CCP 01302023 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

ATTACHMENT F Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, December 7, 2022 Page 3 Member McGehee explained she did not know if the gross square footage of a building was the amount of first floor coverage, or it based on how many floors. She wondered how gross square footage for a building is computed. Chair Kimble explained gross square footage is everything and is specific to where it is measured on the exterior of the wall. She indicated there are very specific calculations done to figure it out. Member McGehee indicated she would like an example of a building that is built to the current requirements of Roseville, how much open square footage there typically is. Ms. Gundlach indicated staff would have to go back to one of the first meetings to get that information because Mr. Paschke did go and do some examples of what the City actually did recently with some of the newer apartment-built sites to see if that made sense based on what was actually happening. This information was previously provided to the Commission. Member McGehee brought up one other thing in the table of points, and the Shoreland Ordinance. She questioned why restoring the shoreland only got one point when it seemed fairly important to her in terms of protection of public waters. She asked if staff felt it was sufficiently covered in the materials being put in Code. She thought it seemed a little low unless staff felt it is unnecessary because it is so rarely done. She opined that unless someone asks for a permit or variance there is no particular motivation for restoration. Chair Kimble felt like where the City landed on the chart and points was that because this can be changed, she thought everyone agreed to leave the points as they are and test it. She thought quite a few changes were made prior to what is being presented for approval now. Ms. Gundlach explained the number of points assigned; staff tried to correlate to the actual cost that the developer would incur in order to do that. The shoreland restoration, depending on how it is done might not be as costly, but in addition to cost is the ease of being able to do it, and these reasons deserved larger points. She noted that is what she recalled the Commission discussion being surrounding the point values. Obviously, the Planning Commission can make a decision of what that number should be but that was the decision that was made at previous discussions. The Commission discussed with staff the definition of swimming pools and thought the definition should include “in ground swimming pools”. Member McGehee asked what the City wanted to do as a sustainability effort because a tree has a big definition. There is everything from a Columnar Oak to an actual Savannah Tree.What is it that the City is really aiming forwhen asking for a tree or trees?