pm_890201 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Page#18 Wednesday, February 1, 1989 Goedeke inquired about who put the paths in and why they were put in the wrong place. Dahlgren replied that the paths are not in the wrong place. Dahlgren commented that it would have been better if the design of the signs and the path design had been done at the same time and that the sign location as proposed will work well. Berry stated that the signs would be nice looking, especially compared with the variances in appearances of signs which have been granted in the past. Johnson closed the public hearing. DeBenedet stated that he was concerned about sign variances but that he felt that the particular signs being proposed were very much in scale with the site. DeBenedet moved and Berry seconded to recommend approval of the sign location variances with the condition that the existing temporary signs be removed. Roll Call: Ayes: Moeller, DeBenedet, Berry, Stokes, Maschka, Johnson Goedeke, Nays: None Berry moved and Maschka seconded to continue consideration of Planning File 1874, Ordinance Amendment Concerning outside Merchandising and Display and Planning File 1912, Ordinance Amendment Concerning Parkland Dedication to March 1, 1989 in light of the late hour. Johnson asked if the Commission provision that would require all special use permit. would outside like to consider a storage to obtain a Dahlgren agreed to draft such a change and send it out to the commission to review prior to the next meeting. Staff agreed to notify affected business owners of the March 1 meeting. Berry stated that the amendment in theory is fine but it doesn't do any good unless there is good code enforcement. Roll Call: Ayes: Moeller, DeBenedet, Berry, Stokes, Maschka, Johnson Goedeke, Nays: None