My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2014_0421_CCpacket
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2014
>
2014_0421_CCpacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/8/2014 1:43:38 PM
Creation date
4/17/2014 2:45:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
135
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
13 4.0 BACKGROUND <br />�4 The subject properties, located in Planning District 7, have Comprehensive Plan Land <br />� 5 Use Designations of Low-Density Residential (LR), High Density Residential (HR), and <br />�6 Institutional (IN). The respective zoning classifications are Low-Density Residential-1 <br />17 (LDR-1), High Density Residential-1 (HDR-1), and Institutional (INST) Districts. The <br />� g p�LlMnv�Y pLAT proposal has been prompted by plans to redevelop the 3-acre area into <br />� g 25 residential lots with common areas. The proposed housing will be a mix of row <br />2o homes, small-lot single-family homes, and townhomes. <br />2� When exercising the so-called "quasi judicial" authority when acting on a PLAT request, <br />22 the role of the City is to determine the facts associated with a particular request and apply <br />23 those facts to the legal standards contained in the ordinance and relevant state law. In <br />24 general, if the facts indicate the applicant meets the relevant legal standard, then they are <br />25 likely entitled to the approval, although the City is able to add conditions to a plat <br />2� approval to ensure that the likely impacts to roads, storm sewers, and other public <br />._ infrastructure on and around the subject property are adequately addressed. <br />'�; 5.0 PRELIMINARY PLAT ANALYSIS <br />2s Plat proposals are reviewed primarily for the purpose of ensuring that all proposed lots <br />3o meet the minimum size requirements of the Zoning Code, that adequate streets and other <br />3� public infrastructure are in place or identified and constructed, and that storm water is <br />32 addressed to prevent problems either on nearby property or within the storm water <br />3s system. As a pxELrnIINAxY pLAT of inedium density residential property, the proposal <br />34 includes zoning issues that need to be addressed since the Zoning Code does establish <br />35 minimum lot dimensions or area. The proposed Fire House Addition must have a <br />3s minimum lot width of 40 feet and a lot area of 4,800 sq. ft. for each of the one-family <br />s� detached housing units and a minimum of 3,600 sq. ft. for each of the attached units. <br />3s There are no minimum lot width standards for attached units. pREL11v11NAxY pLAT is <br />3g included with this report as Attachment C. <br />4o The present plat proposal has been prompted by a redevelopment plan which requires <br />4� approval of a Comprehensive Plan land use change, rezoning, and text amendments to the <br />42 Zoning Code regarding the medium density requirements. On March 13, 2014, the <br />43 Development Review Committee (DRC) met to review the submitted preliminary plans <br />44 for the Dale Street Redevelopment and no major concerns were identified. The City <br />45 Engineer, however, did indicate that his staff has had preliminary meetings/discussions <br />46 with the applicant (GMHC) over storm water management requirements for the <br />4� development and indicated that the development's engineer is warking toward designing <br />4� and resolving initial deficiencies. <br />4g On March 20, 2014, GMHC held the required public open house regarding their intention <br />5o to redevelop the subject properties into the mixed-residential development of 25 <br />5� residential lots with row homes, small-lot detached single-family homes, and townhomes. <br />52 Although a number of residents attended the meeting, most comments/questions were <br />5s related to the development itself and not the lots or their design/sized (Attachment D). <br />54 <br />55 <br />PF14-004 RCA 042ll4 PrePlat.doc <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.