Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Page# 4 <br /> <br />Wednesday, April 6, 1988 <br /> <br />Berry stated that she was concerned that the applicant did not <br />have a clearly defined proposal and that a definite plan and <br />agreement on a permanent solution on the Trapp site was needed, <br />especially because of the history of broken promises on the Trapp <br />site. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Johnson indicated that approval of a temporary solution would be <br />premature without having a permanent solution. <br /> <br />Maschka questioned whether what the applicant was doing on the <br />site now was legal. Dahlgren responded that repair of vehicles <br />was okay, but leasing would need a special use permit. <br /> <br />Stokes wondered if a more limited time period could be placed on <br />the special use permit. Dahlgren pointed out that the city can <br />attach conditions to govern both the start and finish times of a <br />special use permit. <br /> <br />DeBenedet inquired as to the status of the tax increment <br />financing discussions. Waldron responded that they were in the <br />preliminary stages of discussions, that there had been no <br />agreement on final figures and pay backs and that the Council <br />would have to approve the use of tax increment financing in this <br />case. Waldron indicated that it would take 60 - 90 days to have <br />everything in place after an agreement was reached. <br /> <br />Stokes proposed that the commission table the matter for 60 - 90 <br />days to allow for a deal to be made. Dahlgren pointed out that <br />the commission could table the matter 60 days, then it would <br />automatically go to the City Council without a planning <br />commission recommendation. He further indicated that the <br />commission could table the matter longer if the applicant agrees. <br />DeBenedet questioned the need to table the matter. Stokes asked <br />the applicant if they would consent to a 90 day delay on this <br />matter. Murlowski indicated that 90 days was acceptable if the <br />applicant could continue the existing use of the site. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br />Stokes moved, DeBenedet seconded a motion to recommend tabling <br />this matter up to 90 days with the applicants approval to allow <br />a permanent proposal to be worked out on the Trapp site, and for <br />the tax increment financing issues to be resolved. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />DeBenedet, Berry, Goedeke, <br />Maschka, Moeller, Johnson <br />None <br /> <br />Stokes, <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Planninq File 1828 <br />