2016-01-06_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, December 2, 2015 Page 8 At the request of Member Gitzen, Mr. Paschke clarified that Woodhill Drive was a city 350 jurisdiction street and Victoria Street was under Ramsey County jurisdiction as a county 351 road.Mr. Paschke advised that Ramsey County’s Transportation Department was 352 currently reviewing the proposal, and their questions were working through their staff and 353 city staff for the development itself, and were outside the purview of tonight’s requested 354 action to approve the proposed lots on the preliminary plat.Mr. Paschke clarified that any 355 revisions to those details would not change the location of the lots, only access points 356 and/or amenities but not lot configurations. 357 At the further request of Member Gitzen, Mr. Paschke advised that to his knowledge, 358 Ramsey County was not requesting any right-of-way for Victoria Street beyond that 359 already dedicated; and clarified that the City was not seeking any additional right-of-way 360 for a right turn lane.Mr. Paschke further clarified for Member Gitzen that parking for the 361 ball field would be addressed through a shared agreement for a certain guaranteed 362 number of spaces, and become part of the site design and final documents rather than 363 recorded against the plat. 364 From a technical perspective, Chair Boguszewski suggested revised less-specific 365 language under recommended Condition C to identify the “City’s authorized tree service” 366 rather than its current consulting firm. 367 Mr. Paschke concurred. 368 The applicant’s representatives were present but had no additional comment 369 beyond staff’s written report and verbal presentation. 370 Public Comment 371 Marianne Hedin, 2690 OxfordStreet, Unit #210 372 Ms. Hedin stated all the neighbors remained up-in-arms about something they apparently 373 couldn’t do anything about, and that being the proposed four-story building.Ms. Hedin 374 stated she lived in a three-story condominium, and homes surrounding them were all 375 one-story; and opined that this proposed building didn’t blend in with surrounding 376 buildings.Ms. Hedin noted the previous buildings housing the school and Comcast were 377 one story; and noted the ball fields were already the highest point of land in that area. 378 C hair Boguszewski closed the public hearing at 7:35p.m.; no one else spoke. 379 MOTION 380 Member Bullmoved, seconded by MemberGitzen torecommend to the City 381 Council approval of the proposed PRELIMINARY PLAT of Applewood Pointe of 382 Roseville at Central Park, generally comprising the property at 934 Woodhill Drive 383 and 2659 Victoria Street; as detailed and based on the information and analysis, 384 and as conditioned and outlined in the project report dated December 2, 2015; 385 amended as follows: 386 Condition D revised to read: “\[S & S Tree Service\] \[The City’s authorized tree 387 service\] shall approve the final tree preservation plan prior to the issuance of a 388 building permit.” 389 Ayes:4 390 Nays: 0 391 Abstentions: 2 (Boguszewski and Murphy) 392 Motion carried. 393 c.PLANNING FILE 15-024 394 Request by Calyxt, Inc., in conjunction with property owner PIKTerminal 395 CO./Pikovsky Management, LLC, for approval of outdoor agricultural research 396 plots as a CONDITIONAL USE on certain un-addressed parcels south and east of 397 County Road C-2 and Mount Ridge Road 398 As an employee of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and given known 399 soil contamination on this site and his potential future involvement in working on the site’s 400