My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_900801
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
199x
>
1990
>
pm_900801
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:33:29 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 7:55:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
8/1/1990
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.
/
13
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 9 <br /> <br />Wednesday, August 1, 1990 <br /> <br />Planninq File 2135 <br /> <br />Frank and Helen Line request for a lot division at 3063 No. <br />Victoria Street. <br /> <br />Presentation <br /> <br />Shardlow summarized the lot division and stated that it meets or <br />exceeds all lot requirements except for the 100 foot minimum <br />frontage for a corner lot. The proposed corner lot would be 79 <br />feet wide. <br /> <br />Keel stated there is a 10 foot dedication on Victoria, the lot <br />owners must build a water hookup but that the sewer hookup is in <br />place. The lot owner will also have to pay $861.84 assessment. <br /> <br />Helen Line stated that there is plenty of room to build a single <br />family home on the proposed lot. Line added the home will be in <br />the $100,000 to $130,000 range which is comparable to the other <br />homes in the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Wietecki questioned whether the elevations were adequate. <br />stated that he thought the drainage could be handled. <br /> <br />Keel <br /> <br />Berry stated that the driveway on victoria would have to be a <br />turnaround driveway. Line stated that she understood this. <br /> <br />Reiling stated that he was to buy the lot and would build a home <br />on the lot. Reiling stated that the sewer is already there and <br />that drainage would not be a problem. <br /> <br />Anderson, a neighbor, stated that he was concerned with the <br />topography of the proposed lot. Anderson stated that at present <br />the drainage is good, he doesn't want to see that destroyed. <br />Anderson also commented that he hoped that as many of the mature <br />trees be retained as possible. Keel stated that they can't <br />change the natural drainage pattern. Keel pointed out that a <br />drainage plan would have to be submi tted at the time of the <br />building permit. <br /> <br />Goedeke commented that there would be enough oaks <br />left after a home was constructed on the lot. <br />stated that electric service would have to be <br />stated that she understood this. <br /> <br />and other trees <br />Goedeke also <br />changed. Line <br /> <br />Reiling said that the large oak could be retained since it sits <br />in the side lot setback area. Goedeke stated that he understood <br />Reiling knew of a way to protect large oaks that needed to have <br />infill around them. <br /> <br />The Public Hearing was closed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.