My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02471
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2400
>
pf_02471
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 11:53:18 AM
Creation date
12/8/2004 11:32:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2471
Planning Files - Type
Planned Unit Development
Address
674 COUNTY ROAD C W
Applicant
PARKRIDGE DEVELOPMENT
Status
WITHDRWN
PIN
112923110007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
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 />that the area is quite evenly balanced right now, and a further change to increase the density could <br />detrimentally change that balance. <br /> <br />Second, the issue of traffic, although clearly relevant to any consideration of changes in the <br />comprehensive plan, was dealt with in the Commission's decision in an inadequate manner. <br />They approved a change to medium density, with the proviso that any development address traffic <br />concerns. This would seem to be more properly a zoning issue than a matter of the comprehensive <br />plan. As a city commission member myself, I understand that the Planning Commission <br />members are ordinary volunteer citizens, and I applaud them for caring enough about the city to <br />get involved. Nonetheless, that does not absolve them of their duty to immerse themselves in a full <br />understanding of the issues, which include the City Council's clear directive that the Commission <br />discuss all the implications of a comprehensive plan change prior to any discussion about zoning <br />in general or the Kehr townhouse project in particular. <br /> <br />I would make two alternative suggestions. The City Council eould open this issue up for public <br />hearing, so the Council itself could hear both from the residents and from any proponents of the <br />comprehensive plan change. In the alternative, the Council could remand the issue again to the <br />Commission, but provide it with very specific instructions about delineating the types of issues <br />involved, and the necessity of extensive discussion of all relevant issues, including <br />environmental and residential impact. And, although the Commission was correct in noting that <br />it had already entertained public comments on the issue, further opportunity for the <br />Commissioners to familiarize themselves with issues involved in the plan change would be <br />beneficial. <br /> <br />I do want to thank you and the Council for the time and consideration you have given the proposed <br />changes in my neighborhood. It would ease my mind tremendously to know that, whatever <br />decision is ultimately made by the Council, changes are not made without at least some discussion <br />about the impact on those of us who live with our families in this area. <br /> <br />Si~ <br /> <br /> <br />Jill Bergquist <br />486-8661 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.