Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />Paget 18 <br /> <br />Wednesday, July 6, 1988 <br /> <br />Moeller asked how long the developers company maintains <br />ownerships of projects. Gregory answered that their company has <br />existed since 1974 and has not sold any buildings. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked who would actually transfer the parkland to the <br />city. Gregory replied that the developer will acquire and <br />transfer title to the city, and the VFW and the developer will <br />develop the park. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if the VFW doesn't follow through with the <br />improvement what happens, and whether the VFW is included in the <br />PUD. Dahlgren responded that the development agreement would <br />cover this, but that may be appropriate to condition approval on <br />the developer completing the improvements if the VFW doesn't <br />follow though. Dahlgren stated that the whole site is in a PUD <br />and must be built according to the plan approved. <br /> <br />DeBenedet indicated concern about whether there would be enough <br />parking for both the VFW and the park. Dahlgren responded that <br />the VFW is proposing to increase parking, and that this would <br />give more parking for both the uses. <br /> <br />Moeller asked if the question concerning the location of the gas <br />station has been resolved. Dahlgren pointed out that the <br />developer has reached agreement with the property owner, and that <br />the gas station will be built as shown on the plan. <br /> <br />Berry questioned whether the gas <br />station, or a self service station. <br />have no deal with a vendor, so they <br />sure. <br /> <br />station would be a service <br />Gregory responded that they <br />can't answer the question for <br /> <br />Berry pointed out that the reality is that people do not suffer <br />property value loss from these types of projects. <br /> <br />Johnson informed the commission that she was troubled by the fact <br />that council policy seems to be so far off from the desires of <br />the community, and that a lot of time is being spent by staff and <br />developers to put together projects which may not be in the best <br />interest of the neighborhoods. <br /> <br />DeBenedet stated that much has been said, but that they were <br />general comments, and not specific detail changes. DeBenedet <br />pointed out that they seemed to be faced with the decision of <br />either supporting the proposal, or a no development option. A no <br />development option is not possible unless the city purchases the <br />property. DeBenedet indicated that there seemed to a reasonable <br />