My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_900606
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1990
>
pm_900606
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:23 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:55:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/6/1990
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.
/
21
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#12 <br /> <br />Wednesday, June 6, 1990 <br /> <br />Keel stated that MNDOT can't deny access but that they held the <br />applicant hostage based on a drainage permit. <br /> <br />DeBenedet testified that the project is the same as before with <br />major or minor changes depending on where you live. DeBenedet <br />added that because no variances to standards are being requested, <br />that approval is called for and the only question is what <br />condition should be applied. DeBenedet stated that the <br />pedestrian safety concern should be dealt with. <br /> <br />MOTION <br /> <br />DeBenedet moved and Berry seconded to recommend approval of <br />Dominion Group Inc.' s request for a special use permit at 2231 <br />Rice street with the following conditions: <br /> <br />1. That the project be developed according to the plans <br />presented to the Planning Commission on June 6, 1990. <br /> <br />2. That staff approve the final landscape plan with <br />neighborhood review. <br /> <br />3. That staff approve final grading, drainage, erosion control, <br />utility and lighting plans. <br /> <br />4. That color renderings and full exterior details be presented <br />to the City Council. <br /> <br />5. That the applicant make a cash contribution for sidewalk <br />from the point of access on Minnesota west to the park <br />pathway with a public hearing for construction of a <br />sidewalk. <br /> <br />6. That there be no access from the project to Marion street. <br /> <br />Shardlow expressed concern about requiring the developer to <br />assume full responsibility for the sidewalk. Shardlow added that <br />it would be appropriate to have a hearing for the city to <br />consider the whole problem and the right share of the property <br />owners to contribute. <br /> <br />Johnson questioned how the appropriate shares are determined. <br /> <br />Shardlow stated that the applicants share must be proportionate <br />to their need or benefit. <br /> <br />DeBenedet testified that if the project were on a street that <br />sidewalks would be required on two sides. DeBenedet added that <br />if the development goes forward, the existing problem would be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.