Laserfiche WebLink
PF15-010_RPCA_090215 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />City Code §1103.04 (Easements): Drainage and utility easements 12 feet in width, centered on 52 <br />side and rear property lines, are required where necessary. The proposed plat meets and exceeds 53 <br />this requirement. 54 <br />City Code §1103.06 (Lot Standards): All lots for single-family detached dwellings must be at 55 <br />least 85 feet wide, 110 feet deep, and comprise at least 11,000 square feet in area, except that 56 <br />corner lots must be a minimum of 100 feet in width and depth and have at least 12,500 square 57 <br />feet in area. All of the proposed lots exceed these requirements even if the easement surrounding 58 <br />the proposed street is excluded from the parcels as though the easement area was equivalent to 59 <br />dedicating right-of-way. 60 <br />Roseville’s Public Works Department staff have been working with the applicant to address the 61 <br />requirements related to grading and drainage, street design, and the private utilities that will be 62 <br />necessary to serve the new lots. Even if these plans are not discussed in detail at the public 63 <br />hearing, actions by the Planning Commission and the City Council typically include conditions 64 <br />that such plans must ultimately meet the approval of Public Works staff. 65 <br />City Code specifies that an approved tree preservation plan is a necessary prerequisite for 66 <br />approval of a preliminary plat. Preliminary review of the plan indicates the expected removal of 67 <br />266 caliper inches of significant trees more than the code allows without replacement, and 64 68 <br />caliper inches of heritage trees more than the code allows without replacement; this would 69 <br />require planting approximately 87 replacement trees. Mark Rehder, the certified arborist 70 <br />consulting with the Community Development Department will continue to review the plan for 71 <br />continued accuracy as development plans are finalized, monitor tree removal and protection 72 <br />efforts during construction, and verify proper planting of replacement trees after construction. 73 <br />At its meeting of June 4, 2013 Roseville’s Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the 74 <br />proposed preliminary plat against the park dedication requirements of §1103.07 of the City Code 75 <br />and recommended a dedication of cash in lieu of land. Since the existing, undeveloped parcel 76 <br />comprises one residential unit, the proposed four-lot plat would create three new building sites. 77 <br />The 2015 Fee Schedule establishes a park dedication amount of $3,500 per residential unit; for 78 <br />the three, newly-created residential lots the total park dedication would be $10,500, to be 79 <br />collected prior to recording an approved plat at Ramsey County. 80 <br />Roseville’s Development Review Committee (DRC) met on several occasions to discuss this 81 <br />application. Beyond the above comments pertaining to the zoning and subdivision codes 82 <br />representatives of the Public Works Department had the following comments. 83 <br />a. There are several small basins shown to address the required storm water treatment and 84 <br />retention requirements. The overflow of these devices for the most part appears to flow to the 85 <br />rear of the development and ultimately drain to the existing catch basin located between this 86 <br />parcel and Marion Street to the west. While overland flow is an acceptable method of 87 <br />conveyance for storm water, the existing undulating ground in this area currently slows water 88 <br />conveyance and causes some pooling of water during heavy events. This will continue to be 89 <br />the case after development, although the proposed basins should provide some rate control 90 <br />for most rain events. 91 <br />b. The proposed basins and private road will require a Homeowners Association to be 92 <br />established for the purpose of funding the maintenance of these assets. It should be noted that 93 <br />while the proposed basins and site grading meet the requirements of the City and should meet 94 <br />the requirements of the watershed (watershed review and approval are pending), this is an 95