2008_0324_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

4 0 0 BACKGROUND 4.1 The Community Development Department has long encouraged developers of certain 23 major projects to hold a community meeting/open house prior to consideration of their 24 application by the Planning Commission. Because this policy has not been codified, 2 1 however, Community Development staff cannot require this kind of public engagement. 26 4.2 Recent conversations with City Council Members, the Fri. n.d.s of Twin Lakes, and the 27 Roseville Citizen League have given rise to suggestions of further engaging surrounding 2 residents in the Planned Unit Development (PUD) review process, among others, prior to 29 formal consideration of an application at the public hearing before the Planning 3 Commission. 31 4.3 Community Development staff has researched the notification policies and practices of 32 other communities within the metropolitan area and has found that several cities have 33 similar open house requirements. Community Development staff supports the adoption of 34 such a requirement whereby developers would be required to include a summary of the 3 "'1 open house as part of a formal land use application. City staff, Planning Commissioners, 36 and City Council Members can then consider additional community input from the open 37 house during the review process. 5.0 STAFF COMMENTS 39 5.1 According to State Statute, the City of Roseville has 60 days from the submission of a 4 complete land use application in which to either approve or deny the application, and the 4 1 timing of Planning commission and City Council meetings is such that the 60-day 42 timeline is nearly expired by the earliest time an application can be presented to the City 43 Council for final action. Often, because this schedule is so tight, City staff has necessarily 44 formed a recommendation for an application by the time most of the public becomes 4 "'1 aware that there are plans to be reviewed. It is understandable, then, that some members 46 of the public get the impression that a given development is "a done deal" , so to speak, 47 before it is discussed in the public hearing at the Planning Commission meeting. 5.2 Requiring that developers hold an informational meeting prior to submitting an 49 application for project approval ensures that the public is made aware of the proposal and 0 given the opportunity to make comments or ask questions about it before the 60-day timeline has begun. Such a meeting between the developer and members of the 12 community may result in improvements in the development plans before they're even "t' 13 submitted; at the very least, however, interested members of the community will have the t' "'14 additional opportunity to learn about the proposal, formulate their opinons, and make 1� t_ themselves heard. 00 6 5.3 The developer would be responsible for sending invitations to the surrounding property 7 owners, but Community Development Department staff would generate the list of mailing addresses to which these invitations would be sent. This list would coincide with "'19 the distribution of the direct-mailed notices of a public hearing for a land use application 6(1) on that same subject property in addition to the mailing addresses of Planning 61 Commissioners and City Council Members who may choose to attend the open house 62 even though they would not have an official purpose there. I"ROJOOIO—PUD-Open-House—RCA-032408.doc F"age 2 of 4