2013-04-03_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, April 3, 2013 Page 5 Chair Gisselquist closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:06 p.m.; with no one 194 appearing for or against 195 MOTION 196 Member Daire moved, seconded by Member Murphy to recommend to the City 197 Council APPROVAL of the proposed PRELIMINARY PLAT of Highcrest Park 5th 198 Addition; based on comments and findings of Sections 4-6 and the 199 recommendation of Section 7 of the staff report dated April 3, 2013. 200 Chair Gisselquist noted the limited activity in this heavy industrial area of Roseville to- 201 date; and opined that now that it was platted, it should fit in nicely. 202 Member Boguszewski concurred, noting that 60-70% of the cases coming before the 203 Commission appeared to be in that area. 204 Ayes: 7 205 Nays: 0 206 Motion carried. 207 Anticipated City Council action is scheduled for April 15, 2013. 208 b. PROJECT FILE 0017 209 Request by the Planning Division for approval of ZONING TEXT CHANGES to 210 Section 1004 (Residential Districts) of the City Code to clarify the intent of certain 211 requirements related to storm water (PROJ-0017) 212 Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Project File 0017 at approximately 7:09 213 p.m. 214 Mr. Lloyd reviewed the proposed TEXT AMENDMENTS as detailed in the staff report 215 dated April 3, 2013; specific to one- and two-family zoning districts that addresses hard 216 surfaces and clarifies the intent and applicability of provisions for rain water runoff. Some 217 examples of issues included decks not typically considered impervious surfaces as they 218 allowed for some drainage, but also having the potential to consume a majority of a site 219 up to within two feet of the property boundaries. By adding an upper limit of things that 220 could be built on a site, Mr. Lloyd advised that the buildable portion of a lot could be 221 addressed in residential neighborhoods, allowing some expectations of what to expect 222 from adjoining properties. 223 Mr. Lloyd addressed more specifics of this provision, reflecting a new tool for 224 encouraging continued investment in aging residential properties, as addressed in the 225 Residential Storm Water Permit (ReSWP) as detailed in Section 5.2 of the staff report. 226 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that items highlighted in 227 Attachment A in red were proposed new language, those items stricken were intended for 228 deletion from current language, and the remaining black font print would remain. Mr. 229 Lloyd further confirmed that the impervious surface percentages were already in place 230 and nothing new, but the amended text provided clarifying examples and a new process 231 that may allow for some exceptions. On the exceptions, Mr. Lloyd confirmed that they 232 would still require a permit and fee, and that property plans would be reviewed by the 233 Public Works/Engineering Department with specific triggers defining that review on an 234 administrative level, but not through a formal public meeting process. While the 2010 235 Zoning Code update addressed that review and monitor maintenance by the Public 236 Works/Engineering Department, Mr. Lloyd noted that a definite process was now set up, 237 and required applicants to hire a landscape architect or company to make calculations for 238 site drainage and storm water mitigation to address requirements of the ReSWP, with 239 third party involvement over time to ensure mitigation steps remain in place and continue 240 to function. 241 Various examples were discussed among Members and staff; as well as accessibility for 242 mobility-impaired occupants; new technologies for pervious and semi-pervious surface 243 applications; and review of some issues as part of the normal building permit process 244 beginning at the Community Development Department, unless a trigger was identified 245