My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_841107
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1984
>
pm_841107
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:35 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/7/1984
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />Planning Commission Mij,....es-November 7, 1984 <br />Fage 2 <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Berry asked where the new regional center parking data carne from. Dreher indicated <br />that industry groups such as the Urban Land Institute have done nationwide studies. <br />Dreher also indicated that the mix of uses at the center, which include health clubs, <br />retail and theatre uses include several different peak usage times. Dressler suggested <br />that the largest parking problem will involve the theatres. Paul Pink, architect for <br />the developer, indicated that studies have shown that centers with theatres require <br />less parking because the retail uses and theatre use have different peak usage times. <br />Wiski asked why the original proposal included 'more parking than is required. Mr. Pink <br />indicated the ramp allowed the additional parking. Berry asked how many spaces are <br />available in the bank lot. Dreher indicated that there are 41 spaces in the bank lot. <br />Johnson asked what would happen if the agreement with the bank does not work out. <br />Dreher indicated the agreement is simply recognizing that people are going to park in <br />the bank lot whether there is an agreement or not. Matson asked whether a decision <br />has been made to construct a fence along the northerly boundary. Dreher indicated <br />he feels the fence is needed since the parking ramp, which formerly served as a barrier, <br />is no longer included in the project. A majority of the neighbors agree a fence is <br />needed. Matson asked whether an agreement has been reached concerning landscaping <br />over the pipeline to the north. Dreher indicated Williams Pipeline has agreed on the <br />basic plan, and the legal documents are being prepared. Matson indicated the <br />Commission had received a letter from the Audio King shopping center regarding the <br />possible detrimental use of their lot as an exit to County Road B2 from the proposed <br />public roadway serving the shopping center. Mr. Drown indicated the City staff has <br />been working with all property owners regarding the best route for the public street. <br />He indicated the potential is there for the Audio King lot to become an exit to B2. <br />He indicated staff have the same concerns regarding that possibility. Since the roadway <br />is a public street, the City has control over how it is designed. Mr. Drown indicated <br />it is too soon to say exactly what the solution will be. Dreher indicated the <br />developer and neighbors had agreed on a six-foot high vinyl coated chain link fence <br />as a barrier on the northern boundary. Wiski asked the applicant whether the <br />conditions included in the original approval, which included an easement for a <br />walkway, thirty feet of right-of-way dedication, drainage detail and cross easements, <br />were still agreeable to the developer. Dreher indicated they were. Johnson indicated <br />she opposed the variance because she feels there is insufficient parking available. <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Matson moved, and DeBenedet seconded that the Planning Commission recommend the <br />approval of American Redevelopers, Inc. request for variance to parking requirements <br />at 1665 County Road B, with the following conditions: <br /> <br />1) That the project be developed according to plans reviewed by the Planning, <br />Commission to be dated November 7, 1984. <br /> <br />2) That the landscape plan be subject to approval by City staff. <br /> <br />3) That the parking plan be subject to approval by City staff. <br /> <br />4) Dedication of an easement for a walkway on the applicant's land. <br /> <br />5) Dedication of 30 feet of right-of-way for American Street. <br /> <br />6) TIlat final drainage plans be provided for staff approval. <br /> <br />7) That cross easements be provided for a common access drive to be shared with <br />the proposed development to the west. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.