My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2020_0518_CCPacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2020
>
2020_0518_CCPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/7/2022 9:35:26 AM
Creation date
1/7/2022 9:34:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
5/18/2020
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
569
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />41 The proposed drainage and utility easements as shown on the proposed plat meet the <br />42 requirements of the City. <br />43 Proposed Private Street and Pathway <br />44 The Subdivision Code limits the length of cul-de-sac streets to 500 feet, and the proposed cul-de-sac <br />45 street is approximately 550 feet long. The requested Subdivision Variance, analyzed below, is intended <br />46 to address this nonconformity. <br />47 The City Engineer supports the width and design of the street, and specifies that based on the <br />48 width, on-street parking will not be permitted. The roadway meets Citydesign standards, except <br />49 for the length. Final construction plans will be approved by the City prior to issuing permits. <br />50 On account of more urgent community-health related priorities, Roseville’s Fire Department <br />51 Chief has not had an opportunity in recent weeks to prepare a formal memo, but he has <br />52 confirmed his support for the longer-than-standard cul-de-sac street, with the condition that the <br />53 developer installs a fire hydrant at both ends of the proposed street. <br />54 The site plan included with this RCA as part of Attachment C shows a pathway along the east <br />55 side of Lexington, running the length of the development, which the applicants have been <br />56 designing to meet Roseville’s requirements. <br />57 Park Dedication <br />58 This subdivision proposal elicits the park dedication requirement because the subject property is greater <br />59 than one acre in size and the proposal results in a net increase of development lots. The Parks and <br />60 Recreation Commission (PRC) reviewed the proposal on May 5, and recommended a dedication of land. <br />61 The City Attorney has subsequently advised that the acceptance of a land dedication be contingent on <br />62 receiving an appropriate statement of liability from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) <br />63 and satisfactory due-diligence regarding the conditions of the soils in the dedicated land area. <br />64 The applicant’s soil borings, test pits, and Phase 1 & 2 reports reveal some petroleum impacts from <br />65 buried bituminous debrisin the north area of Outlot B and non-structural fill soils elsewherein the <br />66 southern part of the site. While the MPCA does not require any remediation prior to using the land, as it <br />67 is,for passive recreational purposes, full remediation would be required if any part of the of the <br />68 contaminated soils would be disturbed for development of homes, roads, utilities, etc. Therefore, since <br />69 the applicants do not intend to develop any of the land south of their proposal, they were amenable to <br />70 dedicating all of the land south of their proposal to the City for public park use. This dedication includes <br />71 1.61 acres between the Judith Avenue right-of-way and 0.67 acres south of the Judith Avenue right-of- <br />72 way, for a total of 2.28 acres, or about 40% of the land controlled by the developer. Such a dedication is <br />73 much larger than what can be required under City Code and State Statute, but it would not be improper <br />74 for the City to accept this dedication when it is volunteered by the applicant. <br />75 If the additional due diligence leads the City to concludethat the land is not suitable for park dedication, <br />76 then the City would require the applicant to pay a cash dedication in lieu of the land. Since the existing <br />77 property includes 12 existing, platted residential lots, City staff has determined that the proposed 32-lot <br />78 plat represents a net increase of 20 developable lots.Extending the $4,000 per unit fee established in the <br />79 City’s Fee Schedule across the net increase of 20 developable lots, the required park dedication fee <br />80 would be $80,000.The decision of land verses cash dedication does not impact the lot layout as depicted <br />81 on the Preliminary Plat. <br />82 Tree Preservation <br />83 The tree preservation and replacement plan requirements in City Code §1011.04 provide a way to <br />84 quantify the amount of tree material being removed for a given project and to calculate the potential tree <br />7d RCA <br />Page 3 of 7 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.