CC_Minutes_2010_1213 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

*446 Mr. Paschke clarified that, unless a townhome proposal met the requirements of the zoning 447 district and Comprehensive Plan guidance, it was not currently an allowed use, and would need 1448 staff review and their recommendation to, and final approval by the City Council. 1449 Tam McGehee, 77 Mid Oaks Lane 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 Ms. McGehee provided written comments dated July 14, 2010 and entitled, "Proposed Zoning Changes," attached hereto and made a part thereof, related to the overall proposed, with comments containing her perception of the requirements of the Metropolitan Council, the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and specific comments related to Residential Districts, as well as Commercial and Mixed Use Districts. Ms. McGehee spoke in support of Mr. Disney's concerns for maintaining larger lots. Ms. McGehee verbally reviewed her written comments and spoke in support of a previous petition with sixty -nine (69) signatures of residents delivered to the City Council requesting lot division be done more gradually, and calculated based on the size of contiguous lots, rather than based on minimum or maximum square footage, similar to that used in the Cities of Bloomington and Edina. Ms. McGehee questioned why there was any need to change the Residential Zoning Code; and disagreed with staff's response, and provided her perception of the Metropolitan Council's 1463 mandate and the City of Roseville's current adherence to meeting affordable housing 1464 requirements. Ali Ms. McGehee alleged that the post card notice mailed to residents was a gross misrepresentation 466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 of the facts and opined that there was nothing in the current Residential Zoning Code that was inconsistent with the updated Comprehensive Plan. Ms. McGehee further opined that she found it interesting that City staff, in less than two (2) months, could come up with a comprehensive zoning code while a number of amendments to the existing code had taken fifty (50) years to achieve. Ms. McGehee opined that the proposed zoning code was missing consideration for neighborhood harmony and consistency, but was evident in the existing zoning code; and opined that lots should only be divided in cases of hardship or if in harmony and consistency with the current neighborhood, which would serve to accommodate the concerns of Mr. Disney. Ms. McGehee referenced the last sentence of Section 1012.B relating to grandfathered lots. Ms. McGehee further referenced the Vista 2000 and Imagine Roseville 2025 community vision statements and the preference expressed for diversity in housing choices, not uniformity, which was addressed in the current code, including several large lot neighborhoods in the community. Ms. McGehee spoke in opposition to reducing the minimum square footage of lots in Roseville as proposed. Ms. McGee also addressed apparent storm water management problems in Roseville as addressed in the Metropolitan Council's review of the City's Comprehensive Plan and proposed reduction goals, opining that that problem would not be addressed by reducing lot sizes or side setbacks, while simultaneously increasing impervious coverage allowances. Ms. McGehee questioned 1484 where the green space and environmental protection would come from; and opined that this 1485 proposed zoning was totally unnecessary and not required by the Comprehensive Plan, nor did it 40 486 fulfill Roseville's goal for diverse housing. Ms. McGehee opined that the City was in good shape