My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_900103
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1990
>
pm_900103
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:09 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:54:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/3/1990
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.
/
10
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, January 3, 1990 <br /> <br />Dahlgren commented that it is not good to have more asphalt than <br />you need. It should be kept as green space until needed. <br /> <br />LeTendre stated that Liebermann and Schneiderman have ten year <br />leases and both need a small amount of parking. <br /> <br />wietecki asked what the life expectancy for the building was and <br />why it seems to keep changing. LeTendre stated that their long <br />term goal is to develop the whole block but does not know how <br />long that will take. They already have 10 year leases locked in. <br /> <br />Commers commented that the adjacent building is up for sale but <br />they do not have funds to purchase it. They would like to in the <br />future. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if this would be eligible for tax increment <br />financing. Commers stated that this has been investigated and <br />Waldron said no. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated a concern for the future of the building with tear <br />downs and additions. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Johnson stated that she views this corner as a beginning for the <br />renovation of this area and wants to see it move forward. <br /> <br />Wietecki stated that he wants to see a timeline set for the <br />renovation of the northwest corner. Either renovate in two years <br />or before tenants occupy, whichever comes first. <br /> <br />Berry stated that if we start doing this, then everyone will <br />expect it. Gateway was used as an example. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated a concern about the sign. Dahlgren stated that <br />the existing sign if conforming. <br /> <br />DeBenedet commented that he wants to set the renovation date at <br />January 1, 1992 and wants to see sign pictures in a month. <br />Commers asked for June 1992. <br /> <br />Johnson commented that the rest should move forward but the sign <br />drawings should be submitted. <br /> <br />DeBenedet moved and wietecki seconded to approve the zoning <br />change from I-I to B-4. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />DeBenedet, Wietecki, Berry, Johnson <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.