My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2015-09-02_PC_Minutes
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
201x
>
2015
>
2015-09-02_PC_Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/16/2015 11:32:10 AM
Creation date
10/16/2015 11:32:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Regular Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, September 2, 2015 <br />Page 7 <br />association to fund future maintenance as a way to ensure it was done. Chair <br />302 <br />Boguszewski asked Community Development Director Paul Bilotta, available in the <br />303 <br />audience, to draft such a condition for consideration by the Commission. <br />304 <br />Member Bull asked staff about standards for such an association for street and <br />305 <br />stormwater maintenance, and if they would be required to meet city standards and what <br />306 <br />the repercussions would be if those standards were not followed. <br />307 <br />Regarding the stormwater system, Mr. Lloyd clarified that it would be obvious to the <br />308 <br />public as to that effectiveness and how it was functioning long-term; while development <br />309 <br />standards were the same for public and private streets based on city code. <br />310 <br />At the request of Member Bull related to private services on a private street, Mr. Lloyd <br />311 <br />responded that a private main would be required to serve private water and sewer <br />312 <br />laterals similar to if it had been a public main in public rights-of-way with private laterals <br />313 <br />connecting to it. <br />314 <br />Regarding street width and on-street parking, Member Bull expressed his concern for <br />315 <br />emergency or service vehicles since the length of the street was proposed at less than <br />316 <br />200’ feet. <br />317 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that homeowner’s association documentation would address required <br />318 <br />signage for mail and delivery service on Acorn Road for that reason and for service <br />319 <br />providers. Mr. Lloyd clarified that not providing a turnaround was not inconsistent with <br />320 <br />code requirements, and while it was unusual to have a private street without a turnaround <br />321 <br />in the community, city code did allow for it. <br />322 <br />Applicant Representatives <br />323 <br />Chuck Plowe, Plowe Engineering <br />324 <br />Mr. Plowe advised that preliminary approval had been received from the Capitol Region <br />325 <br />Watershed District of the stormwater management plan; with requirements of the <br />326 <br />Watershed District of a maintenance agreement prior to final approval for maintenance of <br />327 <br />stormwater, which will be privately maintained. <br />328 <br />At the request of Chair Boguszewski, Mr. Plowe confirmed that he was an engineer with <br />329 <br />an independent firm hired by Mr. Mueller to help design drainage features and meet the <br />330 <br />goals of stormwater management requirements of the City. <br />331 <br />Mr. Plowe noted that the engineer’s preference would be for a 32’ wide street versus 28’, <br />332 <br />but advised that they would comply with the 32’ width if so directed. <br />333 <br />Based on his understanding and review of City Council meeting minutes and their <br />334 <br />discussion with Mr. Mueller, Chair Boguszewski noted that the City Council had indicated <br />335 <br />their desire for a 32’ wide street. Chair Boguszewski opined that, if the goal was for <br />336 <br />approval of the Plat, if a 32’ width worked, the applicant seek to comply with that <br />337 <br />preference, with the option always available that they could further discuss that <br />338 <br />requirement with the City Council if they desired to do so. <br />339 <br />Developer and Property Owner Art Mueller <br />340 <br />Mr. Mueller noted that if the street width remained at 28’ and accommodate parking on <br />341 <br />only one side, it would result 700 square feet more in space for additional plantings, <br />342 <br />grass and trees. <br />343 <br />Member Bull asked Mr. Mueller to address the compatibility of these proposed lot sizes <br />344 <br />versus other lots in the neighborhood in order that the Commission could understand the <br />345 <br />rationale. <br />346 <br />Mr. Mueller opined that many of the neighborhood lots are smaller than those he’s <br />347 <br />proposing, with the original 45 acres divided into eleven lots, and subsequently having <br />348 <br />divided them yet again. Mr. Mueller advised that part of the rationale in his proposal is <br />349 <br />that larger lots are no longer affordable for development. <br />350 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.