My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014-02-18_HRA_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Housing Redevelopment Authority
>
Minutes
>
2014
>
2014-02-18_HRA_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/16/2014 1:55:39 PM
Creation date
4/16/2014 1:55:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Housing Redevelopment Authority
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
2/18/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HRA Meeting <br />Minutes – Tuesday, February 18, 2014 <br />Page 4 <br />1 <br />Ms. Timm provided a summary review of the revised concept plan with lower density, off-set <br />2 <br />single-family homes and the addition of side yards/patios to provide more privacy. Ms. Timm <br />3 <br />highlighted the increased central space, variations on the edge of the project, and setback <br />4 <br />provisions to address the requirements of a Medium Density Residential (MDR) Zoning <br />5 <br />District. Ms. Timm reviewed specifics for single-family homes, small and large townhome <br />6 <br />units; consisting of street setbacks; proposed location of sidewalks and boulevards; increased <br />7 <br />back areas to allow rain garden installations to address drainage concerns. <br />8 <br />9 <br />Mr. Buelow noted that two (2) single-family homes had been removed since the original <br />10 <br />caption plan, at the recommendation of the HRA to reduce density, with ten (10) versus twelve <br />11 <br />(12) units now planned, and providing a nicer side yard to those remaining units. Mr. Buelow <br />12 <br />advised that information had been submitted to City Planner Thomas Paschke today, as well as <br />13 <br />the Roseville Fire Marshal, for their initial review and feedback. Mr. Buelow highlighted <br />14 <br />proposed elevations and floor plans with the effort to make them each unique and interesting <br />15 <br />for better marketing. <br />16 <br />17 <br />Ms. Timm noted that they had also addressed some of the parking concerns, revising plans to <br />18 <br />allow space to park two (2) cars versus one (1) on the parking pad; adding front porches and a <br />19 <br />central green space for the single-family homes, along with that varying detail, to add variety <br />20 <br />and encourage community interaction in the neighborhood. <br />21 <br />22 <br />Mr. Buelow noted that all units have two (2) car attached garages. <br />23 <br />24 <br />At the request of Member Masche, Mr. Buelow provided approximate square footages at this <br />25 <br />time: 1,500 square feet for single family townhomes, 2,100 square feet for townhomes with a <br />26 <br />finished basement, and 2,300 square feet for single-family homes with a finished basement. <br />27 <br />28 <br />At the request of Member Elkins, Ms. Timm addressed proposed parking for the larger <br />29 <br />townhomes, with entrance from the back alley into a tuck-under garage. Mr. Buelow clarified <br />30 <br />that the larger townhomes had an elevated deck to access the two-car garages. <br />31 <br />32 <br />Ms. Spencer reviewed the six (6) different realtors they had met with to consider marketing the <br />33 <br />units, and their final selection of Lindsay Reuter and Jason Stockwell Team from RE/Max <br />34 <br />Results after having met with several of their agents. Ms. Spencer advised that the selection <br />35 <br />was based on the work of that firm to-date with newer construction in the northeast <br />36 <br />metropolitan area, and their enthusiasm for this particular project and their ability to market it <br />37 <br />effectively. Ms. Spencer noted the firm’s excitement of the proximity of the project to the <br />38 <br />inner city and work sites, its projected price points in the Roseville area, and no similar <br />39 <br />products currently available in Roseville. Ms. Spencer advised that the GMHC was still <br />40 <br />negotiating terms with the firm, and reviewing proposed floor plans and their desirability and <br />41 <br />pricing structure. While no decisions have been made at this point, Ms. Spencer expressed <br />42 <br />their interest in working with the firm based on their energy levels. <br />43 <br />44 <br />Member Masche spoke in support of the revisions and preliminary elevations of the units; and <br />45 <br />opined that this should be an interesting project from a marketing perspective, with three (3) <br />46 <br />completely different products all in one neighborhood. Member Masche opined that the <br />47 <br />product met the goals in providing a varied collection of housing units in the community. <br />48 <br />49 <br />Mr. Buelow concurred, anticipating the project would generate lots of excitement; and <br />50 <br />expressed their interest in facilitating the social aspects of the project. <br />51 <br />52 <br />Mr. Buelow advised the HRA Board that they had noticed the neighborhood of a meeting <br />53 <br />coming up this Thursday evening to provide them with an update and obtain their feedback <br />54 <br />based on the revised plans. <br />55 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.