Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br />Wednesday, January 12, 1994 <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />safety problems with the parking lot, as well as drainage problems. The denial is based <br />on the following findings of fact: <br /> <br />1. The plan, as presented, is inconsistent with the Roseville Comprehensive <br />Land Use Guide Plan. It would be premature to base any land use <br />decisions on the developing update of the Comprehensive Land Use <br />Guide Plan. <br /> <br />2. It has not been established that the proposed joint use of the church <br />parking lot would adequately meet the needs of both the townhome <br />residents and the church membership. <br /> <br />3. The plan, as presented, does not achieve maximum coordination between <br />the proposed development and the surrounding uses. <br /> <br />4. The plan, as presented, does not provide for adequate transition or <br />buffering, in terms of green space, between the proposed project and the <br />single family neighborhood to the south. <br /> <br />5. The proposed internal street system may create conflict between the <br />church traffic and the townhome residents, creating a safety hazard. <br /> <br />6. It has not been established that the drainage created by this project will <br />not impact neighboring single family houses. <br /> <br />7. The proposed density of the project is defined as high density. Medium <br />density would provide a more logical transition from the surrounding <br />single family uses. <br /> <br />8. The church does not have an overall master plan for its property nor any <br />protections to preserve open space. <br /> <br />Roll Call: Ayes: Sandstrom, Rengel, Thomas, Wall, Harms, Wietecki <br /> <br />Nayes: None <br />