My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2014_0220
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2014
>
CC_Minutes_2014_0220
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2014 1:22:23 PM
Creation date
3/26/2014 1:35:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/24/2014
Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
Special City Council Meeting <br /> Thursday, February 20, 2014 <br /> Page 18 <br /> Discussion ensued specific to the PIK parcels as outlined on the map and splitting <br /> the parcels or following their property line. Mr. Paschke advised that the old par- <br /> cel lines would need re-established with new property lines, but may be splitting <br /> uses. <br /> Mr. Trudgeon suggested if two districts were proposed that option be confirmed <br /> tonight for the benefit of property owners in attendance. However, Mr. Trudgeon <br /> suggested a different track, since if it remained zoned as CMU, he anticipated <br /> people knocking at the door and development applications received immediately <br /> under that current code. Mr. Trudgeon noted that this allowed the most flexibil- <br /> ity, with minor tweaking, and with addressing any inconsistencies with the Com- <br /> prehensive Plan using proposed language provided by staff in the RCA, it would <br /> then eliminate any perceived conflict. <br /> Mr. Trudgeon noted that the City Council had previously directed staff to figure <br /> out the zoning; and while his next comments may seem to be a leap, he would <br /> recommend keeping the CMU in place, amend the Comprehensive Plan, tweak <br /> specifics in the code, and get rid of the regulating plan requirement, changing <br /> HDR across Terrace, allowing for mixed use. Mr. Trudgeon suggested that by <br /> doing that, and tackling the EAW and environmental issues, and based on to- <br /> night's good discussion on the limits of retail with the City picking where that <br /> may happen, it would keep things simple and allow property owners to move for- <br /> ward quickly. Under that scenario, Mr. Trudgeon opined that the City Council <br /> would see applications coming forward yet this summer with projects already <br /> ready and waiting in the wings. If the City Council chose to do so, it could divvy <br /> up the area into two districts, and while he saw some merit in doing so, Mr. <br /> Trudgeon opined that a decision needed to be taken on the next steps. <br /> Mr. Paschke, in addressing specific design standards, noted that each had specif- <br /> ics beyond the overall plan, with the CMU currently relying on that regulating <br /> plan. Mr. Paschke asked that the Council keep that in mind; and while not a huge <br /> effort by eliminating the regulating plan, it also eliminated a number of things al- <br /> ready put in place (e.g. buffers, pedestrian connections) and other nuances that <br /> would no longer exist to be built into design standards or removed. <br /> At the request of Mayor Roe, Mr. Paschke confirmed that setbacks would be ad- <br /> dressed like in other sections of code, with percentages based on articulations. <br /> Mayor Roe noted that there was some commonalty in districts, but others were in <br /> the context of urban design principles for the Twin Lakes area. <br /> Councilmember McGehee spoke in agreement with Mr. Trudgeon's suggestion <br /> for design standard, which she had never been a big fan of in the Twin Lakes ar- <br /> ea; and expressed preference for a simpler, less restrictive plan. Councilmember <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.