My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_850703
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1985
>
pm_850703
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:37 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/3/1985
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.
/
7
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 />King is requesting a sign that according to a strict interpretation of the <br />ordinance is a roof sign which is not allowed under the Roseville City <br />Ordinance. Mr. Dahlgren pointed out that the initial concern in <br />establishing this ordinance was to prohibit signs extending from flat <br />roofed commercial/industrial structures. Mr. Dahlgren felt as long as the <br />sign was not silouetted above the building, it wasn't really a significant <br />problem. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Mr. Wiski asked if the ordinance said "no roof signs above the parapet" <br />would the proposed Burger Sign be illegal? Mr. Dahlgren stated in effect <br />it is below the parapet. <br /> <br />Mike Nordstrom from Burger King discussed the proposed sign and showed the <br />Council drawings of how the sign would appear on said building. <br /> <br />Mr. Wiski asked Mr. Dahlgren that if this was indeed a wall sign, would it <br />comply. Mr. Dahlgren replied in the affirmative. <br /> <br />, . <br /> <br />Mr. Wiski stated that he would be voting on the sign variance in this case <br />and not on the traffic issue. <br /> <br />Mr. Matson stated that he was concerned about the traffic situation on <br />Cleveland. He then agreed to meet with Mr. Nordstrom at a future date to <br />discuss these concerns. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Ms. Dressler moved, seconded by Matson that Burger King variance on sign <br />location at southwest corner of County Road C and Cleveland Avenue be <br />approved. <br /> <br />Roll call, Ayes: Dressler, Matson, Berry, DeBenedet, and Wiski. <br /> <br />Nays: None. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />Parking Issue <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren discussed his report regarding the parking problems in the <br />Fuddruckers, Cattlemen Company, and MGM area. In this study, Mr. Dahlgren <br />found that the large public waiting spaces contribute to the problem. <br />Additionally, the lounge and single bar concept increase the demands on the <br />parking. The restaurants in the area do provide more parking than the <br />ordinance requests and Mr. Dahlgren anticipates that once the newness of <br />these areas wears off, the parking pressure may ease. Additionally, Mr. <br />Dahlgren stated if parking continues to be a problem, property could be <br />leased from the state that would provide additional parking areas for the <br />respective restaurants. Mr. Dahlgren stated that the ordinance should not <br />be adjusted at this point in time until he has an opportunity to look at <br />different types of restaurants and the different types of parking needs of <br />the respective restaurant types. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.