2021_0222_CCPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 1 of 2 EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of 1 Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was held on the 22nd day of February 2021 at 6:00 p.m. 2 The following Council Members were present: _________; 3 and _____ were absent. 4 Council Member _____ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 5 RESOLUTION NO. ___ 6 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PROPOSED ‘THE ENCLAVE AT MCCARRONS LAKE’ 7 PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SUBDIVISION VARIANCE (PF20-029) 8 WHEREAS, Airborne McCarrons, LLC has submitted a valid application for approval of a 9 subdivision variance and the proposed ‘The Enclave at McCarrons Lake’ preliminary plat of the 10 property addressed as 196 – 210 S McCarrons Boulevard on behalf of the property owner, Matthias 11 Schlosser; and 12 WHEREAS, the property included in the proposed ‘The Enclave at McCarrons Lake’ plat 13 comprises Ramsey County Parcel Identification Numbers: 14 13-29-23-44-0002 (196 S McCarrons Boulevard) 15 13-29-23-44-0035 and 13-29-23-44-0038 (210 S McCarrons Boulevard 16 WHEREAS the proposed subdivision conforms to all of the applicable standards of the City of 17 Roseville zoning and subdivision codes except that the length of the proposed cul-de-sac street exceeds 18 the maximum length established in §1103.02.F of the City Code; and 19 WHEREAS, the Roseville Planning Commission held the duly noticed public hearing for this 20 application on February 3, 2021, and having closed said public hearing, voted unanimously to 21 recommend approval of the proposed preliminary plat and subdivision variance based on the public 22 record and the Planning Commission’s deliberation with certain conditions; and 23 WHEREAS, The Roseville City Council has made the following findings pertaining to the 24 nonconforming length of the cul-de-sac street pursuant to §1102.02.C of the City Code, which mandates 25 that the City make four specific findings as a prerequisite for approving a subdivision variance: 26 1. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is generally consistent with 27 the Comprehensive Plan because it represents the Comprehensive Plan’s goals of providing a variety 28 of housing types in the community. 29 2. The proposal is in harmony with the purposes and intent of the zoning and subdivision ordinances. 30 The purposes and intent of the subdivision ordinance as it applies to the length of a cul-de-sac street 31 is to ensure there are adequate ingress/egress provisions for emergency response vehicles and that 32 the new residents of the proposed development have a robust connection to the city’s transportation 33 network. The proposal is in harmony with these purposes of the subdivision ordinance because most 34 of the residential lots themselves are within 500 feet (i.e., the maximum length of a cul-de-sac street) 35 of Galtier Street, and those which are further from Galtier Street abut the proposed Marion Street 36 RCA Attachment F Page 3 of 8