My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
res_8949
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Resolutions
>
08xxx
>
8900
>
res_8949
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 8:35:35 AM
Creation date
12/2/2004 8:25:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Resolutions
Resolution #
8949
Resolution Title
Denying Computer City/Beechwood Acquisitions request for Special Use Permit for site plan approval and variance at Snelling Avenue and County Road B-2
Resolution Date Passed
6/14/1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF <br />THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />* <br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting <br />of the city council of the city of Roseville, County of Ramsey, <br />State of Minnesota was duly held on the 14th day of June , <br />1993, at 7:30 P.M. <br /> <br />The following members were present: Goedeke, ~laschka, Cushman, <br />P. Johnson, and V. Johnson, and the following members were <br />absent: None. <br /> <br />Member <br />be adopted. <br /> <br />Goedeke <br /> <br />moved that the following resolution <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. 8949 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, Beechwood Acquisitions for Computer City has <br />applied for a special use permit and a variance to the $etback <br />requirement of the SC Shopping Center District; <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the application was submitted to the city and the <br />Council now determines that: <br /> <br />1) Traffic is a problem at this location and it is in the <br />best interest of the City to not exacerbate the traffic problem. <br /> <br />2) The site plan as proposed shows a traffic circulation <br />pattern that could further cause congestion at the access point <br />to the area and out onto County Road B-2 as well. <br /> <br />3) The plans as submitted by the applicant do not comply <br />with the City's adopted standards and further the development is <br />not in harmony with the commercial use to the north and would <br />have an adverse effect on same. <br /> <br />4) The standards of the SC District require that <br />development within the district be integrated according to an <br />overall plan and that as proposed, the building materials and <br />building orientation are not compatible with surrounding <br />commercial centers. <br /> <br />5) The applicant is proposing to construct an 18,000 sq. <br />ft. building that does not meet the Shopping Center Zoning <br />District standards without seeking variances. <br /> <br />6) That the property in question has an appropriate use <br />that does not require any variance or less objectionable <br />variances than the proposed project. <br /> <br />7) The site plan as shown does not interface well with the <br />Crossroads Center that shares the common access point to this <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.