2013_0722_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment C made himself available to talk with the neighbors; and suggested that, if an open house was not required by code for a project like this, it may need to be considered in the future. At the request of Mayor Roe, Public Works Director Duane Schwartz, provided staff’s response to the May 1, 2013 letter as referenced. Mr. Schwartz advised that, as part of the drainage review for the project, staff had not specifically looked through every item in detail at this point, but had been reviewing the plat and proposed drainage in accordance with City Code requirements and those of the Rice Creek Watershed District. Mr. Schwartz assured the City Council and the public that the project would meet the standard requirements for both of those agencies. At the request of Mayor Roe on behalf of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Schwartz advised that the hydrology study referenced from 1997 had not been found by staff, even when locating the old planning file on Microfiche records when a plan had been submitted, but never pursued for a 12-unit townhome complex, that had been found to be inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan at that time. Had that project proceeded at that time, Mr. Schwartz advised that additional review or hydrologic studies may have been required. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Schwartz advised that, to his knowledge, no hydrologic studies had been done on this parcel; but that soil borings had been required, with results still pending from the developer to staff. Mr. Schwartz advised that staff had soil boring data on file for Millwood Avenue adjacent to the development Councilmember McGehee referenced tree preservation issues also raised from the neighbors, opining that additional information was needed on that. Mr. Paschke advised that the City had a Tree Preservation Policy in place and that the project would need to meet those requirements. At the request of Councilmember McGehee regarding whether or not the issues and questions received from neighbors had been addressed by staff, Mr. Paschke responded that they had not. Nathan Fair, Hanson Builders, 13432 Hanson Blvd., Andover, MN, Applicant Representative with Landmark 6 of Roseville, LLC and Hanson Builders Mr. Fair advised that they were still working with staff on a variety of issues for this Preliminary Plat, including working through the Tree Preservation Plan prepared for the project, and continuing to work on engineering aspects needed to accomplish City Ordinance and Watershed requirements for a drainage plan. As a result of concerns expressed by neighbors at the Planning Commission’s Public Hearing, Mr. Fair advised that their engineers were working with the City’s engineering staff to add an additional pipe for water coming onto their property, but noted that those revisions were still pending. Mr. Fair expressed his firm’s excitement in coming to Roseville with a project; and offered their willingness to meet with the neighborhood, even though this was a fairly small infill project of six lots, they hadn’t felt it was necessary to hold an informational meeting. Mr. Fair clarified that he had met with some of the neighbors during the course of performing soil borings.