Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PLANNING REPORT: <br /> <br />DATE: <br /> <br />June 8, 1994 <br /> <br />CASE NUMBER: <br /> <br />2471 <br /> <br />APPLICANT: <br /> <br />AI Kehr/Parkridge Development <br /> <br />LOCATION: <br /> <br />674,656,646 W. County Road C <br /> <br />ACTION REQUESTED: <br /> <br />PUD Concept Development Plan approval, <br />Rezoning from R-1 to Planned Unit Development <br />and Preliminary Plat approval <br /> <br />I. BACKGROUND <br /> <br />As the members of the Commission are well aware, both the City Council and <br />the Planning Commission have been considering a proposed amendment to <br />the RoseviUe Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan from low density <br />residential to medium density residential for the property generally south of <br />County Road C and west of Dale Street. Parkridge Development has also <br />applied for rezoning from R-l to Planned Unit Development for a portion of <br />this property. On May 11, 1994, the Planning Commission continued <br />consideration of the application for rezoning until June 8, 1994. In part, it <br />was the Commission's feelings that prior to considering a rezoning request, <br />the City should detennine how the land under consideration will be <br />designated in the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. At their regular <br />meeting of May 23, 1994, the Roseville City Council considered a <br />comprehensive plan amendment from LR to MR for the Kehr, Borgstrom, <br />Britz, Booth and Salverda properties, generally located south of County Road <br />C and west of Dale Street. On a 4-1 vote, the City Council chose not to <br />amend the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan in this area of the City, but <br />rather have it remain guided for low density residential development. The <br />Roseville Comprehensive Plan defines low density as 4 units per acre or less. <br /> <br />On May 11, 1994, the Planning Commission, in continuing the application for <br />rezoning until June 8, 1994, also stated that the project infonnation submitted <br />to date, was not adequate for consideration. As of this writing, no new <br /> <br />-f- <br />