Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Roseville Planning Commission Minutes <br />January 8, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Demos stated that whoever requested the permit should be apprised <br />of the drainage requirement, and it should be a condition of the <br />building permit. <br /> <br />Wiski stated he was concerned about smaller lots, and that the <br />City should be concerned about not continually approving <br />unbuildable lots. <br /> <br />Mr. Smith asked what the definition of a swale was. Mr. Honchell <br />replied that it is a depression in the ground or, in effect, a <br />small ditch. Mr. Smith also asked about the possibility of <br />modifying the layout of the home that's eventually placed on that <br />particular lot. Mr. Dahlgren replied that a regular rambler <br />could work quite well on that lot, and that a number of cities <br />are currently using the 75 foot lot standard. Johnson pointed <br />out that a number of people prefer the smaller lots today, in <br />view of the reduced maintenance requirements. <br /> <br />Roll Call, Ayes: <br />Nays: <br /> <br />Dressler, Berry, DeBenedet, Johnson and Wiski. <br />None. <br /> <br />Proposed Amendment To Parking Requirements In Roseville's <br />Zoning Code <br /> <br />Mr. Dahlgren pointed out that this item was before the Planning <br />Commission again as a result of the fact that the previous <br />recommendations of the Planning Commission had to formally be <br />referred to the Commission by the City Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Dhalgren stated that the new standards, as suggested in <br />the new ordinance, were tested with respect to the Lido <br />application, and worked quite well. Mr. Dahlgren suggested that <br />in the second paragraph of the modification, "accredited traffic <br />engineer", should be placed after the word "use". Demos asked <br />whether all traffic consultants are engineers. Mr. Dahlgren <br />replied that the good ones were traffic engineers. <br /> <br />Discussion <br />Wiski stated with respect to terminology, he would have liked a <br />more broad definition of expert. <br /> <br />Demos asked whether the expert was working for the applicant or <br />the City. Mr. Dahlgren replied that he/she would be working for <br />the applicant. <br /> <br />Johnson suggested that the members consider deleting the <br />terminology relating to professional, and accredited. Berry <br />stated that she felt the accreditation part of the language was <br />important to ensure credibility of the parking study. <br />