CC_Minutes_2016_0711 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 11, 2016 Page 24 Mayor Roe clarified, with confirmation by Mr. Freihammer, that there were no additional requirements beyond those already in place by the applicable watershed district and existing city stormwater management ordinance, all part of any subse- quent building permit that needed to meet all those requirements even though all of those requirements were not yet known at the point in the application process. Councilmember Etten asked if staff anticipated working with a developer in con- junction with housing construction on the parcels, or if the reserve setback was in- tended for future mitigation. Mr. Freihammer responded that would depend on how quickly the developer moved, and whether that development occurred as a mass project or individually per lot and individual lot grading. Mr. Freihammer advised that would inform whether it made more sense to do the mitigation all at once or as a stand-alone improvement project. Mayor Roe reviewed the protocol for public hearings and opened the public hear- ing at approximately 8:46 p.m. Public Comment An emczil datetl July 7, 2018 from Paul Romcznowski, 2195 Acorn Road, was pro- vided as part of the record, attczched hereto and made a pc�rt hereof. Steve McLoon, 1920 Gluek Lane As a general comment and in context of the next three action items, Mr. McLoon asked that the City Council consider preservation of neighborhoods. While not knowing this neighborhood well, Mr. McLoon opined that this application, as well as the next two applications for subdivision, did not fit the nature of their neighborhoods, nor did they support the reasons residents originally located in Roseville in these specific neighborhoods. Evan Thomas, Property Owner at 2177 County Road B West As of today, Mr. Thomas stated he had owned his property for forty-two years. Mr. Thomas opined that any increase in impervious surface on the subject proper- ty at 2201 Acorn Road would increase runoff to adjacent lots. Mr. Thomas fur- ther opined that this and numerous previous configurations over the last few years for this parcel would all result in the same reality . However, given those previ- ous proposed plats, Mr. Thomas noted that they at least had some built-in mitiga- tion to address existing and future drainage issues; while this version appeared to have abandoned any mitigation of or concern by the city for any and all develop- ment on the lot and various runoff considerations; and any concept of how much water actually needed to be retained on these proposed lots seemingly abandoned. Mr. Thomas noted that the present drainage situation was already problematic, especially on the southwest corner of the subject lot, and had been evident in May of this year after a significant rainfall event. Mr. Thomas provided photographic