pm_890301 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION page# 3 Wednesday, March 1, 1989 excessive runoff in the area. Gatlin responded that he had not seen how much vegetation would be removed. Gatlin added that a specific drainage plan would be handled at the time that a building permit is issued and that there should not be an adverse effect on the existing drainage pattern. Schultz stated that they were not planning on removing any more trees than necessary, just where the house would be located. Schultz added that the water would drain to victoria from the front of the house and the remaining drainage pattern would remain the same. Maglich asked if a restriction could be placed on the deeds to prevent removal of trees after the homes are sold. Maglich added that he was opposed to the project and that the Planning Commission should deny the lot division. Jane Apman, 2989 Victoria, stated that the prime reason they bought their house was because the area had 100 foot lots and that a 60 foot lot in a 100 foot area is ludicrous. Apman added that there are 75 foot lots across the street but Victoria is a division which separates the 100 foot lot area from the 75 foot lot area. Apman pointed out that trees would be removed to provide yard space because there are not sufficient front yards. Apman testified that the neighborhood is being asked to bail the developer out. Apman pointed out that the proposal is not consistent to the rest of the lots on the block and would be destructive to the neighborhood. The resident at 3013 victoria stated that space is what makes the area desirable and that with the new lots, houses would appear to be crammed in. He pointed out that 85 feet is the smallest lot on the block and most of the lots are 100 foot lots. He added that 60 and 65 foot lots would not be in character with the neighborhood. He stated that the existing situation should be left as is or just add on to the existing house or the house should be moved or torn down to allow two 100 foot lots. Tom Crum, 3029 Victoria, stated that the Planning Commission should vote to reject the project because it is not consistent with the existing space and character of the neighborhood. - Keith Dody, 2992 Victoria, stated that he has a 75 foot lot which is too small and that the houses are too close together. Dody added that a 60 foot lot is inconceivable and that the Planning Commission should reject the proposal.