CC_Minutes_2016_0711 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, July 11, 2016 Page 34 McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, DENIAL of a MINOR SUBDIVISION of the property at 1926 Gluek Lane into two parcels; based on the following find- ings: ■ Runoff and drainage issues in this area are extreme to say the least without more information being known about the proposed subdivision and impacts to current drainage issues; and ■ City Code is not being met as recently amended for lots no smaller than 85' in width, making one of the proposed parcels actually an unbuildable lot, as well as not in keeping with existing and adjacent lot sizes within the charac- ter of this neighborhood. Councilmember Willmus asked staff if the angle of the proposed lot line as it in- tersected with Gluek Lane created a grey area. Councilmember Willmus noted he had long been a proponent of perpendicular lot lines with the roadway. Mr. Lloyd stated he didn't think there was any grey area as lot lines were current- ly proposed. As with the previous application on Acorn Road, Mr. Lloyd noted city code allowed some flexibility by the City Council in the size and shape of lots and their suitability for single-family residential development. While the code prefers nice, rectangular lots easier to understand with property boundaries, Mr. Lloyd noted other subdivision approvals with anomalies; and with these lot lines parallel to existing side property lines, they are allowed even if not within the strict confines of code, as noted in the RCA. Councilmember Etten stated he would not support this motion to deny, even though he understood the concerns of the neighborhood. Councilmember Etten noted both developments considered so far tonight had existing water drainage is- sues, and both had been on the city's radar for some time and efforts were being made to address them. Councilmember Etten referenced bids that had come in too high several years ago that would have gone a considerable way to mitigate those issues and subsequent rejection of the bids and a project accordingly. How- ever, Councilmember Etten questioned how the city could hold individual home- owners responsible for additional and minor stormwater drainage due to the city's inadequate system. Also since these lots will be double the typical standard size in Roseville for single-family residential lots, Councilmember Etten stated he could not support the motion to deny based on that finding either. Based on the findings as articulated, and staff s review as noted by Senior Planner Lloyd, Mayor Roe stated he could not support the motion to deny either. Mayor Roe noted the lot conforms with conventional requirements for lot width and area, and stated he was satisfied that the applicant had made the effort to meet require- ments of lot lines as recently updated by city code, noting that a lot line parallel to the northerly lot line would also work and could be considered as an option de- pending on the final survey data. However, as it currently stands, Mayor Roe opined the proposal met minimum requirements for lot lines and setbacks. Mayor