Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Meeting of the Roseville Planning Commission <br />Regular Meeting, February 3D 1965 ~ 7~30 P.M. <br /> <br />Members present: Nelson, SOike, Anderson, Lund, Sigford, Linebarger and Membrez. <br />Councilman Grauel, Public Works Director Odland and Planning Consultant Dahlgren <br />were also present. <br /> <br />Sigford movedD Anderson seconded, that minutes of the regular meeting of January 6, <br />1965, be approved as submitted. Carried by a unanimous vote. <br /> <br />File 65-247 - Damsgard Addition Preliminary Plat. This matter had been laid over <br />at the January meeting. Nelson movedD Soike seconded, that it be laid over again <br />to the March regular meeting because the applicant did not appear to discuss his <br />plat. Motion carried by a unanimous vote. <br /> <br />File 64-246 - Sign variance for Paul Bunyan Motelp 2915 North Snelling Avenue. <br />John Daubney, attorney representing the petitioner, requested the approval of a <br />variance way in excess of the maximum allowed in the sign ordinance. The total <br />square arc is 326 feet not including the baseo An opinion was expressed that the <br />base ought to be figured as part of the sign and in doing so the total square area would <br />be approximately 486 square feet. A letter from Dr. A. Jo Ouellette, owner of the <br />property to the south was read. It indicated that the doctor was not in opposition of <br />the proposed sign. It was figured that the sign would be about 600 feet south of Lydia <br />and that Mr. Johnsonp the owner, owned another 150 feet south of the 600 feet. It was <br />claimed the sign will have no glare, the elevation will be approximately 34 feet and <br />the petitioner also declared that the existing signs will be removed but would not <br />commi t himself as to when. The national chain of "Congress Motels" is purchasing the <br />Paul Bunyan Motel interest. After due consideration of this variance, Nelson moved, <br />Sigford seconded, that the sign is way in excess of the maximum size allowed in the <br />sign ordinanceD therefore, we recommend that the request be denied, Carried by a <br />unanimous vote. <br /> <br />File 65~249 ~ Division of lot = Northrop Dawson~ 1477 W. County Road B~2. The proposal <br />to subdivide one existing lot facing both Pascal and Simpson was reviewed by the <br />commission. Mrs. Dawsons the owner, stated that the taxes are now up to $1600~ as <br />against $1200D and could no longer keep this large lot as one~ it was not economically <br />sound any longer. There was a question as to whether or not two smaller lots would <br />conform to the area. It was stated that the area consisted of very nice homes" <br />Linebarger finally moved. Anderson secondedv that we recommend the splitting of this <br />lot as shown on the drawing of Midwest Planning with the understanding. however, that <br />all setbacks on both lots conform with the ordinance 0 Roll CallD Ayes (6) = Nays (l)~ <br />Chairman Nelson voting nay. <br /> <br />File 65-248 = Lametti rezoningp Cleveland and County Road C-2 and Lydia and Prior, <br />Mr. Belden Loftsgaarden representing the ownerD Schultz estateD presented a proposal <br />to develop approximately 32 acres of land at the northeast corner of County Road C=2 <br />and Cleveland Avenue. The property fronting Cleveland Avenue was requested to be <br />zoned 1=1, the balance in the rear to be zoned R=3o In the proposal the ponding area <br />at the immediate northeast corner was to be eliminated and in order to drain the sur= <br />face waterD the owners agreed to install a 24 inch pipe along County Road C=2 and along <br />Cleveland Avenue to drain the surface water in a northerly direction connecting with <br />Ramsey County ditch #5. This proposal was submitted as a result of a former engineerD <br />Mr. Soutter, stating that it was agreeable to the Village to drain this water in that <br />mannerD thus eliminating the ponding area. Recently the Village Council ordered the <br />Banister Engineering Company to make an investigation of the surface drainage in this <br />area. The report was completed and submitted to the Planning Commission. It stated <br />that in order to make definite recommendations a land use survey would have to be made <br />