My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-02-03_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2016 Agendas
>
2016-02-03_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2016 11:46:07 AM
Creation date
4/22/2016 11:45:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
Attachment B <br />1023.05: PUD QUALIFICATIONS <br />A.Establishment of a PUD will be considered only for areas of land in single ownership or control. <br />Alternatively, multiple party ownership, in the sole discretion of the City, is acceptable when <br />legally sufficient written consent from all persons and entities with ownership interest is provided at <br />the time of application. <br />B.Projects eligible for a PUD shall have a site which consists of a parcel or contiguous parcels of land <br />two (2) acres or more in size. Tracts of less than two acres may be governed by a PUD overlay <br />district only if the applicant can demonstrate that a project of superior design can be achieved, or <br />that greater compliance with the comprehensive plan goals and policies can be attained through use <br />of the PUD process. <br />Commented \[BGA10\]: <br />Many cities do not provide PUD <br />options for smaller tracts of land to protect against PUD <br />being used as an alternate to the variance process. With this <br />1023.06: PERMITTED USES WITHIN A PUD <br />language, we set a minimum size limit at two (2) acres, but <br />keep the door open to smaller PUDs IF they can achieve one <br />of two specific goals when compared to possible <br />A.The extent of permitted land uses within a PUD shall be limited to those land uses that are either <br />development using underlying zoning: 1) a project of <br />permitted or deemed by the Community Development Department to be substantially similar to <br />superior design; or 2) a project that better achieves goals <br />listed in the comprehensive plan. <br />those allowed in the underlying zoning district. <br />Commented \[BGA11\]: <br />Here we restrict uses to those <br />allowed by underlying zoning, but leave the door open for <br />B.Adopted PUD overlay district regulations may include specific provisions governing uses which <br />new uses if the Community Development Department deems <br />supersede underlying zoning requirements. <br />use. This ensures that new industries seeking a home in <br />Roseville could potentially do so via PUD even if their <br />C.More than one building may be placed on one lot in a PUD. <br />Commented \[BGA12\]: <br />Whereas subdivision (a) states that <br />1023.07: AREAS OF FLEXIBILITY <br />uses will be limited to those allowed by underlying zoning, <br />subdivision (b) grants the City flexibility to tailor use <br />restrictions to the PUD site and surroundings. <br />Flexibility provided through a PUD will not to be approved simply to avoid adherence to underlying <br />zoning regulations, but instead must be used as a springboard to new and exciting development that <br />For example, current Roseville codes state that "no <br />commercial transactions" can occur at a mini-storage facility. <br />would not otherwise be possible utilizing existing zoning standards. Areas of possible flexibility include: <br />This provision could potentially allow someone to proposea <br />mini-storage facility that includes a management office, sale <br />A.Building Placement including zero lot line construction subject to building code allowances. <br />changed, but the general regulations governingthe use were <br />Specifications and standards for lots and setbacks shall be at the discretion of City Council, and <br />tailored specifically for the site. Protection against impacts <br />shall encourage a desirable living or working environment which assists in achieving the goals set <br />to the surrounding properties are built into the review <br />process to ensurethat such changes are appropriate. <br />out for PUDs in Section (A)(1)(b). <br />B.Trees/Landscaping Requirements requires specialized landscaping plans that better address on- <br />site needs and adjacent property concerns than would otherwise be required. <br />C.Open Spaces provision of public open spaces that are enhanced with public art and other <br />amenities to provide a congregation area and a unique sense of place within the development. <br />D.Parking Standards a reduction in stall or lot configuration requirements in exchange for structured <br />parking, better screening of parking areas, or higher quality landscaping throughout a parking area. <br />E.Exterior Materials flexibility on exterior materials to allow for unique architectural expression. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.