My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2009_0420_Packet_Exec
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2009
>
2009_0420_Packet_Exec
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/9/2012 2:40:32 PM
Creation date
4/20/2009 8:54:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
110
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
Attachment B <br />Rezone Parcels at 1126 Sandhurst and 2167 Lexington Avenue to PUD and Approve the <br />General Concept PUD for Wellington Management <br />Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd briefly reviewed the request as detailed in the staff report dated <br />March 23, 2009. Mr. Lloyd noted that the primary outstanding issue remained the location of the <br />building in relationship to the traffic safety triangle; and summarized ongoing discussions and <br />revisions since the Planning Commission meeting. <br />Discussion included the procedure requested in this instance for rezoning compared to past <br />rezoning and General Concept PUD requests, and staff's clarification of a more accurately <br />defined approach. <br />� Further discussion included rezoning without indication of underlying zoning, particularly <br />� rezoning from residential to commercial; and development potential for adj acent and <br />� surrounding properties, including those across the street. <br />� Steve Wellington, President of Wellington Management <br />� Mr. Wellington expressed appreciation for the City Council's attention to this request; and <br />� reviewed other developments of their firm in the metropolitan area, in addition to those in <br />� Roseville. Mr. Wellington advised that his firm was interested in doing the best job to reflect the <br />� desires of the community; and opined that the proposed proj ect was reflective of this intent, <br />� while redeveloping this challenging site and corner location. Mr. Wellington expressed <br />� willingness to further consider additional comments and suggestions to improve upon the <br />� proposed proj ect. <br />� Further discussion included issues with the zero setback on County Road B and Lexington <br />� Avenue; main thoroughfare for students to access the Roseville Area High School by foot or <br />� bicycle; sight line concerns; need for additional green space; limitations on the use of that <br />� particular parcel, and challenges to increase green space and make it financially viable; potential <br />� minor adjustments to facilitate the safety triangle; and potential shifting of the building further <br />� north to increase that visibility. <br />� Additional discussion included the need to create an environment friendly for pedestrians and <br />� bicycles, not just cars and parking; further revisions prior to final development plan presentation; <br />� whether a smaller footprint and an additional story would be feasible and more appealing to the <br />� neighborhood; and need to reduce impervious coverage. <br />� Further discussion included potential acquisition of the adjoining commercial property on <br />� County Road B, and their lack of interest in relocating at this time based on approaches by the <br />� developer. <br />� Mr. Wellington advised that discussion was underway for rounding the corner of the building to <br />� increase visibility and making it more aesthetically pleasing. <br />� Sonja Simonsen, Wellington Project Manager <br />� Ms. Simonsen reviewed comments received at the neighborhood Open House, and general <br />� support of the neighborhood to see the current bank/retail site and drive-thru eliminated. Ms. <br />� Simonsen addressed the use of the parking lot as a buffer to residential neighbors; and potential <br />� reduction of traffic with this office use. Ms. Simonsen noted that the sidewalk would not be <br />� reduced in size with location of the building at the proposed location; and that comments and <br />� concern of the neighbors had been addressed following that meeting. Ms. Simonsen advised <br />� that, in terms of height and density, the neighbors supported a single-story structure to keep <br />consistent with the neighborhood feel, without blocking their view or trees. <br />Page 1 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.