pf_03791 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Excerpts of the DRAFT November 1, 2006 Roseville Planning Commission meeting Commissioner Bakeman recognized that change was difficult, but that it was a given. Chair Traynor advised that he had voted against Mr. Mueller's previous proposal due to his concerns with the character of the neighborhood; the need for diversity in housing with larger I�t sizes as an option; and the dramatic changes it would create in the neighborhood. However, Mr. Traynor noted that consideration of a Preliminary Plat that met all Code requirements and did not require Comprehensive Land Use Map designation amendment or rezoning was a strict narrow review for the Commission, and taking everything into consideration, he would be voting to support this proposal. Commissioner Boerigter noted that he had previously voted for the project, opining that that was a proposal that provided more City control through the PUD process. Mr. Boerigter recognized and addressed several worthy public comments heard tonight; however, noted that it was Mr. Mueller's property, that the trees were on Mr. Mueller's property; and that he should be allowed to develop his property, within the refinements of City Code, as he so chose to do. Commissioner Boerigter opined that while the threat was made that everyone would be splitting their properties, some lots would support splitting, but that those that could be split were also private property and their development was at the discretion of the property owner. Commissioner Boerigter addressed his perception of minimal traffic impacts from three (3) new homes and projected trips, opining that Acorn Road was more than sufficient to handle the additional traffic. Commissioner Boerigter, in considering the totality of the proposal, current City Code, and conditions addressing areas of concern, opined that Commissioners were obligated to vote for the project; and noted that he would be voting to support the project. Commissioner Boerigter opined that this was overall a good project, the proposed homes would be expensive, and he doubted that any real negative property value or impact would occur to adjoining properties. Ayes: 6 Nays: 0 Motion carried. Chair Traynor advised that the case would come before the City Council on November 13, 2006.