CCP 11282022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

46 #®£¨³¨® « 5²¤ ! «¸²¨² 47 Roseville’s Development Review Committee (DRC) met on several occasions to review the proposed 48 subdivision plans. Some of the comments and feedback based on the DRC’s review of the application 49 are included in the analysis below, and the full comments offered in memos prepared by DRC members 50 are included with this RCA in Attachment D. 51 Floor plans, exterior elevations, and other details are included with the materials in Attachment C; 52 helping to illustrate the proposal in greater detail. While the plans submitted have allowed Planning 53 Division staff to confirm the proposed project can be made to satisfy all of the pertinent zoning 54 requirements, some specific details may not be germane to the City’s consideration of the request for 55 conditional use approval. For example, the particular mix of unit sizes illustrated in the floor plans and 56 the exterior design details are useful for demonstrating the ability to conform to various zoning 57 standards, but theconditional use process might not speak directly to all such details. Additionally, the 58 Fire Marshal has noted that the new units will inevitably increase the number of annual inspections 59 under the multifamily licensing program and other calls for service. Because Fire Department staff 60 inspects 30% of such multifamily units each year, the additional 29 units facilitated by an approval of 61 the conditional use request represents a marginal increase of nine licensing inspections per year. 62 The Zoning Code does not establish any specific conditional use approval criteria to review when 63 considering a residential development at greater densities, but the conditional use process is nevertheless 64 an opportunity to analyze the potential impacts of the proposal on the area surrounding the subject 65 property. To that end, §1009.02.C of the City Code establishes a mandate that the Citymake five 66 general findings pertaining all proposed conditional uses. Planning Division staff has reviewed the 67 application and offers the following draft findings. 68 1. The proposed use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan 69 specifically identifies this site for high-density residential development “…with a density greater 70 than 12 units per acre.” 71 2. The proposed use is not in conflict with any Regulating Maps or other adopted plans. The proposed 72 development is not subject to a regulating plan map or other adopted plan. 73 It should be noted here the City’s Economic Development Authority commissioned a Housing 74 Needs Assessment in October 2018, which identified housing needs for the City through 2030. That 75 assessment revealed a need for 354 units of “rental units – market rate”. Since the assessment was 76 completed, only 117 units of such housing (i.e., The Isaac apartments)have been approved and 77 developed. In light of this, the results of this assessment suggest the City is still in need of 237 units 78 of the type of housing proposed by this project. Even if this proposed conditional use for increased 79 density is approved and other potential market rate apartment projects in the pipeline (e.g., Sands 80 Phase III) are considered, a citywide demand will remain for market rate rental housing units. Lastly, 81 all 117 units at The Isaac were absorbed quickly, suggesting the unit count identified in the Housing 82 Needs Assessment matches current market demands. 83 Additionally, being within a half mile of the A Line BRT stations on Snelling Avenue the 84 development siteis subject to the raised minimum residential density requirement of the BRT 85 Overlay District. Although the proposed development is practically unaffected by the overlay 86 district’s required minimum density of 15 units per acre, the greater density represented in the 87 request for conditional use approval is in line with overlay district’s mandate to maximize residential 88 densities with the half mile walk-shed surrounding the transit stops. 89 3. The proposed use is not in conflict with any City Code requirements. Based on the plans that have 90 been received and reviewed thus far, staff has found that revisions to the front façade along County 7e RCA.docx Page 3 of 5