My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_880601
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_880601
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:54 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/1/1988
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.
/
15
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 /> <br />Pagett 14 <br /> <br />Wednesday, June 1, 1988 <br /> <br />Berry pointed out to the commission that clearly enforceable fair <br />ordinances are necessary to ensure a good look for the community <br />and that existing regulations need tightening and clarification. <br /> <br />Johnson questioned what the best method for getting business <br />input would be. Dahlgren commented that an article in the <br />newspaper publishing the fact that the planning commission was <br />reviewing the ordinance would be the most effective way to do it. <br /> <br />Dahlgren pointed out that most business are aware of the <br />ordinance restrictions so they don't do outside merchandising and <br />display. Dahlgren also pointed out that the staff could research <br />other community ordinances. <br /> <br />Berry pointed out that the Chamber of Commerce could be helpful <br />in publicizing this review also. <br /> <br />DeBenedet requested time to review the community and the existing <br />merchandising which is going on. Johnson stated that there is <br />no hurry to take action on this matter and that staff should go <br />ahead and contact businesses for the next planning commission <br />meeting. <br /> <br />stokes questioned what was happening at the Park Lawn Cemetery. <br />Honchell replied that they had a permit to do the excavating work <br />on the site, but that he didn't know the exact details. <br /> <br />Maschka pointed out that he had driven out the Elder Homestead <br />project in Minnetonka and indicated that it was important that <br />they not use the red roof in the Roseville project. Maschka also <br />pointed out to commissioners to look at the alignment of Twin <br />Lakes Boulevard and that it would be appropriate for the road to <br />go just north of McGough Constructions office. <br /> <br />Dahlgren summarized a recent meeting with the Elder Homestead <br />developers indicating that they are changing the exterior look of <br />that project and that staff had expressed the importance to them <br />of equal or higher quality development. <br /> <br />Goedeke asked what the effect of the Pavilion Place chapter 11 <br />has on tax increment financing. Dahlgren pointed out there would <br />be no tax increment financing problems at Pavilion Place. <br />Goedeke expressed concern about the appearance of the Park Place <br />Manor Homes project on Lexington. Dahlgren responded and <br />outlined the history of the project and staff's recent <br />conversations with the developer who is interested in completing <br />the project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.