pm_700805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville Planning Commission Meeting Wednesday, August 5, 1970 - 7:30 P.M. The August 5, 1970, meeting of the Rosevil1e Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Membrez at 7:30 P.M. Those present were: Those absent were: Also present: Mr. Mr. Kellett, Demos, Pope, E1Uund and Membrez. Johnson and Eagles. HOward Dahlgren from Midwest Planning and Research, Incorporated; Goldberg and Mr. lO..uegel from the staff of the Village Mm. Demos Moved, and Mr. Kellett Seconded, that the minutes of the meeting of July 1, 1910 be approved with the following corrections: Page 3, Paragraph 4, the sentence dealing with the reasons for the voting, delete the following: "Mr. Kellett felt that the people in the area were very much against it at the present time. The two sides proposed for rezoning in the area and phase 3 was upsetting to them because of the uncertainty of its development." and substitute the following: "Mr. Kellett felt that the amount of blacktop in the project is inhuman." On Page 4, Paragraph 1, delete the following from the last sentence: "However, she was not opposed to the project in general." Roll Call, Ayes: Kellett, Demos, Pope, Efilund and Membrez. Nays: None. Planning File 566-70 - Jell and Associates, request for amended special use permit at 2450 North Cleveland Avenue. Mr. Membrez read the attorney's answer pertaining to the question of whether the Village could require dedication of street right-of-ways as part of a special use permit. The attorney's answer to this question was that the V11lage could. Mr. Dahlgren outlined the proposed layout of Jell and Associates, as it relates to the meeting of the Village staff and Mr. Loftsgaarden. (The results of this meeting are out- lined in the Public Works Director's memo, dated July 16, 1970.) He also recapped the pre- vious meetings of the Planning Commission and the Village Council, as they pertained to the granting of the rezoning special use permit and liquor license for the HOliday Inn pro- ject. He noted that the Planning Commission had two choices to consider. (1.) Leave the conditions as they now exist with the special use permit. (2.) Release the applicant from these conditions if the applicant would agree in writing that they would not object to the road in the future, nor object; to any special assessments for said road. Also, that they would not seek any damages to the remainder of property resulting from any road construction. Mr. Iofstgaarden stated that they would agree to move the building back, as shown on their plans, which would accomodate a future 33 foot right-of-way for road purposes, but they would not agree to wanting the roadway. He stated that they do not want the road at allo He presented a plan, which showed the proposed building with the future right-of~way to the north side of the property. Mrs. Demos and Mr. E1lund felt that the road right-of-way should be dedicated at this time. There was further discussion as to the pros and cons of requesting right-of-way at this time. Recommendation: Kellet Moved, Pope Seconded, that Jell and Associates's request for a- mended special use permit at 2450 North Cleveland Avenue, be denied. Roll Call: Kellett, Demos, Pope, E1lund and Membrez. Nays: None.