2014_0714_CCpacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment A Extract of the Meeting Minutes of the Roseville Planning Commission, May 5, 2014 b. PLANNING FILE 14-006 Request by the University of Northwestern for a Text Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow student housing as a permitted use in the Community Business District. The Roseville Community Development Department is also seeking a TEXT AMENDMENT to the definition of dormitory, changing the title to "student housing," replacing dormitory in the definition of college or post- secondary school, campus with "student housing," and permitting "student housing" in Regional Business and Community Mixed-Use Districts Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 14-006 at approximately 7:14 p.m. City Planner Paschke reviewed the joint request by the University of Northwestern and the Roseville Planning Division for approval of a TEXT AMENDMENT to the Zoning Ordinance, specifically to Section 1001.10 (Definitions, Table 1005.1) and Section 1011.12.E to permit student housing in the select districts within Commercial and Mixed Use Districts to facilitate plans to purchase and convert the Country Inn and Suites into student housing. Mr. Paschke reviewed the background of staff's analysis, and rationale for the proposed request to support this use, as detailed in Section 4 of the staff report dated May 7, 2014; and differences in student housing/dormitories versus lodging rooms and potential use impacts for the expansion of the College campus. Further analysis was detailed in Section 5.0 of the staff report, specific to definitions of dormitory, student housing, and other applicable text amendments and permitted uses listed on Table 1005-1. Mr. Paschke also reviewed proposed changes to the "Standards" portion specific to student housing for re-use or newly-constructed use, as outlined in Sections 5.7 and 5.8. In Section 5.2, Member Daire questioned if it was staff's intent to eliminate "dormitories;" and if so, there was another section that still referenced "dormitories" versus "student housing." Mr. Paschke clarified that the first instance was the existing language, and the second instance was proposed language, immediately ahead of Section 5.3 of the report, similar to Section 5.1, specifically calling out "dormitories" and highlighted in red. In Section 5.1, Member Murphy noted the proposed "student housing" language seemed to start at high school age; and questioned if language should also consider boarding schools for students under high school age for potential future use if someone put in a residential academy for re-use of an existing building (e.g. middle school). Member Murphy noted that the proposed language did not accommodate such a use; and questioned if there was rationale by staff in excluding student housing for younger than high school age. Mr. Paschke expressed appreciation for Member Murphy's point; and suggested it be included in proposed language, as staff had not given it any thought and had no position on excluding it. Mr. Paschke noted that staff would look at inserting language to address those situations, such as boarding schools, private elementary schools with campus housing for students, noting that there were many in the State of Minnesota as well as in other areas of the metro. Member Murphy spoke in support of allowing those uses. Member Boguszewski suggested revising language in Section 5.1 (second paragraph) to replace "High School" with "Boarding School" to accomplish that aim versus adding further verbiage to the language.