pm_701007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-3- parking. Mr. Herman stated that the Ramsey County Highway Department has gathered statistics which show the average daily traffic (AUT) for McCarrons Blvd. to be 425 vehicles in this area. Therefore, he was of the opinion that the apartment develop- ment would not create any particular traffic hazzard. Discussion Mrs. Demos stated that a previous cornmittment had been made to the residents of the area, by the Planning Commission, that no rezoning from R-1 would occur between the present Roberts Apartment Project and the south shore of Lake McCarrons. Mrs. Demos felt it was a bona fide cornmi ttment and should be honored. Mr. Arnold Albrecht, 362 McCarrons, pre- sented to the Commission a petition signed by 229 residents from the area of the proposed development. The petition requests the Planning Commission and Village Council to retain the present R-l zoning, since any modification in zoning, would change the character of the neighborhood and have a determental social and economical effect on existing single family dwellings in the area. Mr. Albrecht stated that the increased traffic would create not only a safety hazard for vehicles but also for the children in the neighborhood. He also felt that with the higher density of population, pollution of Lake McCarrons would become a more acute problem. Mr. Bob Schroeder, 257 South McCarrons Blvd., lives directly north of the proposed project, stated that residents in the area had been assured that the property north of the Roberts development would not be rezoned, and that he, therefore, strenuously objects to the proposed development. Mrs. Roger Holmes was concerned about the possible pollution of the lake and asked that the Commission consider that factor in their deliberations. Mr. Berry questioned the marketability of apartments since there currently are many vacancies throughout the area. Mr. Taylor noted that as of last year 34% of all apartment units in Roseville were located in Precinct 1, and that this development would only serve to increase that imbalance. Mrs. Leo He letto spoke in favor of the rezoning and indicated that the bui Iding appeared to be very attractive and would be an asset to the community. Mrs. Sands, lives adjacent to the proposed rezoning, and could see no reason for not recommending approval. Mr. Membrez reiterated the fact that a committment had been made to the residents and that the Commission should honor that committment. Mr. Membrez also indicated his concern about the proposed placement of Marion Street and that a curve at the bottom of a 10% grade could certainly create a safety hazard in the winter. Mr. Edlund stated that the pollution of the lake was a valid point, but that he felt as many people as possible should enjoy the amenities provided by the area and that the apartment would provide a healthy mix of land uses around the lake. Mr. Pope indicated that at the time the committment regarding no further rezoning was made, it was emphasi~ed that the committment was in no way binding on future Planning Commissions. Mr. Pope doubted that the property would ever be developed as single family residential and felt that perhaps it was better to accept a good plan now than be faced with a less desir- able plan at a later date. Mr. Johnson sympathized with the residents point of view and yet could see the trend to multiple unit dwellings. Recommendation Mr. Eagles moved and Mr. Edlund seconded, that the request for rezoning from R-l to R-3A and special use permit at 210 South McCarrons Blvd. be laid over until the next Planning Commission meeting. At that time the architects shall provide the Planning Commission with a detailed contour map, exterior construction materials and other elements as required by the planned unit development. Roll Call, Ayes: Johnson, Demos, Pope, Edlund, Eagles and Membrez. Nays: Kellett.