My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CCP 11282022
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2022
>
CCP 11282022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/22/2022 1:25:51 PM
Creation date
11/22/2022 1:25:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
11/28/2022
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
338
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
46 #®£¨³¨® « 5²¤ ! «¸²¨² <br />47 Roseville’s Development Review Committee (DRC) met on several occasions to review the proposed <br />48 subdivision plans. Some of the comments and feedback based on the DRC’s review of the application <br />49 are included in the analysis below, and the full comments offered in memos prepared by DRC members <br />50 are included with this RCA in Attachment D. <br />51 Floor plans, exterior elevations, and other details are included with the materials in Attachment C; <br />52 helping to illustrate the proposal in greater detail. While the plans submitted have allowed Planning <br />53 Division staff to confirm the proposed project can be made to satisfy all of the pertinent zoning <br />54 requirements, some specific details may not be germane to the City’s consideration of the request for <br />55 conditional use approval. For example, the particular mix of unit sizes illustrated in the floor plans and <br />56 the exterior design details are useful for demonstrating the ability to conform to various zoning <br />57 standards, but theconditional use process might not speak directly to all such details. Additionally, the <br />58 Fire Marshal has noted that the new units will inevitably increase the number of annual inspections <br />59 under the multifamily licensing program and other calls for service. Because Fire Department staff <br />60 inspects 30% of such multifamily units each year, the additional 29 units facilitated by an approval of <br />61 the conditional use request represents a marginal increase of nine licensing inspections per year. <br />62 The Zoning Code does not establish any specific conditional use approval criteria to review when <br />63 considering a residential development at greater densities, but the conditional use process is nevertheless <br />64 an opportunity to analyze the potential impacts of the proposal on the area surrounding the subject <br />65 property. To that end, §1009.02.C of the City Code establishes a mandate that the Citymake five <br />66 general findings pertaining all proposed conditional uses. Planning Division staff has reviewed the <br />67 application and offers the following draft findings. <br />68 1. The proposed use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan <br />69 specifically identifies this site for high-density residential development “…with a density greater <br />70 than 12 units per acre.” <br />71 2. The proposed use is not in conflict with any Regulating Maps or other adopted plans. The proposed <br />72 development is not subject to a regulating plan map or other adopted plan. <br />73 It should be noted here the City’s Economic Development Authority commissioned a Housing <br />74 Needs Assessment in October 2018, which identified housing needs for the City through 2030. That <br />75 assessment revealed a need for 354 units of “rental units – market rate”. Since the assessment was <br />76 completed, only 117 units of such housing (i.e., The Isaac apartments)have been approved and <br />77 developed. In light of this, the results of this assessment suggest the City is still in need of 237 units <br />78 of the type of housing proposed by this project. Even if this proposed conditional use for increased <br />79 density is approved and other potential market rate apartment projects in the pipeline (e.g., Sands <br />80 Phase III) are considered, a citywide demand will remain for market rate rental housing units. Lastly, <br />81 all 117 units at The Isaac were absorbed quickly, suggesting the unit count identified in the Housing <br />82 Needs Assessment matches current market demands. <br />83 Additionally, being within a half mile of the A Line BRT stations on Snelling Avenue the <br />84 development siteis subject to the raised minimum residential density requirement of the BRT <br />85 Overlay District. Although the proposed development is practically unaffected by the overlay <br />86 district’s required minimum density of 15 units per acre, the greater density represented in the <br />87 request for conditional use approval is in line with overlay district’s mandate to maximize residential <br />88 densities with the half mile walk-shed surrounding the transit stops. <br />89 3. The proposed use is not in conflict with any City Code requirements. Based on the plans that have <br />90 been received and reviewed thus far, staff has found that revisions to the front façade along County <br />7e RCA.docx <br />Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.