CC_Minutes_2010_1213 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, December 13, 2010 Page 16 opment Department and their lack of advocacy for Roseville citizens. Ms. Melby suggested the need for a better check and balance system to alleviate her con- cerns. Ms. Melby noted that their neighborhood had been subdivided, and if lot sizes were reduced further, more subdivisions would continue. Ms. Melby ex- pressed concern, specific to safety in their neighborhood and access to County Road B, in extremely limited access for emergency vehicles and limited east /west access, opining that it was a huge concern for their neighborhood. Pete LeFavre, 2230 Marion Road Mr. LeFavre recalled the August 2010 meeting and his perceptions of a firm re- sponse from the City Council, referencing a map presented by Councilmember Roe, related to lot sizes and the projected number of areas impacted by reducing lot size to 9,500 square feet. Mr. LeFavre further referenced Councilmember Ih- lan's recommendation for a buffer for large lots; and questioned what happened to those discussions, since this document made no reference to either discussion. Mr. Trudgeon clarified that tonight's discussion and requested action was specific to amending the City's zoning code; with the Subdivision Code not being re- viewed at this time, and retaining the 11,000 square foot minimum lot size; which would be brought forward for review and revision at a future date. Mr. Trudgeon advised that any new lot needed to meet that minimum lot size for zoning and be conforming. Mr. Trudgeon advised that past discussions had provided multiple opinions and directions, with no clear consensus or direction from the City Coun- cjl to staff on minimum lot sizes for any other action at this time; and that staff was not advocating a specific recommendation at this time. Jim Stark, Resident and Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission Mr. Stark, in speaking as the Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, summarized the lengthy discussions held to -date by the Commission on proposed zoning ordinance revisions as they specifically related to parks and recreation; and advised that his comments had previously been provided in an e-mail, at- tached hereto and made a part hereof Mr. Stark advised that a concern of the Commission was that Conditional Uses al- lowed in parks or through a variance process would not be consistent with or in accordance with Master Planning for parks and recreation programs. Mr. Stark reviewed the Master Plan process and history of the process for proposed changes at parks that involved citizen input and a flexible approach to meet needs of the park and /or facility as well as the neighborhood. Mr. Stark noted that the Com- mission wanted to ensure that process continued given the uniqueness of the City's parks and their uses. Mr. Stark advised that the Commission didn't feel parks fit the design standards in the proposed ordinance; and felt it could result in a duplication of City services complicating proposed changes.