Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COHMISSION <br /> <br />Page # 15 <br /> <br />Wednesday, January 6, 1988 <br />a decision can be made with respect to this project. <br /> <br />Maschka inquired whether or not the city should require that <br />elevation drawings be provided, and suggested that this be added <br />to the motion. DeBenedet accepted the amendment. DeBenedet <br />questioned what assurance does the city have that the development <br />will occur as shown on the drawings. Dahlgren responded that the <br />owner has a right to develop the property, and the city has to <br />have faith in the developer to complete the project as proposed. <br />The owner could build something different. The city could change <br />its ordinance to require compliance. <br /> <br />Maschka indicated that in light of this, that elevation drawings <br />would not be necessary. DeBenedet agreed. <br /> <br />Cushman indicated a number of concerns over the site, concerning <br />traffic, truck traffic, and the need to protect residential in <br />the area, and the availability of better sites, and the timing <br />concerns. She indicated that more traffic information is needed, <br />as well as a commitment from the post office. <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />Moeller, DeBenedet, Berry, Goedeke, <br />Maschka, Stokes <br />None <br /> <br />Roll Call, <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Planning File 1816 <br /> <br />Norm Vinnes request for division of existing platted lot at 28ll <br />N. Oxford. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren outlined the location and general dimensions of the lot <br />as well as the lots in the surrounding area. The site is in a 5 <br />ft. set back area, and there is an existing single family <br />dwelling on the lot. The proposed division is to provide a 67 <br />ft. wide lot on the south, which would include the existing <br />house, and the new 65 foot lot would be created on the North. A <br />new house would be constructed on the new lot, which would meet <br />the 10 ft. side yard requirement for new lots. The existing <br />house would become a non-conforming structure because it would <br />not meet the 10 ft. requirement. City ordinances allows lots to <br />be platted with widths less than 85 ft. if they are in character <br />with the surrounding area. The proposed lots would be smaller <br />than any lots in the surrounding area, but the existing large lot <br />is even more out of character. The proposed lot split does not <br />require platting. <br /> <br />Vinnes indicated that only one tree would have to be moved for <br />this project. He indicated that he wished to build a house for <br />