Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />page#12 <br /> <br />Wednesday, January 4, 1989 <br /> <br />design. Dahlberg replied that the any problems will be <br />addressed. <br /> <br />Stokes stated that the concept was excellent but there are bugs <br />that need to be worked out including the lack of sidewalks and <br />addressing fire marshal concerns. <br /> <br />Keel pointed out that the sidewalk would be required by <br />ordinance. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated that section drawings should be provided which <br />show how the roof top units will be screened. Moeller added that <br />the sections should be at locations where parapet height or roof <br />height changes. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked which areas of the exterior would not be brick. <br />Dahlberg highlighted the exterior building materials. <br /> <br />Brown summarized the reasons for the design of the concrete <br />arches and stated that dumpsters could be in the building for the <br />small tenants but might be a problem for the larger tenants. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked where enclosures for the major tenants would be. <br />Brown replied that they would be in the service court areas and <br />that they will develop more details on that. <br /> <br />Berry stated that based on state statutes that developers should <br />make provisions for source separation of trash. <br /> <br />Moeller stated that compactors should be enclosed also. <br /> <br />Johnson summarized the issues that needed to be addressed <br />including the lack of sidewalks, the additional fire marshal <br />review, the provision of complete drainage plans, details and <br />section drawings of roof top screening, mechanical units, colors <br />of brick and columns, design of signage, the need to reconsider <br />the design of the area around the southeast entrance and the <br />provision of sediment control. <br /> <br />Brown questioned the need to redesign the southeast entrance when <br />they have been advised by the traffic consultant that the design <br />is sufficient. <br /> <br />Dahlgren responded that there are two aspects to review of the <br />area including function and appearance. Dahlgren said that while <br />the entrance may work functionally, it would be perceived as <br />tight and not providing good vision of the center. Dahlgren <br />pointed out the importance of proper design because it would be a <br />principle entrance to the site. Dahlgren added that it appeared <br />