Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City of Roseville, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes <br />May 11, 1994 4 <br /> <br />properties east of Xehr to Dale street, from county Road C <br />on the North to Central Park on the south, to Þe <br />redesignated from low density to medium density on the <br />Comprehensive Plan Hap; and the Legion property to be <br />redesignated from institutional uses to low density <br />residential; and recommended that no road cross the Legion <br />property to connect medium density development with the <br />existing single-family development to the west... <br /> <br />On a roll call, the motion carried 5 to 2. <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Sandstrom, Rengel, Wietecki, Thomas and Wall <br /> <br />Nayes: <br /> <br />Harms and Roberts <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Member Thomas moved, seconded by Member Rengel, to approve <br />the minutes of April 13, 1994, as amended. The motion <br />carried 6-0 with Member Wietecki abstaining. <br /> <br />6. PUBLIC HEARINGS. <br /> <br /><a) Planning File 2471. <br /> <br />Parkridge Development Corporation's has requested a Planned <br />Unit Development concept development plan approval, <br />subdivision and rezoning from Rl to Planned unit Development <br />at 674, 656, and 646 West county Road C. Chairman Keith <br />Wietecki opened the public hearing and stated that the <br />Planned unit Development project information is not adequate <br />to be heard at this time. Member Thomas recommended the <br />public hearing be continued to the June 8, 1994, meeting. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Member Thomas moved, seconded by Member Rengel, to continue <br />project 2471, the Parkridge Development Corporation concept <br />development plan, PUD, subdivision and rezoning request, to <br />the June 8, 1994, Planning Commission Meeting. The motion <br />carried unanimously. <br /> <br />A general discussion ensued regarding the planning process. <br />chairman wietecki stated that the Kehr project was not <br />adequate to discuss, because enough information was not <br />available for the Planning Commission to review. He noted <br />that the city Council may not approve the amendment to the <br />Comprehensive Plan designating the Kehr site for medium <br />density development and, therefore, reviewing the PUD would <br />be moot. Member wall stated that he was concerned that the <br />