My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Correspondence 1988 Jopke
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
1983-1993 Correspondance and Office Hours Records
>
Correspondence 1988 Jopke
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2016 4:12:25 PM
Creation date
2/9/2016 1:00:13 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
266
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
� 3. <br />4. <br />The traffic volumes will affect the safety of children <br />wa?.king to Central Park Elementary School. <br />The project was subject to extensive neigh�orhood opposition. <br />5. The issue of the City purchase of tYie school and ten acres <br />for a Recr�ation Center should be separated completely fram <br />the housing project. <br />6. <br />7. <br />The proposed density of development is inconsistent with the <br />sur�ounding neighborhood. <br />That the rezoning is inconsistent with the com�rehensive <br />plan. <br />The Planning Commission on a unanimous vote recommended denial of <br />the special use permit for a planned unit development and the <br />preliminary plat based on the following: <br />� <br />The proposal does not clearly address or resolve water <br />pressure and fire protection problems. <br />The traffic generated from the project will adversely affect <br />traffic conditions on adjacent roads. <br />The traffic v�lumes will affect the safety of children <br />walking io Central Park Elementary School. <br />The project was subject to extensive neighborhood opposition. <br />5. The issue of the City purchase of the school and ten ac�es <br />�or � Recrea�tion Center should be s�parated completely from <br />the �ousing project. <br />6. <br />7. <br />:. <br />The proposed density of development is inconsistent with the <br />surr�unding neighborhood, <br />That�the rezoning is inconsistent with the comprehensive <br />�lan. <br />There is a lack of a completed enviranmental a�sessment <br />worksh�et for the project. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.