My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_840201
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1984
>
pm_840201
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:32 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/1/1984
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Planning Commission Minutes <br />February 1, 1984 <br />-5- <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Mr. Rukavina asked for a motion so discussion could occur on the question. <br /> <br />Mrs. Dressler indicated that for purposes of discussion she would make the <br />following motion: <br /> <br />Dressler Moved, and Moeller Seconded, that no changes be made in the <br />existing ordinance as relating to housing alternatives in the R-I <br />zoning district. <br /> <br />Mr. Rukavina indicated he would oppose the motion. He felt the procedure for <br />rezoning from R-I to R-2 is cumbersome. He stated there is a need for more <br />accessory housing in Roseville. He commented the minor variance process has <br />worked well, and could be adapted to this new use, and provide a smoother <br />process. The City does not relinquish the final decision-making authority. <br />It is a way to provide low-cost housing and he felt the change was needed. <br /> <br />Mrs. Berry commented the average age of Roseville residents was increasing, <br />and that a substantial number of residents were over 55 years old. She <br />stated Mr. Rukavina's comments were very persuasive, and perhaps the <br />minor variance procedure should be explored further. <br /> <br />Mrs. Dressler commented she didn't feel a IOO' requirement for obtaining <br />property owner signatures was sufficient. She felt the impact of another <br />family in a house in the neighborhood could be great, and that the distance <br />requiring signatures should be more. <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren commented the IOO' mentioned was just a suggestion, and that <br />another distance could be used. <br /> <br />Mr. Moeller indicated he hasn't been committed to one option or the other. <br />He felt the adaptation of the minor variance would streamline the process. <br />He indicated there probably are few lots in the city that would be eligible <br />to add another unit. <br /> <br />Mrs. Dressler and Mr. Moeller withdrew the motion. <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />Mrs. Johnson Moved, and Mrs. Dressler Seconded, that the staff be instructed <br />to prepare a suggested ordinance adapting the minor variance procedure to the <br />accessory housing question for presentation at the March 7th Commission meeting. <br />Roll Call, Ayes: Dressler, Johnson, Moeller, Wiski, Berry, and Rukavina. Nays: <br />None. <br /> <br />ADJOURNMENT <br /> <br />Mrs. Dressler Moved, and Mrs. Johnson Seconded, that the meeting be adjourned at <br />9:25 p..m. Roll Call, Ayes: Dressler, Johnson, Moeller, Wiski, Berry, and Rukavina. <br />Nays: None. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.