My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014_0421_CCpacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2014
>
2014_0421_CCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2014 1:43:38 PM
Creation date
4/17/2014 2:45:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
135
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
Attachment F <br />Extract of the April 10, 2014, Roseville Planning Commission Minutes <br />a. PLANNING FILE 14-004 <br />Request by City of Roseville and the Roseville Housing and Redevelopment Authority, <br />owner of the properties at 2325-2335 Dale Street and 657-675 Cope Avenue and the Greater <br />Metropolitan Housing Corporation (developer) for approval of a PRELIMINARY PLAT to <br />facilitate a proposed residential development <br />Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 14-002 at approximately 7:34 p.m. <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed the request as detailed in the staff report dated April 10, <br />2014, for a proposed residential development for the Dale Street Redevelopment Project. <br />Mr. Paschke noted that, as the approval process continued at the staff level by the Engineering <br />Department, greater details were being provided and reviewed to address storm water <br />requirements and storage issues, consistent with the ongoing process. Mr. Paschke noted that <br />the utilities would be private versus public, but were still under review and would require approval <br />by the Public Works Department, with the existing sanitary sewer remaining as is. Mr. Paschke <br />advised that staff supports the lots as proposed, as they were consistent with City Code and met <br />minimum requirements; clarifying that there were no minimum standards for twin homes or <br />duplexes as proposed as part of this development. <br />At the request of Chair Gisselquist, Mr. Paschke reviewed the distinctions between public and <br />private utilities; with public utilities under specific easements for management by the City; and <br />private utilities under the management of the developer and subsequently becoming the sole <br />responsibility of the homeowners association for this development. Mr. Paschke further clarified <br />that the development would still be required to meet City Code and Watershed District <br />requirements as they specifically related to storm water management. <br />Member Daire referenced his concerns expressed at the previous meeting related to text <br />changes that would affect this development, and specific to locating garages up against the alley <br />and potentially creating snow storage issues. However, since that meeting, Member Daire <br />advised that he had occasion to review similar properties along Grand Avenue in a very old <br />mansion area, with those garage doors located right up against the alley. Member Daire stated <br />that they appeared to work well, and in his query of an owner of one of the properties regarding if <br />they found any problems or conflicts with people coming down the alley and those existing <br />garages, they had responded that they found no problems. Therefore, Member Daire advised <br />that this served to alleviate his previously expressed concerns. In addition, Member Daire noted <br />his initial concern as to whether adequate snow storage was available off those alleys in the <br />proposed development. Member Daire opined that, with the additional information provided in <br />tonight's staff report, as well as the addition of infiltration or settlement ponds at the end of the <br />single-family or pocket residential spots, it seemed that adequate snow storage would be <br />available, as well as areas available off the alley in areas behind the row houses. Ultimately, <br />Member Daire stated that in this intervening month, a lot of his initial questions with design and <br />housing layout on the site had been addressed by virtue of his personal observations in similar <br />areas in the metropolitan area; and he had no remaining objections to this redevelopment <br />proposal. <br />In his review of the plat, Member Stellmach noted inclusion of both rain gardens and ponds, and <br />sought a distinction in them and which if either would have standing water involved. <br />Mr. Paschke advised that a rain garden was intended for infiltration versus a pond designed to <br />hold water for a specific time, depending on rain events. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.