My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_000112
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2000
>
pm_000112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:35:44 PM
Creation date
12/15/2004 8:03:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
1/12/2000
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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 />Member Egli asked if there were engineering changes since March of 1999. (no) (The City Council denied the request in <br />1999 because it was premature to completion of a moratorium study.) <br /> <br />Member Egli asked if the parking capacity was adequate. Staff response was the parking is adequate. Thomas Paschke <br />explained the parking and the lot coverage of the site. Greg Kopishke noted that even at peak periods there is adequate <br />parking. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked about storm flooding issues in 1996, and whether the new ordinance would have adequate <br />storm ponding in relation to new requirements for berming and screening. Greg Kopishke explained the new storm water <br />proposal, increasing storage two to three times and constricted outflow by 50% during peak flow. <br /> <br />Deb Bloom explained the research and planning for ponding and storms was no greater than a ten-year storm. The <br />proposal by the Mall will improve storm water storage. There will be no undue strain or impact on the existing system. <br /> <br />Public Comment. <br /> <br />Mark Battis, 1413 Eldridge, noted that the new Ordinance passed December 1999 required 25% coverage. He reviewed <br />calculations for lot coverage in the staff report. He noted the property calculation into Snelling and County Road B <br />expands the site. If those areas are excluded, the site is overdeveloped by 3% (28% total). Mr. Battis said the project is <br />already over the 25% lot coverage. Mr. Battis asked the Planning Commission to recommend the issue of lot coverage be <br />considered by the City Council. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Rhody moved, seconded by Member Wilke, to recommend approval of the request for vacation of <br />certain utility and drainage easements located on the southeast side of the former HomePlace facility and acceptance of a <br />replacement utility easement, based on the following findings as outlined in the staff report of January 12, 2000: <br />1. The Roseville Engineering Department has reviewed, provided comments, and with the addition of a manhole, <br />approved the proposed design and plans to relocate public utilities. They have determined there is no change in <br />the capacity of the utility services, and only a minor addition to the flow. As-built drawings will be required upon <br />completion of the relocation. The Engineering Department has also determined the proposed easement to be <br />adequate to accommodate the reconstruction of the existing utilities. All easement documents must be recorded <br />prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the new building on the site. <br />2. The applicant (Bradley) is responsible for the full cost of vacating, moving and reconstructing the utilities. <br />3. The applicant (Bradley) must submit a utility plan and all utility and drainage easement documents and legal <br />description for the easement to the Engineering Department. The City must release the existing utility and drainage <br />easement upon the recording of the new utility and drainage easement. <br /> <br />Ayes: 5 - 0 <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Member Rhody questioned changing the interpretation of the lot coverage. <br /> <br />Motion: Member Rhody moved, seconded by Member Egli, to recommend that Council work with staff to define lot <br />coverage definitions and to consider whether street easements should be included in the lot coverage. <br /> <br />Ayes: 5 - 0 <br /> <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />6b. Planning File 3159. A request by Sunrise Assisted Living, Inc. for Concept consideration of a Residential Planned <br />Unit Development (R-PUD) to redevelop the four (4) acre Knights of Columbus site into a 79 unit, three story, assisted <br />living care facility. The proposal requires a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Business (B) to High Density <br />Residential (HD) and a rezoning from B1, Limited Business to Planned Unit Development with an underlying zoning of R7, <br />apartment Park District, on property generally located at 2225 Snelling Avenue. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing opened the hearing and requested Dennis Welsch to provide a verbal summary of the January 12, 2000 <br />staff report concerning the proposal. Mr. Welsch explained background and recommendations from the James Addition <br />Task Force. Staff recommended concept approval. <br /> <br />Mike Concilla, Sunrise representative, introduced the company, explained the project, noting it was a 79 unit building. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.