pm_060906 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City of Roseville - Planning Commission Minutes for September 6, 2006http://www.ci.roseville.mn.us/council/planning/minutes/2006/pm0906.htm development phases and silt fences and other conservation methods that will be put in place and monitored by the respective agencies in order to limit impacts on wetlands. Ms. Bloom further addressed natural ponding around the homes, drainage and aesthetics, and requirements addressing each. Dannette Broneak, 493 Hilltop Avenue Ms. Broneak sought the history of the property and past attempts to redevelopment the site; expressed concern with current erosion; proposed retaining wall placement and impacts to neighborhood views and aesthetics; final grades; existing vegetation; and other drainage concerns. Ms. Broneak also addressed her concerns regarding soil sample timing and findings by the developer; and the impacts to public safety for bikers and walkers by the lake and inclusion of a cul-de-sac road in the Reservoir Woods area. Ms. Broneak asked the intended value of the homes. Staff reviewed the property zoning (Single Family Residential); noted that past proposals were for higher density development and were unsuccessful due to the site challenges; and, with the developer, addressed grade and drainage issues and concerns. Mr. Johnson estimated the value of the proposed, custom, single-family homes starting at $500,000 - $550,000. Mr. Johnson advised that he had held a neighborhood meeting to gain input from the neighborhood, creating Chair Traynor advised that, while the Commission sought public input, they made their determinations based on application of legal standards, criteria and codes for land use issues. David Grundman, 519 Hilltop Mr. Grundman sought clarification on the rationale for the City vacating public property. Ms. Bloom advised that the parcel had originally been dedicated for a right-of-way, but the City had no intention of tax rolls; recognizing the rights of property owners to resume ownership of the property if not benefiting the general public. Barbara Grundman, 519 Hilltop Ms. Grundman sought information on proposed impacts to existing wildlife an how the developer intended to protect that wildlife. Mr. Wiley advised that they intended to use care, and work with the City to preserve as many substantial, desirable trees as possible. Mr. Wiley noted that, upon close inspection of the appearance of the heavily wooded area, there were actually few good or large trees, mostly scrub trees. Mr. Paschke noted, that in his career in urban development, it was common for wildlife to adapt; noting the movement from farming community to inner ring suburb of Roseville, and while there would be some displacement during the construction of the development, there should be no overall substantial decrease in the volume of Denise Hermes, 523 W Roselawn Ms. Hermes expressed appreciation to the developer that they had listened to the neighbors and eliminated their proposal for a town home development. However, Ms. Hermes addressed her concerns for tree preservation and keeping the development aesthetics in line with the adjacent natural park and walkway. Melissa McKnight, 493 S McCarrons Boulevard Ms. McKnight expressed her concerns and spoke to the need to preserve the wildlife and natural area, rather than cutting off the natural environment of the deer and turtles. Ms. McKnight also addressed the storm water control during large rainfall events; and the need to address safety for those backing out of driveways onto Woodruff and the location of the sidewalks, bus stop and an additional road proposed. Ms. Bloom addressed the traffic concerns, storm water drainage calculations and rate controls; and reviewed engineers had determined that there would be no significant traffic issues, even while Ms. Bloom appreciated that every increase was seen as significant for the neighborhood. Thad Ewald, 500 Roselawn Avenue W Mr. Ewald noted that the plan appeared to be a decent compromise, given where it had initially started with town homes; and sought input as to how a developer was held accountable from development of the plan to meeting all of the expectations of the neighbors, staff and Commission; and how to get their commitment and apply consequences if appropriate. 6 of 102/6/2007 11.15