2015-07-01_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

an aggressive proposal and will present some long term maintenance that the new 98 homeowners should be aware of. 99 c.At this time, the Engineering department was not presented any information for the alignment 100 or design of water and/or sanitary sewer infrastructure to serve the proposed homes. A private 101 sanitary sewer main and water main will be required that will then serve the individual 102 private services to each proposed home, and maintenance of these facilities will be the 103 responsibility of the Homeowners Association. Review and approval of this infrastructure 104 will occur through the building permit review process. 105 PC UBLIC OMMENT 106 At the time this report was prepared, Planning Division staff hasnot received any additional 107 communications from members of the public about the proposal. 108 CR ONCEPT EVIEW 109 On October 20, 2014, Mr. Mueller brought a sketch of his subdivision proposalto the City 110 Council for guidance as to what changes to the previous proposals would give Councilmembers 111 the confidence that a subsequent plat application would meet City requirements and not 112 compromise the health, safety, general welfare, convenience, andgood order of the community. 113 The proposed sketch plan and the minutes of this discussion are included with this RPCA as 114 Attachment D, and a brief list of the Council’s direction follows. 115 Lot lines must be perpendicular to street to conform to code: 116 the current plat proposal achieves this. 117 Consider routing storm water to the City storm sewer system with less overland flow: 118 storm water is infiltrated into several basins distributed around the property rather than 119 flowing over land to one large basin. 120 Consider a 32-foot wide street to allow parking on both sides rather than parking pads: 121 the current proposal accomplishes this. 122 Minimize impervious surface while still accommodating adequate parking: 123 The drainage plan adequately accounts for two garage stalls andfour driveway stalls per 124 lot in addition to a 32-foot wide street that would allow six cars parked along the south 125 side and seven more parked along the north side, for a total of 37 parking spaces (i.e., 126 9.25 parking spaces per lot). This is certainly an adequate amount of parking, but it 127 doesn’t necessarily minimize the impervious surface area. If the street width were reduced 128 to 28 feet, for example, and parking were allowed on the north side of the street, 31 total 129 parking spaces (7.75 parking spaces per lot) would still be available. The proposed plat 130 may be approved as presented if the Planning Commission and City Council are 131 comfortable with it, but staff from Roseville’sPlanning and Engineering Divisions 132 believe that anarrower street and reduced number of parking spaces can also be 133 acceptable. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss whether this kind of reduction 134 in impervious surface still provides an adequate amount of parking. 135 Be aware that storm water management needs may limit the number oflots: 136 the proposed storm water plan meets applicable standards for the 4-lot plat. 137 Majority of Councilmembers favor a private street: 138 the proposal includes a private street 139 PF15-010_RPCA_070115 Page 4of 5