My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_900905
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1990
>
pm_900905
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:31 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:55:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
9/5/1990
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.
/
15
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 />Wednesday september 5, 1990 <br /> <br />stated that lights will be located on the clubhouse and on the <br />maintenance building. <br /> <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />Wietecki questioned whether a interim use permit will allow for <br />the temporary use of the right-of-way in lieu of a dedication. <br />Shardlow pointed out that since the city owns the land in <br />question, this wouldn't be a proper use of an interim use permit. <br /> <br />Johnson asked what changes would occur when the right-of-way is <br />ultimately dedicated. Bierscheid stated that the Parks <br />Department is working on this. He stated that most likely the <br />size of the clubhouse will have to be reduced. Bierscheid also <br />stated that the neighbors approved the plan. <br /> <br />Berry commented that the parking lot is dark at night. <br />Bierscheid stated that the clubhouse light will shine on the <br />parking lot. This will add to the lighting of the parking lot. <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned whether moving the maintenance building was <br />ever considered. Bierscheid stated that ideally the maintenance <br />building would be on the other side of the golf course. Goedeke <br />questioned whether it is completely filled. Bierscheid stated <br />that it was filled. <br /> <br />Goedeke stated that the maintenance building could be moved near <br />hole #3 or near the putting green. Bierscheid stated that the <br />noise factor would be too much for the neighbors. <br /> <br />Goedeke commented that all this tax money put in the parking lot <br />will go down the drain since the city will eventually have to <br />give up 10 feet for right-of-way dedication. Bierscheid stated <br />that the money comes from golf course revenue. <br /> <br />Stokes questioned the number of spaces lost due to the new <br />entrance. Bierscheid stated that they would lose four, from 66 <br />to 62 spaces. Stokes questioned whether the present driveway <br />configuration had caused any accidents. Bierscheid stated that <br />there has been a lot of near misses. <br /> <br />Stokes questioned how far the new entrance would be from County <br />Road B2. Bierscheid stated that it wouldn't change the distance <br />from the Road only the location of the entrance to the parking <br />lot. Goedeke questioned whether traffic flow would be <br />directional. Bierscheid stated that the entrance would have a <br />median to sepaprate traffic entering and leaving the site. There <br />would also be one way flow in the parking lot. <br /> <br />The Public Hearing was closed. <br /> <br />Goedeke questioned whether a motion should mention that the 3% <br />parking lot landscaping is impossible at this site. Johnson <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.