My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
1993_1115.ws_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
1993
>
1993_1115.ws_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2011 3:51:55 PM
Creation date
10/12/2011 3:46:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
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
City of Roseville -MEMO <br /> Community Development Department November 9, X993 <br /> TO: Steve Sarkozy, City Manager <br /> FROM: Dennis P. Welsch, Community Development Director <br /> RE: CONWREIRENSIVE PLAN UPDATE FOR COUNCIL STUDY <br /> MEETING 19 <br /> Attached is die summary from the October 27th Planning Commission study <br /> meeting. The Commission is sincerely interested in continuing dlis line of <br /> communication wzd feed back with the City Council. They ask for any thoughts <br /> you may have. <br /> In this meeting slumnary you'll find drat: <br /> 1) The Commission is concerned about neighborhood stability and mix of <br /> residential within the neighborhood and support serviceslretial at die edges. <br /> The Commission asked for criteria to define a neighborhood. They advocated "life <br /> cycle" or "life long" housing opportunities, but not necessarily in higher densities. <br /> Providing "life long" housing opportunities for families and individuals provides for <br /> a vibrant, self rejuvenating community. Townhomes are not considered the only <br /> answer to empty nester housing. Building and lawn maintename and preservation <br /> of aesthetic appeal in the neighborhood was also considered an important <br /> "stabilizer". The "scale" of the mixed residential neighborhoods is <br /> important. <br /> 2} The Commission places priority on creating non-motorized "internal" pathway <br /> systems as a way of Lmiring neigliborhoods and parks. <br /> 3} Transportation routes - either cars or mass tl'111S1t- SilOtlid not disnzpt <br /> neighborhoods...should be at the "edges". <br /> 4) The mix of different types of uses should remain nearly the same. Perhaps <br /> more business/office development can occur, but only on flie same amount of lwid, <br /> preferably on the west side of dle city. In other words, build commercial "up", not <br /> "out" horizontally into residential areas. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.