pm_811104 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville Planning Commission Minutes Wednesday, November 4, 1981 The November 4, 1981, regular meeting of the Roseville Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman George Johnson at 7:30 p.m. Members present: Johnson, Dressler, Mastel, Matson, Moeller, Rukavina, and Cushing (arrived at 7:34 p.m.). Members absent: None Others present: Council liaison Al Kehr, Howard Dahlgren of Howard Dahlgren Associates, and Dave Drown, staff. Approval of Minutes Rukavina Moved, Mastel Seconded, that the minutes of the September 2, 1981, Commission meeting be approved. Roll Call, Ayes: Dressler, Mastel, Matson, Moeller, Rukavina, and Johnson. Nays: None. Planning File - 1346 - Robert Moder division of a lot at 2130 North Dale. Presentation Mr. Dahlgren indicated the applicant's proposal was identical to that discussed and continued at the September 2, 1981 Planning Commission meeting. At that time, the applicant had requested the hearing be continued to the November meeting to allow him additional time to consider the advisability of splitting the lot, as the lot zoned R-2 could be developed as an apartment use under the transitional use section of the ordinance. Mr. Dahlgren indicated the applicant now wishes to proceed with the split as originally proposed. Mr. Dahlgren indicated that, according to City policy, a dedication of 10 feet of right-of-way would be required along Dale Street. He further indicated the staff had reviewed the matter of sewer service to the southernmost lot, and recommends a 20 feet utility easement across the east side of the northerly lot, to allow access to the public sewer at the northeast corner of that lot. Mr. McCarron, part-owner of the property, questioned whether the division of the lot at this time would allow him to develop both lots created for an apartment use. Mr. Dahlgren stated that, when split, only the northernmost lot could be developed for apartments. The southernmost lot could be developed for only duplex or single-family residential, unless it were rezoned. Mr. Dahlgren further indicated that if the City did approve the split, the lot would legally become 2 lots only upon being recorded with the County. Thus, the owner could, by delaying his recording the split, postpone a commitment on development for a time.