Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Pagett <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />Wednesday, May 18, 1988 <br /> <br />would provide a sufficient buffer to the mUlti-family. <br /> <br />DeBenedet inquired if County ditch 4 was a dedicated right-of-way <br />or on an easement, and whether it could be utilized for a <br />roadway. Dahlgren said it was with an easement and it would be <br />expensive to construct a roadway because the ditch would have to <br />be replaced with pipe. <br /> <br />Maschka commented that in the long term it would be right to <br />increase distance from the roadway to the single family <br />neighborhood to the north to reduce the noise impact that would <br />be present. A more southerly roadway would provide a better <br />dividing line between uses and more direct access to business <br />uses. <br /> <br />DeBenedet inquired as to how much flexibility there was in the <br />implementation of the plan specifically concerning the location <br />of the roadway and whether businesses would be forced to move. <br />Dahlgren informed the commission that the intent was not to force <br />anybody to move, but to set the framework to guide change in the <br />future as property owners wish to redevelop their properties. <br />Change is and will continue to happen and the city is seeing much <br />more interest in the city by major developers. Dahlgren <br />commented that there is flexibility in the exact alignment of the <br />roadway, but we want to make sure that we settle on the best <br />location. Dahlgren told the commission that in his opinion, the <br />proposed distance between the roadway and the single family <br />neighborhood to the north was great and that there would be no <br />noise impact. <br /> <br />Johnson pointed out that the plan would not lower anyone's <br />property value and that property owners should in fact profit <br />from this plan. <br /> <br />DeBenedet summarized that the effect of the amendment would be to <br />allow the city to point interested developers to potential sites <br />and to be able to discourage improper development. Dahlgren <br />indicated that the plan is necessary to guide development and <br />that it is important to establish the exact location of the <br />roadway to guide future development. Maschka commented that the <br />road will have impact on the single family neighborhood. <br /> <br />Berry stated that in her area, County Road C has no traffic noise <br />impact. Berry pointed out that while she has not been in support <br />of mUlti-family next to Langton Lake, it is her experience that <br />apartment users have been very responsible users of Central Park. <br />Berry pointed out that it is not the policy of the city to <br />acquire property for multi-family use and that the ci ty only <br />reacts to proposals. Berry stated that she was concerned that <br />