My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CCP 01312022
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2022
>
CCP 01312022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2022 2:06:22 PM
Creation date
1/27/2022 2:05:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
1/31/2022
Meeting Type
Regular
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.
/
346
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
RCA Attachment D <br />responsibility of the homeowner. When the lots are sold the boardwalks will not be <br />installed. <br />Member Schaffhausen indicated when the wetland is discussed, in the homeownerÓs <br />association a plan to make sure that the wetland is not disturbed. <br />Mr. Sikich explained this will be provided in the HOA and is not allowed in the DNR <br />rules. <br />Member Schaffhausen wondered what can be done to protect the wetland. She <br />thought the preservation is of value and pretty much every resident that has responded <br />has this as a concern. She wanted to make sure the City is focusing on that concern at <br />a broader level and what else can be done about it if anything. <br /> <br />Mr. Sikich indicated his company can talk with their development attorney and see if <br />there is anything that can be added but the enforcement of wetlands or impacts to <br />wetlands is the DNR. <br /> <br />Mr. Paschke reviewed with the Commission some things that the City can do and <br />what was done in other developments. He noted some type of signage can be used to <br />show the area as wetland along the buffer edge. <br />Mr. Sikich indicated he would not be against the City adding the signage as a <br />condition of approval. <br /> <br />Member Schaffhausen asked if it is possible that all of the work Mr. Sikich is going <br />through with regard to the DNR and all of that activity, could affect density in any <br />way shape or form and changing the lots from five to four or anything of that nature. <br /> <br />Mr. Lloyd did not think so. The requirements in the Zoning Code have the unstated <br />purpose of managing the amount of density allowed on a given site based on the <br />presence of public water, such as the lake or wetlands. He thought that impact is <br />already accounted for or rather this proposal is sort of below whatever kind of other <br />limits that might practically impose. <br />Mr. Sikich indicated this project is a conforming one for the LDR One Zoning. <br />Variances or rezoning is not being asked from them. <br />Public Comment <br /> <br />Ms. Kristine Simonson, 3061 Rice Street, Roseville <br />Ms. Simonson indicated she is a property owner at 2940 West Owasso Blvd. She <br />expressed her concern related to the idea of density reduction and five lots rather than <br />four or three. She noted the odd shape of the lots towards the lake and will have a <br />very different feel when the docks are built. <br /> <br />Mr. Cory Koger, East side of Lake Owasso <br />Mr. Koger explained he had a couple of questions and concerns, specifically <br />regarding the way the design is set up to have a minimum impact. He indicated there <br />Page 11 of 65 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.