />application a time and temperature continuously lit sign was <br />allowed at 1 and 1:30 minute intervals, followed by a 13 <br />minute fixed message. We suggested that within these <br />parameters, the sign would not be "flashing sign" and could <br />be approved. We agreed that they could revise their sign <br />proposals within these parameters for a subsequent review. <br />We also discussed future ramifications of their location as <br />it relates principally to the redevelopment area to the <br />west. We all agreed that the potential is excellent and <br />that their facility should work well on their site. <br />3. O'Meara (633-0246) <br />Barry O'Meara is proposing to redevelop and finish the 16 <br />unit PUD just south of the "trailer courts", west of <br />Lexington. Carol Tanning of Merrill Lynch (636-9000) was <br />with Mr. O'Meara and will be marketing their end product. <br />Mr. O'Meara noted that he is still negotiating with the bank <br />to take over the project. We discussed a revised plan which <br />included an option of two one story town house units at each <br />end of a four story structure with two story units in the <br />center. The other option would be four one story units, <br />though this building takes additional length and would <br />result in the setback of 10 feet on the side lot contiguous <br />to the rear of the homes to the south of the site. Each <br />unit would have two garages, plus additional space for <br />parking in front of the garage and other spaces off the <br />access drive. They are of the opinion that the one story <br />units would attract a good market in Roseville where they <br />perceive many persons to reside in their single family <br />homes, but in need of accommodations fit for the elderly. <br />It was agreed that a revised PUD would be the appropriate <br />® <br />method of handling the revised design, and it would be most <br />important for them to relate directly to the neighbors <br />regarding the change in configuration. It would appear that <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.