pf09-002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

--. .-, faced by residents at Midland Grove Condominiums. Ms. Thielen referenced her conversations with the State of MN regarding drainage issues; and opined that the proposed project would only serve to further compound drainage issues in the area; and that the ultimate outcome for Roseville may be the collapse of the Midland Grove units, loss of tax base by the City of Roseville, and potential litigation issues. Steve Enzler, representing family, 1995 W County Road B Mr. Enzler requested that his letter of June 2, 2009 be included in the record; with Vice Chair Boerigter advising that staff had done so, and the written comments were part of the record, attached hereto and made a part thereof. Mr. Enzler assured Commissioners that his comment was not simply based on `'not in my backyard" mentality; and opined that his comments about the developer and concerns with him had nothing to do with the age of previous projects; but with the reality of the discoveries found on his property over the last two (2) years due to inaccurate measurements, City Codes, and boundary issues. Mr. Enzler opined that the design and footprint of the proposed massive building had not materially changed, while the developer had broken up the exterior elevations; and that the building mass was immediately adjacent to his single- family home. Mr. Enzler advised that he had attempted to reconcile himself to the building's placement, and reviewed various photos from the Developer's presentation, based on his visual interpretations and perspectives. Mr. Enzler opined that Mr. Mueller was a great guy; but he expressed his concern about accurate measurements far this project, noting the two (2) examples currently existing on his property. Mr. Enzler addressed potential development on his property, based on its topography, and opined that it would remain a single- family lot, and asked the Commission consider that in their deliberations. Mr. Enzler addressed similar traffic concerns already expressed, and opined that, while not supported by hard data, the reality was that due to the speed and amount of traffic, seniors would be put in harm's way. Mr. Enzler questioned why this project was being proposed, and why was it so large; and opined that it was basically due to financial considerations, both for the developers, and the City's tax base. Mr. Enzler further opined that it was wrong that there was a chance that changes to the City's Comprehensive Plan would transfer value from his home to the developer; and asked that the Commission consider approval only based on at a maximum medium density, not high density, and not PUD. Merlyn Scroggins, 2237 N Cleveland Avenue N Mr. Scroggins advised that he believed in the City; and opined that there would always be a number of negative coinments on any project before the City. Mr. Scroggins opined that this was a good thing for Roseville; the quality of the proposed housing was exactly right for him to consider at this stage of his life; and that overall, property development in Roseville, is good for the entire City, that it shouldn't be disruptive to people, and he further opined that this project wouldn't be. Mr. Scroggins reviewed development in the area over the last forty (40) years, and his observations during that time as Ferriswood and Midland Grove developments came to fruition, changing the original character of the neighborhood. Mr. Scroggins compared those developments to the original nature of the neighborhood, and understood the inherent desire for people to