My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2009_0511
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2009
>
CC_Minutes_2009_0511
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2009 11:26:18 AM
Creation date
5/28/2009 11:26:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/11/2009
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, May 11, 2009 <br />Page 11 <br />from the sites; and opined that there was consistent lack of clarity for this pro- <br />jected project, including the type of housing, funding sources, and other concerns <br />in this housing market. Mr. Roste encouraged Councilmembers to deny the pro- <br />ject until a better project is proposed or that it be returned to the Planning Com- <br />mission for further review. <br />John Homer, President of Ferriswood Condominium Association <br />Mr. Homer noted that Attorney Coyle represented the Association; and assured <br />Councilmembers that residents were not opposed to the development; but that <br />they were opposed to rezoning the parcel allowing high-density development on <br />that site. Mr. Homer opined that the applicant had not provided a view from Fer- <br />riswood, that would indicate blocking by the proposed building of two of the <br />more valuable units at Ferriswood. Mr. Homer suggested that the developer build <br />something else there that fit in better in the neighborhood and allowed Ferriswood <br />to retain the value of their condominium units. <br />Steve Enzler, adjoining property owner <br />Mr. Enzler, having seen the most recent elevations, advised that he still hadn't <br />been able to rationalize the view and architectural renderings and perspectives <br />versus the mass of trees; concluding that it's not an accurate rendering and that <br />the structure was closer than shown on the renderings. <br />Mr. Enzler reviewed the status of his single-family residence, and reiterated that <br />his major objection is to the mass of the proposed building. Mr. Enzler assured <br />Councilmembers and the developer that he was not adverse to in-fill development <br />there; and noted his support of the neighbors and Mr. Mueller. Mr. Enzler ad- <br />vised that he was concerned about light, air and views from his property. Mr. En- <br />zler supported maximizing the value of the adjacent parcel, however, not at the <br />cost to adjoining properties and transferring value from those existing properties. <br />Mr. Enzler noted the boundary issues already prevalent on his property; and asked <br />that no more be added until those are resolved. <br />Sherri Enzler, Sister to Steve Enzler and an Environmental Attorney for 15 <br />years <br />Ms. Enzler reviewed her credentials in providing an opinion on this matter, spe- <br />cific to her work on site impacts to water quality and quantity and the relationship <br />of water-based eco-systems, <br />Ms. Enzler reviewed the immediate concerns she had when reviewing this pro- <br />posed development related to storm water management on site and impacts to the <br />area; slow water absorption ofheavily-forested lands; and dramatic water quality <br />reduction from impervious surfaces. Ms. Enzler encouraged that environmentally <br />appropriate development be considered for this size of property that won't signifi- <br />cantly increase storm water runoff. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.