pf07-006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• • Use Plan. 1�he URC wiihheld approval of the plan, however, in order to seek further clarification on the omission of a park access road as identified in the 1986 "Langton Lake Park Master Plan" (attached). The developer responded that they did not include the access road for two primary reasons: 1) the presence of wetland areas in the proposed park access areas, and ; 2) their conclusion that dedicating the property for park access (as shown in the 1986 "Langton Lake Park Master Plan") resulted in financial infeasibility of the project due to removal of developable area. In their response to the DRC, the developer asserted their opinion that there would be other "less impactful approaches," that would allow them to feasibly develop the site ��hile providing the needed access. 10.4 On April 19, 2007 the DRC met again to review the developer's response to questions raised at the previous DRC meeting. At that meeting, the DRC supported a recommendation to approve the land-use application as long as a concerted effort was made to identify an acceptable park access road between Cleveland Avenue and the Langton Lake Park parking lot. 10.5 On April 27, 2007, the Community Development Director, Parks and Recreation Director and Public Works Director met with the applicants and with a design consultant representing the city. At that meeting, a site plan was developed that garnered general consensus among the group. That site plan is reflected in the current application. 10.6 On May 22, 2007, the Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission (PWETC) discussed the application. At that meeting the group raised a number of questions that are in need of further review, including: differentiating public versus private facilities, identifying sidewalk locations, further information on the proposed wetland mitigation, adherence to wetland setbacks, right-of-way width and the design of the proposed cul-de-sac. Many of those concerns have since been addressed by: o Furiher refinement of the park access road design specifications; o Staff's recommendation that the park access road be constructed by the applicant but be dedicated as public right-of-way, and; o Additional clarification on sidewalk locations. l l.0 PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION 1 1.1 On June 6, 2007, the Roseville Planning Commission held a Public Hearing to consider the request by United Properties for a Preliminary Plat, Rezoning, and General Concept Planned Unit Development at 3010 Cleveland Avenue North. 1 1.2 At that meeting, Planning Staff recommended approval of the application with a number of conditions. l 1.3 During the Public Hearing, three members of the public testified regarding the proposal. All three of the individuals testifying opposed the development on a number of grounds — primarily related to the height of the proposed building, the potential shadows created by the height of the building and concerns regarding traffic on the proposed road. PF07-006_RCA_061807 Page 7 of 9