CC_Minutes_2007_0514 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council Study Session Minutes of Monday, May 14,2007 Page 6 one single-family residential zoning district may be advantageous. Mr. Grefenberg further summarized the City's current zoning stan- dards related to minimum lot sizes and widths and depths; front, back and side yard setback requirements; and shoreland area differentials. Mr. Grefenberg addressed neighborhood context-based regulations, such as "sliding scale" regulations used by the Cities of Edina and Bloomington, and their application to Roseville; Roseville's neighborhood vitality is one of the community's strengths; and Mr. Grefenberg expressed his personal consideration of contextual zoning for Roseville, until applying it to the city. He felt that it had unrealistic outcomes for the community. Mr. Grefenberg noted that the "McMansion" issue was raised and ad- dressed; noting that current Roseville City Code provided restrictions (height and minimum side yard setbacks) that would preclude many problems being experienced in other suburbs. Mr. Grefenberg further noted that "cluster housing" was also discussed. One of the recommendations of the CAG was for a new zoning dis- trict that would apply to areas that historically developed with lots smaller than existing standards (i.e., platted prior to May 21, 1959). Mr. Doherty provided a summary of the CAG's recommendations; di- vided into four major categories: A. General Single-Family Residen- tial Subdivision Policy; B. Subdivision Code; C. Zoning Code; and D. Other City Standards and Ordinances. The written report provided detailed examples, discussion considerations, and rationale and moti- vation for the consensus opinions of the CAG, and noted one area where consensus was not achieved related to flag lots. Mr. Doherty concluded by noting that, while not part of the CAG's original charge, continual feedback and comments were heard from citizens - both residential and commercial interests - regarding their concern for environmental issues; along with tree preserva- tion/replacement, and citizen desire for an ordinance to make policy more explicit other than what is intimated in current code.