Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCMin_90Apr23MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETIP~G APRIL 23, 1990 Chairman Boche called the meeting to order at 7:25 P.M. PRESENT Barry, Boche, Daykin, Nestingen and Gibson Talbot. Also present was Council Liaison Ciernia and City Planner Susan Hoyt Taff. ABSENT Duncan and Finegan. MARCH 26, 1990 MINUTES APPROVED Minutes were approved by unanimous consent. PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A UTILITY SHED AT 1745 LINDIG STREET IN AN R-1 ZONE Bruce Zimmerman, 1745 Lindig, proposes to construct a utility shed in his rear lot, five feet from the rear and side lot lines. The structure will be barn style, 11 ft. x 12 ft. x 11 ft. 6 in. high, and painted tan to match his home. Planner Susan Hoyt Taff reported that the structure and location meet the requirements of the zoning code. The proposed shed requires a building permit. Nestingen moved to approve the permitted accessory use permit at 1745 Lindig. Motion carried unanimously. PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A UTILITY SHED AT 1900 SIMPSON STREET IN AN R-1 ZONE Ronald Hagen, 1900 Simpson, proposes to construct an addition to an existing utility shed. He was unaware of the requirement for a permitted accessory use permit when he built the initial structure so he is requesting the permit at this time. The storage area is 6 feet wide by 11 feet long and 12 feet high, which meets the size requirements of the zoning code. The bottom portion of the shed is built against the cedar fence, which is more than one foot from the rear and side lot lines and, therefore, meets the location requirements of the zoning code. The structure will be finished in rough cedar and left in its natural color to match the fence. The structure does not require a building permit. Barry moved approval of the permitted accessory use permit, which was approved unanimously. PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A UTILITY SHED AT 1892 HOLTON IN AN R-1 ZONE Gary Affolter, 1892 Holton, proposes to construct a utility shed in his rear lot which will be 15 feet from his rear lot line and 6 feet from the side lot line. The structure will be 8 feet wide, 11 feet long and 11 feet high. It will be painted the same color of the house. The size and location of the proposed structure meet the zoning code. It does not require a building permit. Barry moved approval of the permitted accessory use permit, which was ,.approved unanimously. MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING APRIL 23, 1990 PAGE 2 PERMITTED ACCESSORY USE PERMIT FOR A GAZEBO AT 2148 FOLWELL AVENUE IN AN R-1 ZONE Mr. Gordon Davis, 2148 Folwell, proposes to construct a detached gazebo 12 feet x 15 feet x 12 feet high in his rear yard in place of an existing deck which was removed. The gazebo will be made of redwood posts with treated lumber, a fir floor, screens and rolled roofing with a pattern. The gazebo will be 12' from the principal structure, 30' from the rear lot line and 30' feet from the east side lot line and 32' from the west side lot line. The size and location of the gazebo meet the requirements of the zoning code. He talked to his neighbors who voiced no objections. A building permit is required for this type of structure. Daykin moved approval of the permitted accessory use permit. The motion was approved unanimously. UPDATE ON THE PARKING COMMITTEE AND THE MCALLISTER REQUEST FOR "NO PARKING" Planner Hoyt Taff reported that the Parking Committee met and made progress on drafting a city parking policy. With respect to the McAllister request for "No Parking'° on Arona, Planner Taff will research the issue with city staff and prepare a report • for the May Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Ciernia suggested the Roseville Police be asked to comment on safety issues. INTERVIEW PLANNING CONSULTANTS FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Randy Thoreson of Short, Elliot, Hendrickson; John Uban and Tim Malloy of Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban; and Fred Hoisington of Hoisington Group Inc. made presentations on their proposals for the comprehensive municipal plan update. A question and answer period followed. After the presentations, Commission members discussed the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. Daykin favored the Hoisington Group because of the firm's experience, clearly thought out proposal and ability to produce a good product. Barry suggested that the Hoisington Group would give the city a fresh look but Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban's experience with the city would be an asset in preparing the plan. Nestingen favored the Hoisington Group due to the detailed citizen based process in the proposal. Talbot also favored the Hoisington Group because the proposal exhibited more substance, gave more attention to the process and suggested looking at expanding the process to include more in-depth redevelopment and Boche concluded that the Hoisington Group would look at the city with "a fresh set of eyes" and give the concept a new look. Barry requested that Mr. Hoisington be asked to include a more detailed redevelopment and more in-depth citizen participation element as options with the proposal. • MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PAGE 2 APRIL 23, 1990 After further discussion, Daykin moved to accept the Hoisington Group proposal and ask City Staff to look at the option of expanding the Hoisington proposal to include commercial dedevelopment and more citizen involvement at an additional cost as well as obtain a definite amount of time that will be devoted to the project by the City Planner. The motion carried unanimously. Chairman Boche announced that the recommendation will go before the City Council for its consideration on Wednesday, April 25, 1990. Chairman Boche declared the meeting adjourned at 9:33 P.M. Submitted by: Katherine J. Zimmerman Approved : ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ qGU ~ ~..~.. Donna Daykin, S retary •