2016-03-02_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, January 6, 2016 Page 23 the most sense for traffic in this already congested area. However, Member Bull stated 1136 that a traffic study was not a critical issue for him in making his decision. 1137 Member Gitzen stated he believed a traffic study would be beneficial, and as the 1138 apparent key point and issue in the neighborhood, would provide the Commission with a 1139 more factual background in considering this zoning change. Member Gitzen stated that 1140 the more information he had available the easier it would make his decision versus 1141 relying on conjecture. 1142 Member Cunningham noted multiple comprehensive plan changes having come before 1143 the Commission to-date; and her take was that it was important and their responsibility to 1144 look not at the project but the new comprehensive plan designation. Member 1145 Cunningham stated that she had 99.9% trust that the current owner and developer are 1146 moving forward with this project, but opined the Commission would be remiss to not 1147 consider that other things could happen that may make this project no longer feasible. If 1148 the Commission decided to change designation to HDR for this project, without having 1149 made a fully-educated decision, including the traffic patterns very much attached to this 1150 project, Member Cunningham stated a traffic study may help, but she didn’t feel it was 1151 necessary in her decision-making. Member Cunningham stated that she thought this 1152 project would prove a great use of this land, but noted nothing would guarantee it may or 1153 may not be on the land in the short-or long-term future. 1154 Member Daire referenced uses east of this subject parcel and Mr. Lloyd’s comments 1155 related to MDR ringing this HDR project at Midland Grove, noting it would be desired and 1156 made sense to buffer those existing parcels with MDR based on land use principles and 1157 intermediate density use. However, from a theoretical standpoint, Member Daire stated 1158 he saw this property if MDR precluding any project being discussed yet increasing over 1159 what had been a past option (single-family housing) that would increase the density of 1160 dwelling units and trips/day, amounting to a possible 300 trips/day in and out of the 1161 entrance to Midland Grove Road. If moving to HDR and a potential future drop in the real 1162 estate market, or people deciding to age in place in Roseville versus moving to an 1163 assisted living and memory care facility, Member Daire opined that it was conceivable 1164 that the project’s character could change, even though there was no way the City could 1165 control that. If 54 units were translated into apartment units, Member Daire noted that 1166 could translate into as many as 540 trips/day, this may provide some return on the land, 1167 but not as high as Mr. Weyer is expecting, while still higher than single-family residential 1168 with only room for 13 homes. 1169 Member Daire noted his quandary in having to deal with the proposal asking for HDR 1170 zoning and land use for this 2.5 acre parcel, while at the same time, trying to determine 1171 what was in the best interest for the rest of the community. Member Daire stated this 1172 caused him to lean toward MDR between the existing HDR and LDR designations. 1173 Member Daire reviewed development along Ferris Lane and if MDR is a better use 1174 overall in the community for that parcel indicating the comprehensive plan should be 1175 changed to reflect that and zoning code changed accordingly; but creating a dilemma for 1176 him. Member Daire reiterated that his preference would be to go with MDR on that 1177 parcel, but since he as an individual commissioner could not initiate that process and 1178 could only recommend that staff ask the City Council to consider it, which they may or 1179 may not agree with, he stated his decision was between the proposal currently before 1180 him that seems solid for HDR thinking even though he thought it was HDR was an 1181 inappropriate land use designation for this site. 1182 Chair Boguszewski noted a third option would be to table action on the request tonight 1183 pending a traffic study, which would at least inform that decision-making process. 1184 Member Daire stated that a traffic study wouldn’t help him much, but suggested removal 1185 of the private road sign installed by the parking lot of Midland Grove designating where it 1186 actually became private versus where it was currently located on the city’s road segment 1187 may prove helpful to avoid future confusion. 1188