My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_881012
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1988
>
pm_881012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:32:58 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:38:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
10/12/1988
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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 />Pagel 5 <br /> <br />Wednesday, October 12, 1988 <br /> <br />Ken Sayler, 2366 Top Hill Circle, asked if a bond issue vote will <br />be required. Johnson answered, no. <br /> <br />Sayler inquired if the City is responsible for maintaining a <br />minimum level of water pressure. Keel stated that 35 lbs per sq. <br />inch was the minimum level and that some areas are approaching <br />that minimum. Keel pointed out that the project would not effect <br />this pressure and that a minimum of 35 lbs. per sq. inch would <br />be maintained. <br /> <br />John Lenard, 485 Lovell Avenue, asked what the cost to the tax <br />payers would be of keeping 10 acres of land off the tax roles. <br />Waldron responded that under the current single family zoning, 40 <br />new homes could be developed which would generate approximately <br />90,000 dollars per year in taxes. <br /> <br />Lenard stated that this should be considered as an additional <br />cost of the rec center. <br /> <br />Paul Walker, 305 W. County Road B2 stated that he was not opposed <br />to change if it is needed but questioned the need for more <br />apartments in the area and pointed out that the ci ty should <br />determine what the environmental impact of the project would be. <br />Waldron responded that an environmental assessment worksheet will <br />be required and that approvals will be contingent upon <br />satisfactory completion of the EAW process. <br /> <br />Walker questioned who makes the judgement whether there is an <br />environmental impact. Waldron answered that the City Council <br />would make that decision. <br /> <br />Ron Duncan, 747 W. Cope, stated that the proposed project would <br />adversely affect existing traffic problems in that area, that <br />there are enough apartment buildings in that area, and that he <br />was against Tax Increment Financing. <br /> <br />A representative of the vietnamese Temple and resident of the <br />City stated his concern about the impact of the project on the <br />sewer system and, that the city should not approve this project <br />prior to an environmental assessment worksheet being completed. <br />The representative also stated that the church bought the <br />property in 1982 and relied on the current plan which showed open <br />space on the site. <br /> <br />Jopke summarized the environmental assessment worksheet process. <br /> <br />Richard Dombross, 797 Sextant Avenue, asked if there has been any <br />determination made about changes that will be necessary to County <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.