My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2007_0611
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2007
>
CC_Minutes_2007_0611
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/7/2007 8:25:06 AM
Creation date
6/21/2007 11:30:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/11/2007
Meeting Type
Continued
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
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
<br />there appeared to be an obvious attempt to keep the ideas from public <br />view. <br /> <br />5. What Are the Alternatives Lot Split Recommendations Addressing? <br /> <br />Residents want to insure the value of their homes as influenced by their <br />neighborhoods. They want changes to the neighborhood that are first and <br />foremost mindful of the character and ambiance of the area. This is not a <br />unique concern and has been addressed here and around the country by <br />cities. Cities that have developed over time, often before they were cities, <br />appear to either protect large lot areas such as Hopkins and St. Paul or by <br />using a averaging or sliding scale as Edina or Minneapolis. <br /> <br />Roseville has only 100 or so large lots that might be able to be developed. <br />It is clear that the predominance of these lots is located in areas heavily <br />impacted by retail development and/or highway interchanges. The two <br />major areas, Acorn and Gluek Lane are considered for study by the <br />University of Minnesota to evaluate the ability of trees to improve air <br />quality. To allow these areas to be chopped into areas of 11,000 sflots <br />would not only be to destroy the investments of the residents but to <br />degrade the quality of their environment as well due to the loss of air <br />filtering and noise reduction provided by the additional trees and green <br />space. <br /> <br />Most individuals bought their homes on a platted lot. Almost no one <br />bought his residential home with the anticipation of being allowed to <br />divide the lot. If that was the plan, as some individuals in my <br />neighborhood, they bought two lots. When they prepared to sell they <br />offered them together or separately. <br /> <br />It is hoped that what will result from this hearing and the CAG report and citizen based <br />Alternative Recommendations is a policy that does treat all the residential neighborhoods <br />equally by adopting a sliding scale or averaging approach to lot divisions. It is further <br />hoped that topics of "subdivision," "variance," "lot recombination," and "PUD" will be <br />discussed and reviewed by a broadly based citizen panel to be sure that residential <br />neighborhood character is preserved, our housing stock remains diverse, and the <br />investments of all our citizens protected. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.