pm_881005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION page# 9 Wednesday, October 5, 1988 pointed out that this was a marketing question and not a land use question. Kieger asked what variances are actually necessary and pointed out that the setbacks seemed substandard. Dahlgren replied that the PUD allows development to occur as is shown on a approved plan and pointed out that normally there would be 10 ft. setbacks required and that there appeared to be 10 ft. setbacks provided. Kieger commented that a couple of garages only had 5 ft. setbacks and there was a question of the setback from the storm sewer easement. Dahlgren stated that the 5 ft. setback from the garages was correct in that the dwelling locations would have to be adjusted to be out of the 30 ft. easement. DeBenedet stated that the setbacks of the buildings were shown on the plan and that if the plan were approved, those would be the setback requirements. Dahlgren stated that the setbacks shown on the drawing would apply. Johnson stated that the need for clear accurate information and drawing for the City Council meeting were critical. Dahlgren said that the Commission could stipulate that 10 ft. setbacks be provided. Adams asked why it was necessary to rush this proposal to the Council. He stated that it is more important to get the actual facts and information in a clear manner before the Planning commission acted on this matter. Johnson testified that the applicant has a need to settle the estate and that it might be appropriate to go ahead if clear information can be provided for City Council consideration. Adams informed the Commission that this is the first time the neighborhood has officially had an opportunity to speak on this matter and that it is important to have accurate information. Richardson asked if the new taxes from this development would cover the additional cost to the City. Johnson pointed out that it would be the same as other development. Dahlgren stated that would be the same or better because the City doesn't have to develop and maintain the road. Adams asked what plans there were for fire hydrants in the development. Mattke pointed out that there would be a hydrant at the end of the cul-de-sac. Keel reviewed the drawings and verified the location of the hydrant and the lift station.