My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_640603
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
196x
>
1964
>
pm_640603
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:31:31 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 6:30:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
6/3/1964
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
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 />-3- <br /> <br />3. The northeast corner 140' x 150' from R-l to B-3 subject to the <br />following conditions: <br /> <br />a) The proposed road between the shopping center and the subject <br />property must be graded according to Village specifications and the <br />cost to be paid by the benefited property owners. The dedication <br />of this 60 feet to be obtained from the owner. <br /> <br />b) Dedicate an additional 30 feet for Judith Avenue <br />c) Dedicate an additional 10 feet for Hamline Avenue <br />d) Drainage of surface water to be solved before any development can <br /> be started <br /> <br />Carried unanimously <br /> <br />File 64=197 Rezoning and Special use permit from Al Schiavino, 543 South <br />OWasso Boulevard from R-l to R-3. Mr. Daubney representing the owner sub- <br />mitted a plan showing 4 apartment buildings, the land area being approximately <br />4= 1/2 acres. The question here is one of whether or not apartments could be <br />introduced along this part of Lake Owasso where the property is located. It <br />could have an adverse effect upon the single family residences along the lake <br />area. It was\pointed out that a similar proposal (somewhat larger) was denied <br />some few years ago. The granting of this request could establish a precedent <br />and the fact that some of the contiguous land owners have signed in favor of <br />the rezoning, the proposed zoning request would likely ultimately be enlarged to <br />include contiguous areas as well. Sigford moved, Motl seconded we recommend <br />that the rezoning request be denied. Carried unanimously except chairman Nelson <br />who abstained from voting because of a possible conflict of interest. <br /> <br />File 64-198 Division of lot from E. V. Schafer, County Road B and Fernwood. <br />There being no one present to speak for this request, Anderson moved~ Nelson <br />seconded to lay the matter over to the next regular meeting. Carried unanimously. <br /> <br />File 64-199 - Division of lot from Ralph SagerD l80S Fernwood. Mr. Walter Lucke <br />and Mr. Sager pleaded hardship, assessments and taxes are high and too big a <br />load for Mr. Sager to carry. The new proposed lot would only be 75' x lOlo <br />or 7,575 square feet which is way short of the minimum requirements. Sigford <br />moved, Lund seconded, to recommend the denial of this request. Carried <br />unanimously. <br /> <br />File 64-201 - Division of lot from Alvin Leier, 1000 Wo Roselawn Avenueo The <br />proposal is to create a new 80 foot lot from the corner of Aglen and Roselawn. <br />It was suggested that the lot be increased to 85 feet. The owner agreed, there- <br />fore, Motl moved, Sigford seconded, to recommend that the request be granted to <br />make the new proposed lot 85 feet instead of 80 feet in width. Carried <br />unanimous ly 0 <br /> <br />File 64-202 - Division of lot from Elizabeth Larson, 2015 W. Eldridge. Mrs. Larson's <br />son stated that he could acquire an additional tract Soox 57' to the rear of the <br />westerly lot to bring the total square feet to ll, 520 which is more than required <br />for an interior lot, however, by splitting the lot, the remaining portion on the <br />northwest corner of Eldridge and Wilder would be way short of the minimum for a <br />corner lot. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.