2012-03-27_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Returning to the zoning discussion, Ms. Bloom provided some examples of permitted uses in the various zoning districts, including traffic considerations in relationship to those uses. Ms. Bloom noted the challenge was with MSA streets, when higher than 7 ton, 32' wide roadways were indicated, and assessable versus non-assessable costs were considered. Ms. Bloom advised that the challenge and concerns on the staff level were related to defining which costs were assessable (e.g. medians, signals, pedestrian crossings, and turn lanes). In those situations, Ms. Bloom advised that staff's perspective was to make the Assessment Policy easier versus more complicated and easier for staff to implementation without as much structure. Ms. Bloom opined that the basic question was, "What are we trying to solve?" Ms. Bloom suggested that the concern was to provide equity in higher traffic use areas that need more traffic controls, specifically in commercial more than residential areas. Ms. Bloom advised that staff was recommending that LDR-1 and LDR-2 zoned districts be left as is based on the existing Assessment Policy and demonstrating benefits; with all other districts reviewed and Policy revisions recommended to the City Council after further PWET Commission consideration. Chair DeBenedet requested individual Commissioner perspectives regarding staff's recommendation to leave the Assessment Policy in place for LDR-1 and LDR-2 zoning districts. Ms. Bloom recommended language in the LDR-1 and LDR-2 zoning districts for assessable costs "up to 50% of project costs;" with 50% used as a placeholder, but moving toward appraisals. On State and County road projects, Ms. Bloom recommended assessing up to 50% of assessment costs as long as the City was not attempting to collect more than the Roseville portion of the cost-share for those projects, avoiding any "double-dipping," while recognizing the additional costs in constructing or reconstructing a commercial roadway. Discussion included those streets (e.g. Dale Street)that could be addressed using the City's existing Assessment Policy versus those projects indicating an appraisal would be more appropriate; typically providing appraisals on every project excluding those in LDR-1 and LDR-2 districts. Member Vanderwall suggested, in LDR-1 and LDR-2 districts, that a second tier or option for appraisal be included beyond the 25% assessment rate; and expressed concern in property value differentials based on the past five (5) years as well as future significant variables. Chair DeBenedet expressed concern in allowing an option for a resident to request an appraisal. Page 7 of 15