My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-05-05_PC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
2010-05-05_PC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2011 1:40:29 PM
Creation date
2/18/2011 1:40:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
5/5/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, May 05, 2010 <br />Page 2 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the language of Condition E of Section 7 of the requested <br />43 <br />action was left intentionally broad to provide staff to work with the property owner <br />44 <br />for creation and implementation of a screening plan, but intended for completion <br />45 <br />this summer or early fall, and would be refined further prior to the action moving <br />46 <br />forward to the City Council. <br />47 <br />Discussion included specific location of fences in relationship to storage of <br />48 <br />materials; type of materials being stored; setback requirements related to the <br />49 <br />fences and storage materials; height of fence and/or vegetation and trees to <br />50 <br />adequately screen the commercial property from residential properties; rationale <br />51 <br />for staff’s recommended Condition C related to excluding sheds and other <br />52 <br />portable storage containers and preference for a building addition to <br />53 <br />accommodate indoor storage requirements; and confirmation that the trucks and <br />54 <br />trailers were not being stored on this property. <br />55 <br />Mr. Lloyd displayed photos of the site taken on May 4, 2010, showing Albrecht <br />56 <br />materials and equipment, noting that the boat stored on site had since been <br />57 <br />removed. <br />58 <br />Further discussion included complications with the fence and maintenance of <br />59 <br />vegetative screening; condition of mature evergreen trees helping to screen the <br />60 <br />property; past maintenance by the property owner and/or adjacent residents; and <br />61 <br />the inability of the City to require the cooperation of adjacent property owners in <br />62 <br />maintaining the property of the applicant. <br />63 <br />Member Wozniak noted that the applicant’s business was as an irrigation <br />64 <br />company, and that utilizing their expertise in maintaining vegetation screening <br />65 <br />their property seemed apropos. <br />66 <br />Applicant Representatives: <br />67 <br />Dwayne Albrecht (husband of property owner), 1408 West County Road C <br />68 <br />Discussion among Mr. Albrecht and Commissioners included specific materials, <br />69 <br />equipment and vehicles on site; difficulty in determining which property was <br />70 <br />under discussion and impacted by this land use request <br />71 <br />Mr. Albrecht stated that there was now less equipment than indicated in those <br />72 <br />pictures included in the staff report; that the boat had been removed, as well as <br />73 <br />extra cyclone fence rolls; and the original involvement of MIDC in modular <br />74 <br />retaining wall installations, but their current marketing of those remaining <br />75 <br />materials with the current economy, and their refocus on pipe and irrigate <br />76 <br />supplies. Mr. Albrecht alleged that some captions on the pictures were <br />77 <br />inaccurate; and that City staff interviewed a short-term employee on site who was <br />78 <br />unclear as to what materials belonged to whom and where. Mr. Albrecht advised <br />79 <br />that the pipe supply shown along the west fence was purchased by Albrecht from <br />80 <br />MIDC in truckload quantity, and paid for over time and as used, but that their <br />81 <br />commitment was to purchase an entire truckload for cost efficiencies, similar to <br />82 <br />other vendors utilized by the firm (i.e., John Deere and fuel vendors) to ensure <br />83 <br />better prices on larger quantities. <br />84 <br />Scott Wicklund, 1450 W County Road C, Proprietor of MIDC Enterprises/ <br />85 <br />Distributors of Professional Irrigation & Landscape Supplies (Full Service <br />86 <br />Warehouse) <br />87 <br />At the request of Member Wozniak, Mr. Wicklund confirmed that the proposed <br />88 <br />storage diagram provided by the applicant and part of the report was a fairly <br />89 <br />accurate depiction and was typical of on site storage. Mr. Wicklund advised that <br />90 <br />the materials stored were mostly PVC pipe; green and black coiled pipe; and <br />91 <br />corrugated “poly” drain tile, with the quantity shown also typical, but dependent <br />92 <br />on the type of year, and may include a limited number of valve boxes as well. <br />93 <br />Member Wozniak expressed concern in the applicant complying with the height <br />94 <br />of stacked materials not exceeding six feet (6’). <br />95 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.