pm_940209 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Wednesday, February 9, 1994 Chairman Wietecki asked for progress on the storm sewer plan. The staff responded that the City Council has approved a feasibility for the storm sewer, and that the storm ~ewer would be paid for by the benefiting property owners including the developer. Lon Aune, City Engineer, explained that the study will be completed within 60 days. 3 Member Roberts asked about other conditions regarding landscaping, screening, storm sewer, and fence details. Mr. Falk responded that all those conditions would remain the same and would be included in the Planned Unit Development. Dan Williams, representing the Space Center, discussed the alternative designs and the estimated costs for the schematic designs. He stated that a two-story curtain wall is currently outside of the budget, but he had hoped that the budget will be reduced when final design drawings are done and bidding has been completed. The two-story design, which was the original design, was intended to be a long-range design to allow Beltmann to expand its office space to a second level. Williams reiterated that the Space Center still hopes to construct the original design with the two-story glass front, but does need to remain flexible. The budget figures are not adequate. Member Thomas asked for clarification regarding the fence, pines, and evergreens along the fence. Member Wall stated that this was to be the first project north of County Road B2 and was to be a "classy" building which would set the benchmark for other buildings in the area. It was to be an "innovator". Using the alternate "B" exterior design would simply make the building appear as an office warehouse building. Member Wall asked Mr. Williams if he was comfortable with the Planned Unit Development. Williams responded that the Space Center was comfortable with the PUD as long as there is some flexibility to modify the site plan based on economics. General discussion ensued regarding materials of buildings in the area and building rent in the adjoining areas. Member Harms stated that option "B" is easy to complete, while option was more costly and provides higher quality. She preferred option "A" and asked that the applicant return for further review if option "B" is selected.