Laserfiche WebLink
34 Public Comment <br />35 The duly noticed public hearing for the proposed zoning andsubdivision code amendments was held by <br />36 the Planning Commission on September 2, 2020, and the City Council reviewed the recommended <br />37 ordinance on September 28. Planning Division staff has not received any comments from members of <br />38 the public outside of those meetings. <br />39 P OLICY O BJECTIVE <br />40 Develop programs and policies to encourage the redevelopment of housing stock in a way that <br />41 maintains or enhances the integrity of existing neighborhoods. <br />42 Provide mechanisms that encourage the development of a wide range of housing that meets <br />43 regional, state, and national standards for affordability. <br />44 Employ flexible zoning for property redevelopment to meet broader housing goals such as <br />45 density, open space, and lot size. <br />46 While the ordinance, in its current form, would protect the back yard privacy of existing lots by ensuring <br />47 that a new street cannot be built within a substantial distance (i.e., at least a regulation lot’s minimum <br />48 depth)from the rear boundaries of those lots, it may also have deletriouseffects not yet considered. For <br />49 instance, if the large stretch of land between these existing lots and a new street in a proposed plat is <br />50 unsuitable in some way for residential development, not only would that unused land represent an <br />51 inefficient use of the land, but the cost of that inefficiency would need to be added to the other lots in the <br />52 plat that are developed, thus undermining the City’s goals related to improving affordability. <br />53 Subdivision Code variances could be considered on a case-by-case basis if something unique were to <br />54 arise, but the variance process should not serve as the sole solution to these situations. <br />55 B UDGET I MPLICATIONS <br />56 none <br />57 S TAFF R ECOMMENDATION <br />58 Staff recommends two possible actions: <br />59 1. Determine whether the current ordinance needs to be published for 10 days on the Roseville’s <br />60 website to satisfy City requirements before passing it. <br />61 2.Pass an ordinance amending Title 10, Zoning, and Title 11, Subdivisions, to regulate subdivision <br />62 proposals that would locate a new street adjacent to the rear boundaries of existing parcels. <br />63 R EQUESTED C OUNCIL A CTION <br />64 1. Determine whether the current ordinance needs to be published for 10 days on the Roseville’s <br />65 website to satisfy City requirements before passing it. <br />66 2. Pass an ordinance amending Title 10, Zoning, and Title 11, Subdivisions, to regulate subdivision <br />67 proposals that would locate a new street adjacent to the rear boundaries of existing parcels. <br />68 Alternative Action <br />69 Pass a motion to table the item for future action.Because City of Roseville initiated this zoning and <br />70 subdivision code amendment, there is no concern regarding mandatory timelines or statutory approval, <br />71 but developers may be waiting for this issue to be resolved to submit applications. <br />Prepared by Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd <br />Attachments: A: 9/28 RCA & draft meeting minutes B: Draft ordinance <br />7e RCA <br />Page 2 of 2 <br /> <br />