CC_Minutes_2013_0520 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

May 1,2013 Roseville Planning Commission 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville,MN 55113 Dear Planning Commission, Our names are Jody and Greg McElroy.We have been Roseville residents most of our lives,growing up in Roseville, briefly moving away when we got married, and returning to Roseville in 1997. We have resided at 905 Millwood Avenue since that time,raising our two daughters and enjoying our neighborhood and city. As we are faced with a proposed development within with the hopes they will be heard, d, Roseville Planning Commission to express our concerns assessed and acted upon. The proposed development threatens this tight-knit neighborhood in addition to destroying the character of the neighborhood that makes it so special. While it is somewhat expected that any/all land within Roseville is highly sought-out and will eventually be developed, it is disheartening to learn that the Planning Commission is considering a plan that does not fit in with our neighborhood for many reasons. Within the Request for Planning Commission Action Anal as just recently et follows:made 5.2.a available,we have many concerns as we reviewed the Preliminary Analysis. —City Code 1103.02—1103.021 indicates that the right-of-way for a local street is required to be at least 60 feet wide and that the right-of-way for a circular osednright-of-way r does not adherett must have the city a radius of at least 60 feet. As it is reported that the proposed code,we are uncertain why an exemption to this is being entertained. There are safety concerns as they relate to emergency responders, plows,trash haulers,etc.with a street that doesn't follow the city's code. 5.2.b—City Code 1103.06 indicates that the proposed lots adhere to the City Code in that they meet the minimum lot sizes. While this may be true,they do not adhere to the character of the neighborhood. The properties along Millwood Avenue and the surrounding streets are known for their deep,wooded lots. The proposed lot sizes and the sizes of the homes on hos w ted infiltration bacalll pose a with the neighborhood. Lastly,as it relates to 5.2.b,the proposed storm hazard for the young residents of the neighborhood in addition to possibly causing sight-line problems for traffic coming into and out of the proposed cul-de-sac. 5.2.L—City Code 1103.04 indicates that the drainage and utility easements 12 feet in width as proposed on the preliminary plat drawing meet the code requirements. Am a along system d Avenue can attest,we have severe drainage problems. Every spring,many of our sump run continuously. As our neighborhood is faced with drainage concerns,we have strong reservations regarding drainage,channel or streaming coming from the proposed development. Our realistic fear is II