My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_880706
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_880706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:55 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/6/1988
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.
/
28
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 21 <br /> <br />Wednesday, July 6, 1988 <br /> <br />which the commission should address. Gregory stated that two <br />driveways onto Lexington would not be a problem, that a one way <br />drive would not solve any problems. <br /> <br />Roll Call, Ayes: <br /> <br />Maschka, DeBenedet, Berry, Goedeke, Moeller, <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />Berry, Stokes, Johnson <br /> <br />The meeting was recessed at l2:45pm. <br /> <br />The meeting reconvened at 1:00am. <br /> <br />Planninq File 1864 <br /> <br />Brutger Companies request for a Special Use Permit for an amended <br />planned unit development at 2231 Rice Street. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren summarized location, history and the proposal. Dahlgren <br />outlined concern that the grading and drainage plan be subject to <br />MN Dot approval, that the building height not exceed the previous <br />proposal, that the exterior building materials be clarified, and <br />staff review the relocation of utility lines. <br /> <br />Steve Wilson from Brutger Companies testified that the proposed <br />plan was better than the previous plan because it would be lower <br />in height, have large setbacks, a reduced footprint, more <br />underground parking, and have a quality exterior with brick and <br />cedar accents. Wilson stated that at the neighborhood meeting, <br />the primary concern was traffic. <br /> <br />Berry questioned the color of the brick. Wilson answered that it <br />would be an earth tone color. <br /> <br />Johnson asked for clarification on height. Wilson responded that <br />the elevation of the roof peak on the previous proposal was 969 <br />ft. 10 in. while the proposal would have a roof peak of 969 ft. <br /> <br />Wilson pointed out that the project would have 71 units versus <br />the previous 61 units. They have been able to do this because <br />the project is built further into the ground while having a 18 <br />hundred sq. ft. less of a footprint. Wilson pointed out that the <br />peak of the roof would be 40 ft. high. <br /> <br />DeBenedet questioned what would occur on lot 4. Wilson responded <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.