2002_0819_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

cul-de-sac islands. ■ Shift units three to four feet to create added definition and character to the development. Some units could be shifted forward, while others would need to shift to the rear. An example is attached. ■ Create a deck/porch/patio area versus just indicating the deck This will eliminate the need to modify the PUD in the future if a home owner desires to enclose the deck or replace it with a three/four season porch. The pad area will also provide for the installation of a future patio should a home owner desire this feature. ■ Consider the installation of a 28 to 24 foot wide looped street with designated on- street parking or a 20 to 22 foot one way looped road with parking on one side. 6.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 6.1 Staff recommends approval of the proposal by Masterpiece Homes for a Planned Unit Development General Concept Plan and Subdivision Plat for the proposed Stonecrest development of 24 owner occupied town home units on a looped road with associated site improvements on property at 2245, 2263, and 2275 County Road B, based on the findings and comments of Section 3 of the project report dated August 7, 2002. 7.0 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: 7.1 On August 7, 2002, the Roseville Planning Commission held the public hearing regarding the Masterpiece Homes request. At the heading a number of adjacent property owners were present to address the Commission, with their main issue/interest having to do with grading and drainage for the development. Other issues/concerns discussed included development density, tree preservation, setbacks, street design, screening, storm water management pond, building design, traffic, green/open space, County Road B closure, and traffic. 7.2 The Commission allowed Staff and/or the developer to address each question, providing the audience and Planning Commission with additional details. 7.3 The City Planner indicated to the Commission and audience that the Concept proposal was like a working drawing, allowing minor changes based on input form the City Council and the neighborhood. Specifically, the City Planner offered to hold a meeting(s) with the surrounding property owners to discuss landscaping and screening options. The Commission suggested to the developer that ongoing communication, similar to that which has already occurred, continue until the proj ect is complete. 7.4 The Planning Commission voted (S-0) to recommend approval of the preliminary plat and Planned Unit Development "General Concept Plan", creating a 24 unit residential PUD development with an underlying zoning of R-2, premised on the street and utility plan dated August 7, 2002 and the remaining site plans dated July 2S, 2002 and the comment and findings of Section 5 of the project report dated August 7, 2002. PF3357 — RCA PUD Concept 08 1902 Page 8