2007_0416_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Post-Meeting 3 Homework�eneral Comments Single-Family Residential Lot Split Survey I don't quite understand the difference between zoning districts and overlay zoning districts. Assuming this [environmentalconcerns] means loss of private open space—other environmental impacts covered by watershed and other code If general en�iran�nenta�, code for it should cover an��r�. than lot ��I�E��. Jamie please note what ever we end up with I have a concern if the process becomes more staff tintt driven. Especially when Amy Ihlan is comparing us to other communities and the communities that she is using as examples has more staff and overhead which our community has not supported in the past. I do not want our staff doing more, and having the time that is required for the new policy with less assistance. Several members of the group seem to take an "cit��r/or" stance to this issue. This is not a win%lose situation – but one in which compromise and £uture-r�r�in�x�.� is necessary. There are three p:rima:ry stalreholders in the current lot split issue are: 1. Lot owners who purchased their property with the idea of splittingit up in the future. 2. Lot owners who purchased a home in an area with large lots and want the area to remain as is. 3. City personnel who need to apply ordinances and advise citizens on property issues. Our solution has to take into account the expectations of each of these three. Lot splits must be allowed – the e�rtent of division is the crux of the issue. Secondary stakeholders include all citizens of Roseville There has to be a way to allow some lot splits, while maintaining the character of a neighborhood. I think that a zoning change combined with the sliding scale idea could wor1�. It seems that there are three primary groupings of lot sizes in Rosev�e: 1. the 32% that are smaller than 11,000 sq. ft. 2. the 35`'/o that are app. 11,000 sq. ft. 3. the 33% that are larger than � 1,00 sq. ft. Obviously these do not fall into neat geographic areas. However there probably are areas where there are si��»ila�i�ies in lot size. Perhaps a R-lc zoning for the areas where large lots are prevalent, a R-la zoning for the areas where medium size lots occur, and a R-lb for where the smaller lots are prevalent. I l�naw very little about zoning, so maybe this is a�aaiv-e assumption. Then, within each zoning area an appropriate sliding scale could be used in situations where: 1. large lots are being split into smaller lots; and 2. small lots are re-combined into different sized lots. Apri15, 2007 Page 1 of 2