2016-03-02_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, January 6, 2016 Page 18 Mr. Christiansen stated that given this request for a change in zoning tells him that 876 something was wrong with the city’s planning, and questioned why the zoning should be 877 changed, since it was just done so a few years ago. Mr. Christiansen opined that it was 878 unnecessary to do so again, and while this was a nice piece of real estate, and there 879 were a number of homes already in this neighborhood without any problems, he 880 questioned why single-family homes couldn’t also be constructed on this site (e.g. 3-4 881 homes) and prove much easier for Midland Grove Road access, widening it to create two 882 parking areas, as well as providing additional green space and some nice homes for this 883 neighborhood. 884 However, Mr. Christiansen opined that putting a health care facility on this site was not a 885 good idea. As an architect working all over the world in the past, specifically with hospital 886 consultants and construction of health care facilities, Mr. Christiansen stated this isn’t a 887 very good site for such a site. For instance, if residents of the facility are ambulatory, Mr. 888 Christiansen asked where they would walk as there were no sidewalks, and how would 889 the cross a busy 4-lane road at Cleveland Avenue and County Road B. With those 890 things under consideration, Mr. Christiansen opined that it made no sense to develop this 891 type of proposed facility, and suggested the zoning designation be left as is allowing low 892 density uses to develop on this residential property. 893 Mr. Christiansen thanked the Planning Commission for their service to the community. 894 Kevin Schultz, 2250 Midland Grove 895 As a resident in the area since 1983, Mr. Schultz noted that the neighborhood had been 896 through a similar rezoning process several years ago, and questioned what had changed 897 unless it was the number of proposed stories. 898 At the request of Mr. Schultz, Mr. Paschke confirmed that if this parcel developed as 899 single-family residences there would be no need to change the current comprehensive 900 plan or zoning designation. 901 Chair Boguszewski noted that to-date no one owning the subject property was interested 902 in developing the site for such use; and while recognizing this was a difficult decision, he 903 also noted that an earlier development proposal for this site actually had proposed 77 904 units rather than the 54 with this proposal. 905 Mr. Paschke confirmed that a previous development proposal was for 77 units, coming 906 forward approximately 7-8 years ago as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that 907 predated the 2008 change to the city’s zoning code. 908 Chair Boguszewski noted, confirmed by Mr. Paschke, that the Commission 909 recommended approval of that proposed project, with subsequent denial by the City 910 Council. 911 Wayne Mostick,2250 Midland Grove 912 Mr. Mostick stated he was opposed to the project, opining that more green space was 913 needed. Also, Mr. Mostick opined that, with more kids waiting for buses, the area could 914 be developed into a nice area for kids. Mr. Mostick referenced his attendance at a 915 meeting of the Midland Grove Board of Directors, where residents were told they’d better 916 accept this project or when the City of Roseville did its next comprehensive plan update, 917 they could approve Section 8 housing for thesite, along with other scare tactics 918 expressed that night that he personally resented. Mr. Mostick also expressed concern 919 about a potential “bait and switch” situation, even though the presenters of the project 920 appear to be above-board and this seems like a good project. However, Mr. Mostick 921 stated his confidence that if this proposal didn’t go through, what may take its place. 922 Lucy Botzis, 2236Ferriswood Lane 923 Ms. Botzis referenced a letter in tonight’s meeting packet from David Sellergren, 924 President ofFerriswood Condominium Association, 2191 Ferris Lane, (FCA) written on 925 behalf of their Board of Directors voicing their numerous concerns. Having served on the 926