pm_851204 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Minutes December 4, 1985 Page 6 Benshoot pointed out that if the three stripe alternative was used with respect to the roadway, a seven foot path would be available for walking purposes. Thompson, 3037 Cleveland, asked how Wier would get the property without the proper approval. Wier pointed out again that negotiations are still occurring, and offers have been increased. Mrs. Boehlke stated that she was concerned about traffic and what would happen to the parking in front of the house. Benshoot pointed out that parking would have to be eliminated in the front part of the house. ~hompson stated that the county should keep the two driving lines, and he resents any modification of the proposed striping in the area. Steinbring again stated he would like to know who would handle the construction costs of driveway modifications on the east, once the parking was eliminated. Waldron replied that was a private concern, and would have to be dealt with in that way. Waldron then proceeded to explain the City's condemnation policy, which essentially states that the developers must work closely with the neighborhood residents, and once an overwhelming majority supports the project and agreements have been reached, condemnation becomes a reality. Unnamed, at 220 Brenner, stated that he built a house in the area, and was told that it would remain single family, and now he is very worried about property values and is opposed to the project. Wiski asked for a show of hands of who had attended the neighborhood meetings. The show of hands included almost everybody at the meeting. Boehlke stated they would liked to have attended the first meeting, although they were pleased to have been invited to the second. Wier stated that may have been an oversight, and apologized. Fisher pointed out that Woodbridge used the official Ramsey County list to contact the owners. Wier also addressed the property value concern, and stated that in light of the heavy industrial use there today, it's very likely that property values would increase as a result of his development. Fisher pointed out that Woodbridge had conducted an analysis of property values next to office developments in Roseville, and also compared said developments to a control group. In both instances, an increase occurred in the range of ten to twelve percent, and there were no differences between single family homes in single family areas, versus single family homes in office areas.