My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_880706
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_880706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:55 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:37:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
7/6/1988
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.
/
28
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:#: <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />Wednesday, July 6, 1988 <br /> <br />Johnson pointed out that the proposed lots would be in character <br />with the area. <br /> <br />Sylvester Fiefarek, 195 Larpenteur Avenue, testified that he was <br />the previous owner and he is contract for deed holder of the <br />property in questions. Fiefarek stated he was told by a <br />potential buyer that the lot couldn't be split. <br /> <br />Valento commented that under the terms of his contract, that if <br />the lot was split within three years of his purchase that the <br />previous owner would have to be paid additional money. Valento <br />stated that it has, however, been five years since the purchase. <br /> <br />Fiefarek testified that the <br />couldn't be split so that <br />Fiefarek indicated that <br />completed, however. <br /> <br />city told the previous buyer that it <br />potential sale did not go forward. <br />no formal city process had been <br /> <br />Roseann Reule, 343 W. Burke, stated that she had been told that <br />there was a five year, not a three year provision in the contract <br />for deed. Johnson indicated that was a private matter which <br />does not concern the action being requested of the Planning <br />Commission. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Stokes inquired about responsibility for drainage changes and <br />its effect on the existing wetland. Dahlgren replied that the <br />area is low and that the natural drainage goes to the area on the <br />rear of this lot. A new house would be constructed on the high <br />ground and drain to it, while the rear would continue to function <br />as a wetland and not be adversely impacted. <br /> <br />Berry moved, DeBenedet seconded, to recommend approval of the lot <br />division at 324 West County Road C with the condition that the <br />existing garage be removed prior to acceptance of the final <br />division of the land. <br /> <br />Roll Call: <br /> <br />Ayes: <br /> <br />Maschka, Moeller, <br />Stokes, Johnson <br /> <br />Berry, DeBenedet, <br /> <br />Nays: <br /> <br />None <br /> <br />Planninq File 1867 <br /> <br />Lexington Avenue Limited Partnership/George Reiling request for <br />comprehensive plan amendment for medium density residential to <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.