CCP 08082022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

RCA Attachment D wĻŭǒƌğƩtƌğƓƓźƓŭ/ƚƒƒźƭƭźƚƓaĻĻƷźƓŭ aźƓǒƷĻƭΑĻķƓĻƭķğǤͲWǒƌǤЏͲЋЉЋЋ tğŭĻЎ 183 green space in the neighborhood. She thought Sand Castle Park is a very tiny area and 184 is not like the other City parks that grace the area on the other side and she thought 185 this area on the other side of Old Highway 8 is in many ways a legacy neighborhood 186 and is under assault and also under viewed by Roseville because it is on the other side 187 of 35W. She also spoke about the water issues going on in Roseville as a whole. 188 189 Ms. Gundlach reviewed her discussion with the City Engineer regarding some of the 190 drainage issues in the area. 191 192 Member McGehee indicated she did not particularly have an objection to the 193 subdivision of this lot. She noted she did have an objection regarding the initial split 194 of the lots at the City Council because it was envisioned them having twin homes but 195 not six of them and particularly not in the back yards. She considered seven twin 196 homes on the two parcels to raise the bar to multi-family. 197 198 Member Bjorum understood Member McGeheeÓs point but he would disagree simply 199 based on the fact that the LDR allows for the lot widths and square footages that the 200 developer is proposing so regardless of how large the existing lots are, what is being 201 set in front of them is clearly within the limits of the Zoning Code and 202 Comprehensive Plan. 203 204 Member McGehee agreed and reviewed what the Council envisioned the lots to be at 205 the time the lot was split. She noted she only raised these issues because they are 206 issues the City Council should think about because it was the Council that put these 207 things in place. She thought there was a lack of green space and she thought these 208 water issues are serious and she did not think these twin homes are affordable. She 209 noted these are issues that she would like carried forward to the City Council. She 210 would like, if at all possible, some kind of stipulation that these townhomes would be 211 sold as single, individual homes. 212 213 Mr. Gundlach did not think it was within the land use authority to dictate whether or 214 not something is owner occupied or rental. She explained relating housing type and 215 affordability and missing middle, the reason the City opened up the two family or 216 duplex housing type or LDR District was because the Comprehensive Plan calls for a 217 need for missing middle housing and that does not necessarily mean the same thing as 218 affordable housing. Affordability is a function of supply and demand and income and 219 missing middle is two, three, four family dwelling units. Nobody disputes the 220 $450,000 or $500,000 that is not affordable, but when comparing that to the Enclave 221 Townhomes that are listed for $650,000 or the single-family homes at Midland 222 Legacy Estates that are listed for $850,000, those are one family dwellings that are 223 owner occupied. $450,000 is a little more in the middle for what people could expect 224 to pay for a single-family home. She explained affordability is a function of supply 225 and demand and the City has a system where of all the CityÓs residentially zoned land 226 for one hundred years, eighty some percent of it has been zoned only for single family 227 homes of lot sizes of eleven thousand square feet. That has caused affordability issues 228 coupled with land price, materials, costs and now interest rates. Owning a single- 229 family home, certainly new construction is unattainable for many so the idea behind Page 5 of 35