My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_880406
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_880406
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:53 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
4/6/1988
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.
/
16
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 />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Page#10 <br /> <br />Wednesday, April 6, 1988 <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br />Nays: <br /> <br />DeBenedet, Berry, Stokes and Johnson <br />Goedeke, Maschka, and Moeller <br /> <br />Planninq File 1830 <br /> <br />Gerald Kaufhold request for a preliminary plat at 1130 County <br />Road B. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren outlined the location and history of the site. Dahlgren <br />pointed out that the proposed 12 lot plat is composed of 10 <br />single family residential lots, a park lot, and a lot with the <br />existing school which is being leased by the 916 program. <br />Dahlgren informed the commission that there were serious problems <br />with the plat including that there would be more single family <br />residential uses adjacent to commercial uses, the proposal is not <br />a total solution to the site and contains a bad park design. The <br />proposed park represents poor park planning because it is <br />landlocked, too small to meet neighborhood needs, will constitute <br />a safety hazard because of the lack of visibility, will be <br />expensive to maintain, will adversely affect the adjacent <br />residential lots, and it would be incompatible with the purpose <br />and function of the property originally planned in the park <br />system plan. Dahlgren concluded that other, better, options are <br />available and that everybody loses with the alternative proposed. <br /> <br />Johnson read a letter from Bob Bierscheid, Parks and Recreation <br />Director, which stated that the Park and Recreation Board opposed <br />the proposed park plan because it is insufficient, <br />unmaintainable, provides limited community access and is not in <br />the best interest of the city. <br /> <br />Kaufhold testified that this was his only alternative, the <br />proposal is consistent with the zoning and plans of the city and <br />within his right to build. Kaufhold stated that if this plan was <br />approved, he would donate $15,000 to relocate the lights for the <br />hockey rink. Kaufhold added that purchasers of the single family <br />lots would be required to sign a statement indicating that they <br />were aware of his intent to develop the school as commercial in <br />the future. <br /> <br />Kaufhold called attention to the fact that he was finalizing a 2 <br />year lease with 916 which could be renewed annually, and to the <br />fact that the city could purchase additional lots to expand the <br />park. <br /> <br />Tom Dunwell, project architect, outlined the proposal, that the <br />required 10% dedication would be provided, that the proposal <br />meets the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance requirements, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.