2014-07-09_PC_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, June 4, 2014 Page 3 properties –in other words, enhance those values, or diminish values as alleged by 94 public comment to-date, and ultimately raising property taxes for those existing homes. 95 Mr. Lloyd sated that it was a general concept, that new construction typically provided a 96 positive principle on existing properties. In a phone call he’d received related to this 97 project, Mr. Lloyd advised that the caller referenced a recent listing of a neighboring 98 home significantly less than the apparent asking price based on online research of 99 approximately one month ago by this same caller.Mr. Lloyd opined that neither of those 100 reference sources may be aware of the 2250 Acorn Road property which had been the 101 subject of another recent approval for a subdivision approved in the mid-1990’s but never 102 recorded, and also recently re-approved; and indicating a lower listing price based on one 103 homeand ½ parcel and 1 vacant lot at the time of appraisal versus when fully developed; 104 advising that therefore, the caller’s perception may not be up-to-date or accurate. 105 Member Stellmach questioned the minimum roadway standards now and in 2007 when 106 the platwas original approved, with Mr. Lloyd confirming that the same standard 107 requirements of 60’ remained.Member Stellmach further asked for examples of similar 108 width cul-de-sacs of 50’ width in Roseville and how they functioned. 109 Mr. Lloyd advised that last summer, a similar roadway width was approved for Josephine 110 Heights Plat on Millwood Avenue, creating another short cul-de-sac with limited rights-of- 111 way.Mr. Lloyd advised that this requirement hadbeen in place for some time, and while 112 he couldn’t speak tohow often it had been used, there appeared to be no correlation 113 between reduced right-of-way standards and the operation of those roadways. 114 Mr. Paschke concurred, noting that it was typical for infill development to have a similarly 115 reduced radius design,with a number of them in place throughout the City of Roseville. 116 Applicant Art Mueller, 2201 Acorn Road 117 At the invitation of Chair Gisselquist, Mr. Mueller advised that he had nothing to comment 118 on beyond the staff report and noted that he was not asking for any variances, and had 119 designed the plat in accordance with all requests and requirements of the City to-date. 120 At the request of Member Boguszewski, Mr. Mueller advised that he had not completed 121 filing the project in 2007 due to the lawsuit filed by neighbors and subsequent 1.5 year 122 delay; along with his wife becoming sick with Alzheimer’s disease, and since having 123 passed away. 124 Member Daire complimented Mr. Mueller on the professional assistance he had sought in 125 laying out the preliminary plat and completeness of the presentation. 126 Mr. Mueller thanked Member Daire for his comments, opining that the engineers had 127 done a good job on the plat. 128 At the request of Member Cunningham, Mr. Mueller advised that he had won the lawsuit, 129 which was just filed as a nuisance, and therefore the way had once again been cleared to 130 proceed with the development. 131 Public Comment 132 Vivian Ramalingam,2182 Acorn Road 133 Ms. Ramalingamstated that, when the project was first mentioned in 2007, with Mr. 134 Mueller seeking a petition of support from the neighborhood, he proposed dividing the 135 current property into two for an additional home to care for his wife, which the 136 neighborhoods agreed to –dividing the property into two.However, by the time the 137 project came before the Planning Commission, it had grown into a project diving the 138 property into four parcels, creating a considerable amount more density than supported 139 by the neighborhood.Ms. Ramalingamnoted that the neighborhood currently supported 140 spacious lots, and it was the concern of the neighbors that by dividing the property intoo 141 four parcels would detract from properties across the street, three of which were on very 142 spacious lots, in addition to the negative impacts and cramped proportions of squeezing 143 four homes onto this parcel. 144