pm_891206 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION page#11 Wednesday, December 6, 1989 Goedeke questioned why this proposal was different than the Rainbow proposal and that brick should be provided on all four sides. stokes questioned whether the furniture store could be allowed in the building under the existing industrial zoning. Dahlgren replied that retail uses are not allowed. DeBenedet stated that rezoning is the way the city should go and that rezoning can't be conditioned. DeBenedet moved, Goedeke seconded to continue the matter until January 3, 1990, that the applicant file the 9-1/2 foot dedication as required prior to further review by the Planning Commission and that there be further negotiation with staff concerning landscaping, inside trash handing, treatment of the back side of the canopy, the exterior finish all around the building, lighting, proof of parking to meet front code requirements, under ground electrical, and the treatment of the loading docks. stokes questioned how the docks were being handled. Goedeke stated that there is shared use of the rear area of the adjacent building and that he was concerned about the safety of the people parking in the area. stokes stated that the building should be fixed up, then the City consider rezoning the property. LeTendre requested that the Planning commission reject the proposal rather than continuing it because the deal would be dead if the project is delayed 30 days. Johnson stated that if the tenant wants to come in( he will work with the city. Dahlgren stated that the Planning commission can table the matter a maximum of 60 days after which the council could not act. DeBenedet stated that he preferred to handle the matter this way because the Council should have a recommendation from the Commission. Johnson stated that the proposal has possibilities and that she couldn't, therefore, support a rejection.