CC_Minutes_2016_0711 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 11, 2016 Page 26 Specific to tree preservation efforts, Mr. Kotoski advised that the last thing he wanted to do was remove trees; and noted the plan was to carefully preserve the site as much as possible, with the intent to remove very few trees. Due to the size of the proposed lots, Mr. Kotoski opined that the character of the neighborhood would involve little change and most likely remain the same as ad- jacent lots. Mayor Roe closed the public hearing at approximately 8:59 p.m. Councilmember Laliberte asked Mr. Kotoski if he yet knew the placement for proposed homes on these three lots. While still pending finalization, Mr. Kotoski advised that the structure placement would meet Roseville city code minimum setback requirements, and anticipated they would be located approximately central on each lot. At the request of Councilmember McGehee, Mr. Kotoski further confirmed that the structures would be individual, custom-built, single-family homes. Willmus moved, McGehee seconded, approval of a MINOR SUBDIVISION of the property at 2201 Acorn Road into three parcels; based on the comments and findings of the RCA dated today's date, input received during public hearing, and subject to conditions as detailed in the RCA, page 4, lines 74 — 89; emphnsizing condition d(lines 86 — 89) that prior plat czpproval for Oak Acres Plat, preli�ni- nary czpprovecl on Februc�ry 8, 2016, will be rescincled prior to signed subdivision documents being relec�secl for recorcling with Rczmsey County; c�nd recognizing the broader easement width as noted by the Public Works Department. Councilmember Willmus opined that with this proposal with two additional homes being added to the existing Mueller home, and elimination of the large pri- vate roadway in the middle of the parcel as previously presented, this concept will have a less intensive or massive impact on existing tree coverage as well as the neighborhood. Therefore, Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the pro- posal. Councilmember McGehee specifically addressed the comments raised by Mr. McLoon tonight; stating she had long been a supporter of this parcel and any sub- division limited to two lots. However, due to current city code, Councilmember McGehee stated the proposal currently before the City Council was not something that could be objected to; and barring that, every effort had been made to provide for sufficient easements to address runoff issues, as recognized by the city and this applicant. Councilmember McGehee noted that it had been clearly docu- mented and recogn'ized that this area had an existing problem with runoff. Coun- cilmember McGehee noted this drainage issue was not the city's sole jurisdiction,