pm_051005 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City of Roseville - Planning Commission Minutes for October 5, 2005Page 2 of 11 located within Planning District 14, and has a zoning designation of 'R-1', Single Family Residence District. Paschke noted that all 10 lots will have access to the newly constructed public road to be known as Chatsworth Court. The existing site slopes from east to west and splits from south north and further back on the site, drains to the south. When regraded, the front half of each lot will drain to the street which will drain from the proposed cul-de-sac north to Parker (a drop of 6 feet within the 370 foot long street (approximately 1.6% slope). Subject to Capitol Regions Watershed review, rain gardens will be created along the Parker frontage. In addition, two infiltration containment areas will be created, one in the northwest corner and the other in the southeast corner. He noted that each of the proposed lots meets or exceeds the requirements of the City Code regarding length, width, size and required set back. The proposed road includes a 50 feet wide right of way with a 28 foot wide road (back of curb to back of curb). The proposed plat includes approximately 12,000 sq. ft. of paved street and an estimated total of 32,000 sq. ft. of impervious surface on the lots for a total of 44,000 sq. ft. of impervious surface or approximately 26%-27% of the total site. Chair Mark Traynor joined the meeting. The Planning Staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat creating 10 single family residential lots from the 3.73 acre site located at 952, 960, and 978 Parker Avenue, subject to the comments of Section 4 and conditions of Section 5 of the project report dated October 5, 2005, that: 1.The Developer work with City Staff to develop a grading, drainage, utility and final tree preservation and landscape plan. 2.Birch Park will be responsible for a park dedication requirement. Staff assumes that a payment in lieu of land dedication will be required amounting to $1,000 per net new lot. The method of park dedication (land or fee) must be reviewed by the Park & Recreation Commission and a recommendation included in the final action by the City Council. Member Bakeman asked what the name of the cul-de-sac should be. Could the street be named something different (Chatsworth Circle or Court)? This meets the street naming requirements. Chair Traynor asked why this is not a PUD or zoning criteria in larger developments. What is the scope of review for single family lots? Thomas Paschke explained the process used on Iona Lane for a PUD. Thomas Paschke also explained the need to determine zoning consistency and meeting all the criteria within the subdivision plat. 'Does the plat meet these criteria' is the question the Planning Commission must answer. He explained that these lots meet the minimum legal requirements of the code (lot size, consistent with comprehensive plan, sewer, grading, drainage, watershed review). Member Pust asked if this could be a PUD. (Had this been done at the Iona Lane subdivision?) Oakcrest and Hamline subdivision is similar to this proposal. Ron Anderson, applicant, explained that this proposal will be for single family homes. Chair Traynor asked who will pay for utilities, roads and dedication. (This is the applicants responsibility.) Three pieces of correspondence opposed to the project were added to the record. Deborah Pile (drainage) Dahmann/Sabeno (wildlife natural environment and privacy) and Saxerud (privacy, quality of life). Bill Kuhbander, 1016 Parker, owns land to the west and said the property will change the neighborhood. Three homes are owned by the Baptist Church. Traffic is an issue. This development will add 10 new cars and there will be little parking. There were deer, weasels, fox and ducks in the backyard. Why wasn't a traffic study done? Thomas Paschke explained the traffic in the neighborhood. Chair Traynor expressed concern about the changes to the character of the neighborhood (single family lot neighborhood). http://www.ci.roseville.mn.us/council/planning/minutes/2005/pm051005.htm12/27/2005