Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Paget 5 <br /> <br />Wednesday, November 1, 1989 <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned how the utilities would be handled for the <br />temporary bank building. Wilmus replied that water would be <br />provided from a main on County Road C and that the facility would <br />have a sewer tank which would be pumped out as required. Wilmus <br />emphasized that this was a very temporary facility which would be <br />operated only until the new facility would be ready. <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned how large the bank would be and how many <br />people it would employ. wilmus replied that the bank would have <br />twelve employees, of which five would be at the facility at any <br />one time. Wilmus stated that typically there would be two bank <br />officers, two tellers and one data processing person. Wilmus <br />said that the temporary building is an approved banking facility <br />which would have one drive up unit. <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned whether the temporary facility would require <br />any special security measures by the city. Wilmus replied that <br />it would be a secure unit which would place no additional burden <br />on the city Police Department. <br /> <br />Wietecki asked if this would be a one or two story building. <br />Wilmus answered that the bank facility would have two floors, one <br />of which would be a basement which would include a vault, <br />conference room and restrooms. <br /> <br />Maschka questioned if it would be a light brick. wilmus replied <br />that the brick would be lighter than and would contrast with the <br />brick used on the adjacent Investor's Savings Bank. Maschka <br />questioned if brick would be on all sides and suggested that it <br />be kept fairly dark. Wilmus replied that there would be brick on <br />all four sides of the structure. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if there would be any flashing signs. Wilmus <br />answered that there would be one pylon sign which would meet City <br />code requirements for setback and size and that there would be no <br />flashing, travelling message signs. <br /> <br />Johnson asked if the Fire Marshal had any concerns. <br />replied that he did not. <br /> <br />Nisja <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated a concern that there were no detailed drawings for <br />the restaurant. Johnson replied that the restaurant would be <br />required to submit separate detailed drawings at a future <br />Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />Dahlgren stated that the bank elevations were unclear, in terms <br />of exact building materials. Wilmus replied that the structure <br />