2016-12-07_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Draft Minutes – Wednesday, November 2, 2016 Page 14 vegetation, staff would follow-up with the property owner to address violation of 659 city code if and where applicable. Therefore, Mr. Paschke advised that there was 660 no need for a condition in this instance and for this applicant, if the provision was 661 already covered under general ordinances. 662 Member Murphy noted it may have been an appropriate property provision before 663 this use ever came forward. 664 Mr. Paschke agreed; noting that simply trimming trees would not have been a 665 requirement of past approvals. 666 Discussion ensued regarding type of vegetation and possible history of its growth 667 versus their use as screening. 668 Chair Boguszewski closed the public hearing at approximately 8:07 p.m., with no 669 one appearing for or against. 670 MOTION 671 Member Kimble moved, seconded by Member Cunningham to recommend 672 to the City Council APPROVAL of the requested CONDITIONAL USE for a 673 Yoga studio/fitness center at 1940-1944 Lexington Avenue, pursuant to 674 Roseville Zoning Code, and attached draft City Council resolution 675 (Attachment C) subject to the conditions as outlined in lines 47-48 of the 676 staff report dated November 2, 2016, and based on public comments and 677 Planning Commission input. 678 Ayes: 7 679 Nays: 0 680 Motion carried 681 Chair Boguszewski asked that staff confirm the concerns regarding the back 682 windows before this is scheduled for the City Council on November 28, 2016; and 683 to also provide the Planning Commission with their findings for informational 684 purposes. Chair Boguszewski opined that he suspected the City Council would 685 have similar questions about the overall parking sufficiency on site with the 686 addition of this use and current uses already on site. 687 b. PROJECT FILE 0017, Amendment 13 688 Request by the City of Roseville to amend City Code, Chapter 1004 689 (Residential Districts) to revise regulations pertaining to the quantity of built 690 improvements allowed on properties in the LDR-2 Zoning District 691 Chair Boguszewski opened the public hearing for Planning File 160928 at 692 approximately 8:09 p.m. 693 Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd briefly introduced this request for text amendments 694 based on further City Council direction and previous Planning Commission action 695 and staff recommendations. Mr. Lloyd referenced meeting minutes to inform that 696 direction; and reduction in the overall allowable improvement area from the 697 recommended 70% to 50% by the City Council for LDR-2 zoning district 698 designations. Mr. Lloyd reviewed the definition of “improvement area” including 699 all areas built on a property with some counting toward impervious coverage and 700 others not as detailed in the staff report. Mr. Lloyd further reviewed zoning code 701 limitations on the portion of a lot that could be built on and variables between 702 LDR-1 and LDR-2 based on recognizing minimum lot sizes and constraints on the 703 developable portion of those lots and market conditions. 704 Mr. Lloyd advised that in staff’s research, the 2010 adjustments made to the 705 zoning code regulating impervious surfaces and improvement areas were 706 intended to provide some flexibility in calculations, and therefore LDR-1 and LDR- 707 2 districts were respectively defined at 50% and 70% as reasonable. Also, Mr. 708 Lloyd pointed out that later a similar flexible calculation had been applied for MDR 709 designations at 65%, somewhat smaller than the 70% for LDR-2 designations. 710