Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Pagett <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />Wednesday, June 1, 1988 <br /> <br />careful to follow through on them. Berry pointed out that people <br />in the neighborhood should call the Engineering Department if <br />there are any problems. <br /> <br />Ettesvold asked <br />Johnson responded <br />would need to be <br />with City policy. <br /> <br />for clarification on the sidewalk condition. <br />that a sidewalk would be required or funds <br />escrowed for a future sidewalk in accordance <br /> <br />Planninq File 1857 <br /> <br />Gerald Kaufhold request for preliminary plat at the former <br />Lexington School site at 1130 West County B. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Dahlgren summarized the location and the history of the site. <br />Dahlgren pointed out two major problems with the proposal. <br />Approval of the preliminary plat as proposed would eliminate the <br />possibility of having an appropriately placed and properly scaled <br />park at this location. Because of the uncertainty of the long <br />term use of the existing school, it appears to be unwise to <br />commit a portion of the site for single family residential <br />purposes without there being a proposed reasonable and approvable <br />solution for the remainder of the site. Dahlgren testified that <br />it would be premature to amend the comprehensive plan and approve <br />a preliminary plat without a long term solution for the total <br />property. <br /> <br />Keel discussed the proposed utilities, and indicated that a <br />$130,000 escrow would be required and that the sanitary sewer <br />location along the back property lines is not the best solution. <br />A sanitary sewer line would be better located in the right-of-way <br />of Eldridge Avenue as it would be more accessible. <br /> <br />Dunwell pointed out that the current plan addresses all the <br />concerns expressed by the Council in their previous denial. <br />There would be no driveways onto Lexington Avenue. The proposed <br />use is consistent with R-1 zoning and the city's comprehensive <br />plan, the proposal is consistent with the surrounding <br />neighborhood, adequate utilities are being provided, the <br />proposal exceeds the 10% park dedication requirement and the city <br />could purchase lots for additional park land if they so desired. <br /> <br />Kaufhold questioned the unreasonableness of the proposed park. <br />Dahlgren responded that the park should be where the proposed <br />single family lots area. Kaufhold replied that the city can <br />purchase those lots if they so desire for park purposes. <br />Kaufhold testified that they now have a three year lease with <br />