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 <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />Wednesday, June 1, 1988 <br /> <br />Maschka moved, Stokes seconded that the Planning Commission <br />recommend approval of a 10 foot sign setback variance with the <br />following conditions. <br /> <br />1. That the sign area not exceed 28 sq. ft. <br /> <br />2. That the height of the sign not exceed 5 ft. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Goedeke, Berry, DeBenedet, Maschka, <br />Stokes, Johnson <br /> <br />Nays: <br />Planninq File 1855 <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />W. Yale Marshall request for a lot division at 2120 N. Cleveland <br />Avenue. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren summarized the proposal and the location of the site. <br /> <br />DeBenedet questioned how the front yard setback requirements <br />would be applied to lot B. Dahlgren explained that the setback <br />would be considered from the south line of the widest part of the <br />lot but not the street line because of the odd shape of the lot. <br /> <br />Keel explained what assessments would be due on the property. <br /> <br />Maschka questioned what kind of house would be developed on the <br />new lot. Marshall explained the type of house and location. <br /> <br />Goedeke inquired if the applicant had talked to the neighbors <br />about the large setback of the house from Eldridge. Marshall <br />indicated that he had talked to the neighbor and they did not <br />have any problem with the setback and that they would be relived <br />about the removal of the dirt pile on the site. <br /> <br />Goedeke asked what would happen with the dirt pile on the site. <br />Marshall responded that the dirt would be used on the site. <br /> <br />Berry questioned whether the applicant had a problem with the <br />condition that the garage be removed. Marshall indicated that <br />he had no problem with that. <br /> <br />DeBenedet inquired if the dirt pile was topsoil from the <br />adjacent lot. Marshall replied that it was not top soil and <br />that they did not need the dirt on the adjacent property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.