My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_890301
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1989
>
pm_890301
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2013 9:29:04 AM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:38:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
3/1/1989
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.
/
11
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# 6 <br /> <br />Wednesday, March 1, 1989 <br /> <br />Dahlgren replied that if the Commission was comfortable with the <br />criteria then it shouldn't be a problem. Dahlgren added that a <br />special use permit gives the City some flexibility and that it <br />allows businesses to tailor outside storage to their own specific <br />needs. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if there were any restrictions on outside display <br />of alcoholic beverages. <br /> <br />Dahlgren responded that the language should be corrected to allow <br />only outside display of nonalcoholic beverages. <br /> <br />DeBenedet stated a concern that outside merchandising and display <br />could adversely effect handicap accessibility. <br /> <br />Berry pointed out that the criteria includes not blocking <br />sidewalks. <br /> <br />Johnson testified that the special use permit would also allow <br />the City to insure proper handicap accessibility. <br /> <br />Goedeke pointed out that in previous meetings, Super America <br />expressed concern about the 8 day restriction. Dahlgren replied <br />that two types of outside merchandising would be allowed, the 8 <br />day provision could be done without special use permit and that <br />any other kinds could be covered by the special use permit. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated he favored the proposal. <br /> <br />Stokes asked how the proposal would meet hardware stores needs. <br />Dahlgren replied that the specific needs could be addressed <br />during a special use permit process. <br /> <br />Stokes pointed out that a special use permit can be revoked if <br />there are problems. <br /> <br />John Kinsel, from Super America, stated that SA can live with the <br />proposed ordinance and questioned signage requirements for <br />outside displays. Johnson replied that signage would be <br />addressed at a future date. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Berry questioned the matter of control on appearance of displays, <br />especially garden displays. Dahlgren replied that open sales is <br />a special use permit and that special use permits have been <br />issued for Margolis in the past. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.