My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009_0629_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2009
>
2009_0629_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/9/2012 2:55:26 PM
Creation date
7/28/2009 2:46:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
221
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
to the case being heard at the City Council level; and that that definition be included in the Conditional <br />: Use documents recorded with Ramsey County as such. <br />: Commissioner Wozniak suggested an additional condition that the applicant works with staff to improve <br />: the aesthetics of the area, outside the 3,000 square foot display/sales area, through maintained grass, <br />: paving or landscaping techniques. <br />Vice Chair Boerigter opined that he was not inclined to make that a condition of approval, since the <br />applicant was a tenant, not the property owner; and advised that he would be more supportive of <br />engaging the property owner in bringing the remaining property up to code at some point. <br />Further discussion included the process for requiring paving of the current gravel lot, in conjunction with <br />installation of curb and gutter and landscaping along the street frontage and property line; parking spaces <br />on the site not related to this use; whether enough parking existed for different industrial uses already <br />there; and staff's perspective that conditions for Conditional Use approval be defensibly related to the <br />requested use itself. <br />Chair poherty opined that he would not be supportive of requiring that the entire property be brought up <br />to code. <br />E Vice Chair Boerigter opined that he would not be supportive of a condition on the entire property; <br />E however, he observed that it would be nice if the property owner would take the initiative to clean up the <br />E unpaved area on his own. <br />7 Commissioner Gottfried opined that he wasn't sure how far to push this discussion since the property <br />7 owner was not present to confirm their intent. <br />Vice Chair Boerigter suggested that the Condition B of staff's recommendations remain as indicated; with <br />the applicant and/or property owner strongly encouraged by the Planning Commission to clean up <br />the adjacent portion of the lot beyond the current gravel area. <br />Commissioner Wozniak encouraged staff to work with the property owner to improve surface conditions <br />on areas outside or adjacent to the paved area. <br />Ayes: 7 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.