My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-01-07_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Agendas
>
2015-01-07_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2015 8:39:57 AM
Creation date
1/22/2015 8:39:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/7/2015
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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
RA <br />EQUESTEDCTION <br />2 <br />JAVA Properties proposes to plat Lots 4, 5, 16, and 17, Block B, Twin View, lying in the <br />3 <br />northeast corner of the intersection of Twin Lakes Parkway and Cleveland Avenue, as Lot 1 and <br />4 <br />Lot 2, The Cleveland Club. <br />5 <br />B <br />ACKGROUND <br />6 <br />The subject property, located in Planning District 10, has a Comprehensive Plan land use <br />7 <br />designation of Community Mixed Use (CMU) and a corresponding Zoning District classification <br />8 <br />of Community Mixed Use (CMU) District. The proposal has been prompted <br />9 PRELIMINARYPLAT <br />by plans to develop an Aldi grocery store and two small retail buildings on the site. <br />10 <br />When exercising the so-called “quasi-judicial” authority when acting on a request, the role <br />11 PLAT <br />of the City is to determine the facts associated with a particular request and apply those facts to <br />12 <br />the legal standards contained in the ordinance and relevant state law. In general, if the facts <br />13 <br />indicate the applicant meets the relevant legal standard, then they are likely entitled to the <br />14 <br />approval, although the City is able to add conditions to a approval to ensure that the likely <br />15 PLAT <br />impacts to urban design, roads, storm sewers, and other public infrastructure on and around the <br />16 <br />subject property are adequately addressed. <br />17 <br />PPA <br />RELIMINARYLATNALYSIS <br />18 <br />P proposals are reviewed primarily to ensure that all proposed lots meet the minimum size <br />19 LAT <br />requirements of the Zoning Code, have desirable lot layout and grading, protect natural <br />20 <br />resources, have adequate streets and other public infrastructure in place or identified and a plan <br />21 <br />to be constructed, and have addressed potential storm water issues to prevent problems either on <br />22 <br />nearby property or within the storm water system. As a of a property in the <br />23 PRELIMINARY PLAT <br />CMU district, the proposal leaves no zoning issues to be addressed since the Zoning Code does <br />24 <br />not establish minimum lot dimensions or area. The proposed is included with <br />25 PRELIMINARY PLAT <br />this report as Attachment C. <br />26 <br />In December 2014, the Development Review Committee (DRC) met on several occasions to <br />27 <br />review the submitted plans. Following are the DRC’s comments: <br />28 <br />The proposed development is requesting access along Twin Lakes Parkway, Mount Ridge <br />29 <br />Road (shared), and Cleveland Avenue (shared). The proposed access points and the impact <br />30 <br />of the overall development on the surrounding transportation system will be evaluated by a <br />31 <br />traffic study commissioned by the City of Roseville. The developer is required to pay their <br />32 <br />share ($2554) of this study with the development to the north sharing the cost. <br />33 <br />The DRC views the JAVA development site and the proposed hotel site to the north as a <br />34 <br />unified development and, therefore, will be requiring access and shared parking agreements <br />35 <br />between the two sites. The DRC and has recommended that both development teams work <br />36 <br />together to address grade issues while minimizing the use of retaining walls, if possible. The <br />37 <br />DRC also strongly encourages the development teams to coordinate storm water mitigation <br />38 <br />requirements. This coordination will minimize infrastructure costs, improve customer <br />39 <br />experience, and reduce demands on adjacent streets. <br />40 <br />The developer/applicant is required to submit an application to the Rice Creek Watershed <br />41 <br />and the City of Roseville to address storm water requirements, which should be completed <br />42 <br />prior to approval. <br />43 FINAL PLAT <br />PF15-002_RPCA_010715 <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.