pm_700107 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-3- Discussion I There was no one from the audience that wished to be heard upon this particular matter. Demos had a question as to what property had been sold and what is the reason for the division at this time. Mrs. Matkaiti indicated that she was selling the property which now houses a grocery and a tavern and that she would retain the property which has the Standard Oi 1 Service Station and would lease this property to the Standard Oi 1 Company. There was a question as to the parking situation after this division of the lot would take place. There was a question as to the length of the lease on the Standard Oil Station. Mrs. ~fatkaiti indicated that it was a IO/lO five year lease and that the present station was almost at the end of the first ten years. Recommendation Eagles Moved, Pope Seconded, that we recommend that the request of A. J. Matkaiti for a division of a lot a 2164 North Dale Street be approved. Roll Call, Ayes: Edlund, Pope, Kellett, Eagles, Demos, Johnson. Nays: None. Planning File 561-69 - Bonestroo, Rosene and Associates, request for rezoning from R-I to I-I at 2335 Fulham Street. Presentation Mr. Mike Worth, Attorney representing the Bonestroo, Rosene and Associates, made the pre- sentation for this proposal. He indicated that the engineering consultant firm of Bonestroo Rosene and Associates would like to construct an office building on this particular site. He indicated that there present facilities are now on Eustis Street in St. Paul and that they have outgrown these facilities and would like to move to this site in Roseville. He stated that the company is requesting an 1-1 zone because this was indicated on the recent "70l Planning Guide" adopted by the Planning Commission and the Village Council. ~fr. Worth stated that the company presently employs approximately 35 people and they anticipate this figure to grow. Mr. Worth indicated there was a ponding easement over the entire area which was now owned by the Village of Roseville. He indicated that at one time this was a State Highway Department easement and that it had been turned back to the Village of Roseville. Mr. Worth indicated that he is requesting a rezoning of the entire area and that in order to accomplish this the Village of Roseville would have to reduce the entire easement that exists over this land at the present. Discussion There was a great deal of discuss ion over this particular easement (ponding) that now exists on this property. Both fl.fr. Goldberg and Mr. Dahlgren indicated that they had consulted with the Village Attorney of Roseville and that it was true that the Village of Roseville owns a ponding easement over the entire tract. It was further indicated once this easement was turned over to the Village of Roseville there had been attempts on the part of the Village of Roseville to negotiate reducing this easement to the present owner of the property, Mr. Frank Witham, who presently has property on Fulham Street. HO\iever, the negotiations for the re- duction of this easement by the Village of Roseville were unsuccessful and the matter was left at this point. Edlund had a question as to the architects drawings of the building, and Mr. Bonestroo pre- sented these drawings to the Planning Commission Hembers. ~fr. Frank Witham, owner of the property on Fulham Street, indicated there was a great deal of confusion over who had control over this easement, whether it was the State Highway Depart- ment or the Village of Roseville. He stated he was contacted by Mr. George Membrez to neg- otiate this easement, but he was unaware of just who had ~ontrol over the easement, the State Highway Department or the Village of Roseville.