pm_800702 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville Planning Commission Minutes Wednesday, July 2, 1980 The July 2, 1980, regular meeting of the Roseville Planning Commission was called to order by Acting Chairman G. Johnson at 7:30 P.M. Members Present: Members Absent: Staff present: Dressler, Mastel, Cushing, Rukavina, Simons and G. Johnson. V. Johnson Council liaison Al Kehr, Howard Dahlgren, Bob Ryan and Steve North Approval of Minutes Mr. Rukavina moved and Mrs. Dressler seconded, that the minutes of the regular meeting of June 4, 1980, be approved. Roll Call, Ayes: Dressler, Cushing, Rukavina and G. Johnson. Nays: None. Abstention: Mastel and Simons because they were absent from the meeting. Planning File 1264 - Proposed ordinance defining certain permitted and special uses in the R-l zoning district and adding criteria for issuance of special use permits in all zoning districts Mr. North indicated that the City has been discussing the proposed ordinance with School District 623. He recommended that consideration of the ordinance be continued because of concerns which have been raised by the School District and the need for additional inform- ation and legal opinion from the City Attorney. Recommendation Mr. Rukavina moved and Mrs. Dressler seconded, that the proposed ordinance defining certain permitted and special uses in the R-l zoning district and adding criteria for issuance of special use permits in all zoning districts be continued until the August 6, Planning Commission meeting. Roll Call, Ayes: Dressler, Mastel, Cushing, Rukavina, Simons and G. Johnson. Nays: None. Planning File 1265 - Proposed ordinance providing for park dedication at time of subdivision of property Mr. Dahlgren indicated that in the late 1950.s the Minnesota Legislature adopted legislation allowing communities to require the dedication of park land as part of the platting process. He stated that the purpose of the legislation was to permit communities to provide adequate park facilities without placing an excessive financial burden on the community to purchase the land. The legislature later amended the law so as to allow for the payment of cash in lieu of land to cover those instances where the city did not desire park within a particular area of land to be subdivided. Mr. Dahlgren commented that Roseville has never adopted a park dedication ordinance. Instead, the city passed a $650,000 bond issue in the early 1960's and purchased the park system substantially as it is today. He indicated that the city is now faced with the prospect of a neighborhood being developed without available park site to serve it. This has occurred because the park originally purchased to serve the area, now held by the school board for future high school site, was sold to the school district. There is now the possibility that the school district will dispose of the land for development purposes. Mr. Mastel asked if the city wasn't a little late in the game to be requiring park dedications. He stated that the city is almost fully developed and it seems unfair that developers must now dedicate property or pay the cash when all those in the past have not. Mr. Simons indicated that he shared Mr. Mastel's concerns.