CC_Minutes_2013_0520 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,May 20, 2013 Page 24 • The developer will provide a plan for screening vehicle headlights from neighbors on the east, west and north sides of the subject parcel; and for screening the east and west property lines. Councilmember Willmus encouraged the developer to work with the neighbors on screening, opining that this was an issue that would become more prevalent in the future throughout Roseville. Councilmember Willmus expressed his appreciation that the developer had met the standard lot size requirements for this infill pro- posal; and appreciated the ongoing work of the developer with staff on drainage issues. Councilmember Willmus advised that he had the opportunity yesterday afternoon, with the mini-monsoon, to observe the area and runoff, and opined that there was work needed by the City on the south side of Millwood, and from those properties at a certain point draining to the north of the catch basin located in the proximity of 922 Millwood that needed a curb cut to get water being the curb line. Councilmember Willmus further opined that the City needed to re-evaluate the level of neighborhood input and developer meetings required, which were not cur- rently available for this case. However, overall, Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the motion as conditioned. Councilmember Laliberte expressed her appreciation to the Planning Commission for holding the Public Hearing at which a bulk of this material was covered as ev- idenced by their meeting minutes included in the agenda packet materials. Councilmember McGehee spoke in opposition to the motion, referencing the comments of Councilmember Willmus, and her preference that the neighborhood be given credibility and involvement in advance of Preliminary Plat approval, and expressing her disappointment that the developer was not interested in extending the approval period. Mayor Roe opined that it made sense to look at neighborhood meetings as part of the approval process for this type of application, and would prove a good topic for the June 3, 2013 meeting, along with the other land use issues scheduled. Councilmember McGehee opined that the Tree Preservation Ordinance also need- ed further discussion. In response to Councilmember McGehee's comments, Councilmember Willmus opined that, if the City Council voted against this Preliminary Plat, the developer would be back without conditions, as there was nothing in the City's existing code to stop it at this point, which served to enter into his decision-making. Going forward, Councilmember Willmus, concurred there were tools to consider for fu- ture applications, but reiterated that if he took a similar position to that of Coun- cilmember McGehee, the neighbors would still be looking at this development without protective conditions.