Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Study Session <br />Monday, Apri116,2007 <br />Page 4 <br />1 recent lot split scenarios; public open house discussions and evalua- <br />� tion of alternatives; with anticipated development of recommenda- <br />;� tions still pending. <br />4 <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />8 <br />� <br />ti� <br />�1 <br />k� <br />l� <br />14 <br />1� <br />1� <br />1� <br />�� <br />�� <br />.�,� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�4 <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />Ms. Radel noted the percentage of returned survey responses in the <br />four impacted neighborhoods - Burke Avenue; Chatsworth Court; <br />Fulham Street; and Ham��ne Avenue -(64 out of 197 distributed, a <br />32% response rate) given the limited turn-around time available. Ms. <br />Radel addressed the recurrent themes in the returned surveys: concern <br />for open space, trees, and wildlife; ability to bring new families to <br />Roseville; favoring new single-family houses over new multi-family <br />homes; and property values, increases or decreases. <br />Ms. Radel addressed the approximate 35 people attending the com- <br />munity open house and the variety of lot split topics covered, includ- <br />ing history, current standards, recent case studies, and physical im- <br />pacts; while providing an opportunity for attendees to provide their <br />opinions on design, housing requirements and secondary impacts. <br />Ms. Radel summarized general conclusions from the open house to <br />concerns regarding loss of open space and stormwater management <br />issues associated with lot splits; the need to demonstrate the public <br />need for public roads; and the openness of residents to a mix of multi� <br />and single-family housing to accommodate new residential growth. <br />Ms. Radel noted that the lot design activity appeared to conclude that <br />the context of new development was important; density should not be <br />assumed to be bad; private roads can be acceptable; and current zon- <br />ing does not address all the preferences indicated. <br />�� <br />�� Ms. Radel provided the advisory group's options for direction from <br />�� the City Council on how to proceed: <br />� � 1) Provide an incomplete set of recommendations to the City <br />�� Council on April 23, 2007, the expiration date of the morato- <br />�3 <br />�4 <br />�S <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />��� <br />rium <br />2� Provide complete recommendations on May 14, 2007, follow- <br />ing the May 2, 2007 Planning Commission meeting; or <br />3� Other recommendations, as determined by the City Council. <br />Discussion among Councilmembers, staff and the Advisory group in- <br />cluded: specific survey results; potential extension of the moratorium, <br />