My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_881012
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_881012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:58 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:38:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
10/12/1988
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 />page#16 <br /> <br />Wednesday, October 12, 1988 <br /> <br />stokes moved and Berry seconded to recommend approval of a <br />special use permit request for a family billiard and video <br />entertainment center at 2819 North Hamline Avenue with the <br />condition that the special use permit be for a one year period <br />beginning at the opening of the center with annual renewal to <br />ensure that the business is operated without problems. <br /> <br />stimmler stated a concern that the applicants would be investing <br />$200,000 into tenant improvements and would not have a guarantee <br />beyond one year that they could stay there. Johnson replied that <br />they could stay there as long as they perform without problems. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Berry, Goedeke, Stokes, Maschka, <br />Moeller, DeBenedet, Johnson <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />Planninq File 1895 <br /> <br />Motel 6 request for sign variances at 2300 Cleveland Avenue. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren summarized the location and proposal. <br /> <br />Rick Palmeteer, from Universal sign co., summarized the proposal <br />and the need for variances. <br /> <br />Berry asked how many feet lower was the grade level of the sign <br />than the property to the northwest. Palmeteer responded that he <br />was not sure but it was likely more than 10 feet. Goedeke asked <br />how the sign compares with signs to the east at Long Cadillac. <br />Palmeteer responded that it would be higher than the sign at Long <br />Cadillac. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if the 350 foot notice went across highway 36. <br />Johnson commented that the sign really didn't effect single <br />family residential property. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Goedeke moved and Moeller secpnded to recommend approval of a <br />variance to have a 151.25 sq. ft. sign which is 45 feet high at <br />2300 Cleveland Avenue. <br /> <br />DeBenedet stated that he was against the motion because there are <br />reasons for the sign restrictions in the ordinance which the City <br />should stick to. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.