pm_870902 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville Planning Commission Minutes September 2, 1987 Page 3 Tom Turba, representing the neighbors, asked what additional parking was being proposed. Dunwell replied that 109 parking places were currently on the site plus 262 new parking areas were proposed. Dave Jaehne, 1171 Eldridge, asked whether this parking is ade- quate. Dunwell replied that the developer had met all require- ments. He asked Dunwell to clarify the appraisal. Dunwell stated that he believed the appraisal was based on a mixed use. Mr. Bakeman, 1178 West County Road B, asked whether there would be an access to the park on the north. Dunwell replied that a fence is required adjacent to a residential area. However, a gate could be provided for the area residents. Mrs. Bakeman asked what the new traffic patterns would do to the neighborhood. Dunwell replied that an extensive discussion of the traffic patterns had not been reviewed. However, it was his opinion the two driveways on Lexington were reasonable. Jim Lyons, 1179 Burke, asked for clarification of the City Coun- cil's position and had it essentially supported the rezoning as a "given." Pat Johnson replied that the Council's position applied only if the zoning were to occur as proposed and, thus, certainly the Council and Planning Commission did not accept the rezoning as a given. Lyons stated his concern in that he thought the rezoning was very inappropriate, and the City should work to preserve parkland. Johnson again pointed out that no decisions had been made. She stated that citizens have the opportunity to submit applications for various ~rap0sals and that they must be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council. Helen Gross, 1036 West Burke, discussed her concern relating to the traffic and increase in commercial development in the area. Don Hamilton, 1154 Eldridge, wanted to know why the property wasn't advertised, and were there requirements for advertising. Dr. Worner proceeded to discuss the School's major problems with excess buildings. Again he stated that the School Board did not advertise the sale of the building. Bill Everhart, 1110 Eldridge, asked whether the proposed develop- ment represented the type of commercial strip development that concerned the City. Dahlgren replied that this was an example of such a concern. Hamilton asked why the school simply couldn't sell half the property to the north, and save the rest for the park. Bierscheid emphasized that the City does want to continue to use the park property, it simply cannot pay the price being requested.