My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_890104
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
198x
>
1989
>
pm_890104
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:00 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:38:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/4/1989
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.
/
14
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# 6 <br /> <br />Wednesday, January 4, 1989 <br /> <br />DeBenedet <br />residents. <br />community <br />residents. <br /> <br />asked if the existing user fee structure favors <br />Bierschied answered that people working in the <br />but not living in the community are also considered <br /> <br />DeBenedet pointed out that projections show that there would be <br />40,000 jobs in Roseville in the future which would be more jobs <br />than residents. This would place more pressure on the system and <br />that there is a strong need to improve the City's park system. <br /> <br />Berry testified that the initial acquisition has been done and <br />paid for and that there is. increased pressure being put on <br />facilities because of the current intense exercise fitness <br />movement. Berry stated that with population increases, job <br />increases and declining access to schools, it would be <br />appropriate to consider increased dedication requirements at <br />this time. <br /> <br />Berry testified that the requirements should include a graduated <br />scale for different land uses and money in lieu of land <br />provisions. <br /> <br />Johnson stated that the Twin Lakes area is a great example of <br />where there would be an increased need in a commercial industrial <br />area to provide trails and other facilities. <br /> <br />Johnson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />stokes stated that changes are necessary to maintain and improve <br />the park system. Stokes testified that the ordinance requirement <br />should be a staggered system based on land use. <br /> <br />Goedeke commented that historically not enough money has been put <br />into development of parks, only into acquisition. Goedeke stated <br />that more money is needed other from the general taxpayer. <br /> <br />Moeller asked that the ordinance apply to lot splits as well. <br /> <br />DeBenedet pointed out that staff should consider all plats and <br />lot splits, cash in lieu of land provisions at the City's option, <br />and that staff should look at the issue of value and whether is <br />should be pre-platted value or after plat value. <br /> <br />Planninq File 1915 <br /> <br />Scott Nelson request for a lot division at 1027 and 1035 W. <br />County Road B. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.