Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />