My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-10-05_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2016 Agendas
>
2016-10-05_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2016 11:28:35 AM
Creation date
10/27/2016 11:28:30 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.
/
42
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
HDR1HDR2 <br />Table10046 <br />AttachedMultifamilyMultifamily <br />bc <br />ağǣźƒǒƒķĻƓƭźƷǤЋЍ ƓźƷƭΉƓĻƷğĭƩĻbƚƓĻ 36Units/netacre <br />aźƓźƒǒƒķĻƓƭźƷǤЊЋ ƓźƷƭΉƓĻƷğĭƩĻЋЍ ƓźƷƭΉƓĻƷğĭƩĻ <br />ЍЉ <br />b.DensityintheHDR1districtmaybeincreasedto36units/netacrewith <br />ЍЊ <br />approvedconditionaluse. <br />ЍЋ <br />c.DensityintheHDR2districtmaybeincreasedtomorethan36units/net <br />ЍЌ <br />acrewithapprovedconditionaluse. <br />BH <br />ЍЍ <br />UILDINGEIGHT <br />Regarding additional concerns expressed by Council members pertaining to building <br />ЍЎ <br />setbacks and building height, the City Planner reviewed the 1995 City Code to see how <br />ЍЏ <br />residential district dimensional standards were previously outlined. Attachment D <br />ЍА <br />shows both the 1995 residential districts’ building height and setback requirements and <br />ЍБ <br />the 2010 Zoning Code building height and setback requirements for Residential <br />ЍВ <br />Districts, Commercial and Mixed-Use Districts, and Employment Districts. <br />ЎЉ <br />Although setbacks vary district to district, the main difference between the 1995 <br />ЎЊ <br />requirements and those currently in effect is the building-forward concept. Setbacks are <br />ЎЋ <br />similar in the residential districts but reduced or eliminated for front and street side- <br />ЎЌ <br />yards in the commercial, office, and industrial districts in favor of design standards that <br />ЎЍ <br />address placement of buildings and parking lot design and location. Rear- and side- <br />ЎЎ <br />yard setbacks in most all commercial, office, and industrial districts are heightened <br />ЎЏ <br />when the building/lot lies adjacent to LDR-1 or LDR-2 property or just residential <br />ЎА <br />properties. <br />ЎБ <br />To address building height concerns, the Planning Division proposes requiring a CU for <br />ЎВ <br />buildings over 45 feet high in the HDR-1 district and over 65 feet high in the HDR-2 <br />ЏЉ <br />district. Currently the maximum height in the HDR-1 is 65 feet high and in the HDR-2 <br />ЏЊ <br />district it is 95 feet high (see Table 1004-6). <br />ЏЋ <br />HDR1HDR2 <br />Table10046 <br />AttachedMultifamilyMultifamily <br />de <br />ağǣźƒǒƒĬǒźƌķźƓŭŷĻźŭŷƷЌЎCĻĻƷЏЎЍЎCĻĻƷВЎЏЎCĻĻƷ <br />ЏЌ <br />d.Buildingheightover45feetrequiresaCUintheHDR1 <br />ЏЍ <br />e.Buildingheightover65feetrequiresCUinHDR2 <br />RS <br />ЏЎ <br />ESIDENTIAL ETBACKS <br />Regarding setback requirements, the Council asked staff to look at establishing the <br />ЏЏ <br />following setback requirements for all districts: <br />ЏА <br />Side yard: 10 feet or 50% of building height (whichever is greater) <br />ЏБ <br />Rear yard: 20 feet or 50% of building height (whichever is greater) <br />ЏВ <br />In order to see if the values proposed by the Council would result in the desired <br />АЉ <br />outcome, Planning Division staff applied the Council’s suggested standards to a number <br />АЊ <br />of scenarios and has the following analysis for each district. <br />АЋ <br />PROJ0039_TextAmendments_100516 <br />Page 2 of 6 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.