Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />1S <br />16 <br />11 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br />Excerpt of 1�Iinutes of Planning Commission meeting of January 2, 2002: <br />a. Plannine File 3357: Request by Stoney River Development (Brent <br />Thompson) to consider a Planned Unit Development allowing eight single-family <br />residential lots on the 2.25-acre parcel located at 495 Iona Lane. <br />Chair Rhody opened the hearing and asked Thomas Paschke, City Planner, to <br />provide background on the proposed Preliminary Plat and Concept Stage of a <br />Planned Unit Development. <br />Brent Thompson, (Stoney River Development) requested consideration of the <br />Preliminary Plat and a General Concept approval for a Planned Unit <br />Development (Section 1008.1OC) of the Roseville City Code. <br />The proposal seeks approval to subdivide the 2.25-aCre parcel at 495 Iona Lane <br />into an eight lot residential development with 8 single-family, owner occupied, <br />detached structures. The proposal will slightly increase lot and house density on <br />the 2.5 parcel from that which is allowed under Section lOQ4.02D5 of the <br />Roseville City Code. <br />Community Development staff recommended approval of the preliminary plat <br />and concept plan for the Planned Unit Development. <br />Mr. Tom Walsh, 454 Iona Lane, stated that the eight-house plan was acceptable, <br />and that it may be more acceptable as a seven-house development, allowing more <br />setback between units. By reducing to seven the development would have fewer <br />vehicles and traffic, and the units will be further apart, reducing fire hazards. <br />Member Mulder asked for the scale of the units (ramblers with 1,500 — 1,800 s.f: <br />per first finished floors per unit). How large will the building area be? (2,100 — <br />2,200 s.£). How many will be walkout units (six units). <br />Member Olson asked what the elevation notation on the plan represented (floor <br />elevation at first floor and lower level floor). <br />Member Mulder asked for total impervious surface (22-23%). Member Mulder <br />asked for ponding details. Deb Bloom reported that staff is working with Grass <br />Lake Watershed. There is adequate size and area for storm water storage. <br />Member Wilke asked for details of water running to the south (Water will be <br />conveyed to ponds, then to Lake Owasso). <br />Troy Duncan asked for comparison of siY unit to eight unit preliminary plat <br />approvals. Thomas Paschke explained added requirements of the Planned Unit <br />Development. Is there an incremental difference between six large houses and <br />eight smaller houses (Staff estimates similar numbers). Deb Bloom noted that <br />the City assumes a 25% impervious coverage of the site. <br />Member Mulder asked what staff and developer requirements would be <br />completed prior to Council review approval (grading, drainage, tree preservation <br />and landscaping and terms and conditions of the PUD). When Council gets the <br />