Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Pagel 6 <br /> <br />Wednesday, February 7, 1990 <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />wietecki <br /> <br />Dahlgren commented that with minimum lot requirements of 11,000 <br />square feet, the lot division would be near the center but may <br />be moved in certain circumstances. <br /> <br />Other Business <br /> <br />Ordinance changes for Design Standards. <br /> <br />Dahlgren presented the design proposals and called attention to <br />details. He went through the outline which consisted of the <br />following: <br /> <br />I. Concensus - a general summary of comments of December 3, <br />1989 Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br />II. site Plan Review Options - a listing of methods of reducing <br />the time necessary for official procedures and/or nature of <br />reviewing body. <br /> <br />III. Performance Standards Ordinance Amendment to require <br />higher design standards for development in all districts. <br /> <br />IV. Policies to establish thresholds for Requiring: <br /> <br />A. site Plan Review <br />B. Concrete Curbing and Drainage <br />C. Right-of-way Dedication <br />D. Revised and existing policies for new thresholds that <br />would require specific actions. <br /> <br />V. Building Code Recommendations <br /> <br />wietecki questioned whether the sign setback is adequate. <br /> <br />Stokes commented that speeding up review time is not always <br />appropriate. Stokes, stated that he would like to see the reVlew <br />done more efficiently. Stokes added that sometimes taking time <br />is more appropriate. <br /> <br />Berry stated that she was uncomfortable with number 2 under the <br />site plan review options. <br /> <br />wietecki questioned if the review would be coming up at the same <br />time as the hearings. <br /> <br />Jopke presented and reviewed the planning time line chart. <br />