My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_660209
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
196x
>
1966
>
pm_660209
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:31:35 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 6:30:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/9/1966
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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 />Roseville Planning Commission <br />Special Meeting, Wednesday, February 9, 1966 - 7:00 P.M. <br /> <br />Members present: Jim Nelson, Remsburg, Linebarger, Anderson, Carpenter, Membrez. <br />Also present: Howard Dahlgren, planner. <br /> <br />File 309 - 66 <br /> <br />Variance requested by Superamerica Station at the northwest corner of <br />Larpenteur Avenue and Fernwood. The first request considered at the <br />regular meeting of February 2, 1966, was for four variances which at <br />that time were considered unreasonable. The applicant reported that <br />three of the variances were eliminated and he was now requesting only <br />one, the rear yard setback. The plans show that he will extend the <br />existing building back to the northern property line which leaves only <br />two feet between the rear of the service station and the south side of the <br />repair garage to the north. The applicant agreed to panel the 2 foot <br />opening and concrete the floor between the buildings. <br /> <br />Remsburg moved, Membrez seconded, to recommend that the variance be <br />granted. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren proceeded to explain that in view of the past experiences, <br />current trends and potential multiple development in the Village, it is <br />advisable to consider changes in our multiple zoning districts. The <br />report was analyzed paragraph by paragraph and except for a few items <br />which needed further study, the members of the Planning Commission agreed <br />that the proposed changes were steps in the right direction. <br /> <br />It was suggested that another special meeting be scheduled in March and <br />invite the contractors of apartment buildings to join in. The opinion <br />was that the contractors may make some contributions to improve the <br />proposed plan submitted by Dahlgren. <br /> <br />The proposed housing code was also analyzed and it was the consensus <br />of opinion that a housing code was needed in the Village. The basic <br />difference between a Building Code and a Housing Code is that while a <br />Building Code covers new construction, a Housing Code affects all existing <br />housing regardless of when it was originally built. The report states <br />that about 100 homes in the Village would not comply with a proposed <br />Housing Code. It was suggested that Mr. Dahlgren prepare another report <br />on this to be studied by the Commission at a special meeting during the <br />month of March. <br /> <br />There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. <br /> <br />Respectfully submitted, <br /> <br />George A. Membrez,\Secretary <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.