My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_900801
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1990
>
pm_900801
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:29 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:55:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/1/1990
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.
/
13
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, August 1, 1990 <br /> <br />Goedeke pointed out that the Planning commission was concerned <br />about the foot print of the building from the very beginning. He <br />stated that in the future it is important to ensure the accuracy <br />of the surveys before the building is constructed so that this <br />doesn't happen again. <br /> <br />Stokes said that the lake is receding. He added that the <br />ordinance doesn't do enough to protect the lakes. Stokes <br />commented that this discussion is academic because in ten or so <br />years from now the lake will have receded so far there won't be <br />any encroachment. <br /> <br />Roberts stated that he is concerned that an approval does set a <br />precedent and that he is very upset with the whole situation. <br /> <br />DeBenedet said that he agreed with everyone's concerns. He <br />stated that he didn't like the scale of the building in the <br />beginning. DeBenedet pointed out that a building on Hamline was <br />granted a variance because tearing down the wall was too severe. <br />DeBenedet stated that perhaps a contribution to the park fund <br />would be an appropriate penalty to the developer for this <br />violation. <br /> <br />MOTION <br /> <br />Berry moved and Goedeke seconded to approve the variance to the <br />Rosewood Estates. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Berry, DeBenedet, Goedeke, Johnson, <br />Stokes, wietecki <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />Roberts <br /> <br />Planninq File 2128 <br /> <br />Har Mar, Inc. request for vacation of the Frontage Road lying <br />between Midway Ford and Snelling Avenue and between Lincoln Drive <br />and Terrace Drive. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Shardlow summarized the site and explained that since there were <br />no longer plans for a full interchange at Snelling, there was no <br />need for the right-of-way. Shardlow stated that Snelling might <br />be considered as an LRT corridor and this should be considered <br />when considering the vacation. <br /> <br />Keel stated that the exact western line has yet to be determined. <br />However it will be determined before the vacation is granted. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.