Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

well good evening on behalf of the commissioners and staff I would like to welcome you to the April 23rd, 2026 City of Roseville Planning Commission meeting. Please put all electronic devices on silent at this time. Agendas are on the back counter. And if you plan to speak at tonight's meeting, please complete a blue speaker card and return it to a staff member. As a reminder, Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live, replayed on Comcast 14, and available on the city's YouTube channel. I'll now call the meeting to order. Lupe, may I please have a roll call?

Yes. Commissioner Hagler?

Here.

Commissioner Kriz is absent. Excused. Commissioner Meish? Here. Commissioner Pryor is absent. Excused. Commissioner Unidad is absent. Vice Chair Brashears? Here. And Chair Hagan-Jones?

Here. Please join me in this Pledge of Allegiance. Will you please begin the staff introductions?

Yes. Good evening, Commissioners. Lupi Nelson, Recording Secretary.

Good evening, Commissioners. Joe Speaker, Assistant City Attorney. Good evening, Chair Hagen-Josen, Commissioners. Greg Vitter, Assistant Development Services Director.

And good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Lauren Hawker, Planning Manager.

Good evening, Chair and Commissioners.

Eric Singer, Associate Planner. The public comment period is a time for anyone who would like to address the Commission on any item not on tonight's agenda. When addressing the commission, please state your name for the record and limit your comments to three minutes. Is there anyone who would like to address the commission on any item not on tonight's agenda? Hearing none, I will close the public comment period. Next, we have the consent calendar, which consists of routine items that may be approved under one motion as recommended in the staff reports. However, since each routine item requires a public hearing, Each and every one may be considered separately upon the request by the audience, the Planning Commission, or the staff. Action on the consent calendar shall be considered a public hearing. Tonight's consent calendar consists of one item, minutes from the March 26, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Is there anyone on the commission or in the audience who would like to pull an item off the consent calendar for separate discussion? Hearing none, may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar as listed? So moved. And is there a second? I'll second. Commissioner Mache has made the motion, and Commissioner Beshears has seconded the motion. Roll call, please.

Commissioner Mache?

Aye.

Aye. Chair Beshears? Yes. Commissioner Hagler? Yes. And Chair Hagen-Jess?

Yes. The motion is approved. Thank you. Next on the agenda is requests and presentations. Before I begin, I want to review the meeting procedures. First, we will hear the staff presentation. Then I will take questions from the commission. THEN I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. THEN I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. THEN I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE COMMISSION MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF. AND THEN FINALLY THE COMMISSION WILL CONSIDER THIS ITEM AND MAKE A DECISION BASED ON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE REPORT FROM STAFF AND THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED DURING TONIGHT'S HEARING. Item 6.1 is a request to amend Title 18 and Title 19 of the Roseville Municipal Code. For the record, file number PL26-0088. Eric, may we have your presentation, please?

Yes. Thank you, Chair Hagen-Jos. So, as mentioned, we'll be discussing amendments to the zoning and subdivision ordinance in response to legislation that was passed by the State of California in 2025. So as you know, staff annually reviews the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance to ensure consistency with state legislation that's been passed in the last year. Tonight we'll be doing a brief overview of the proposed amendments. The staff report goes into all of them in greater detail and includes the red lines of both the zoning and the subdivision ordinances. In terms of the zoning ordinance amendments, The First Amendment that is being proposed is an additional footnote to the residential use table located in Section 19-10-020 that specifies that a daycare center is permitted by right when co-located with multifamily housing. Their definition of co-location is operating within or on the same grounds as the multifamily housing. THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS TO ANOTHER EXISTING FOOTNOTE WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL USE TABLE. THIS IS IN SECTION 1912-020. SO CURRENTLY A RESIDENTIAL USE IS CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED IN A COMMERCIAL ZONE AS LONG AS THERE ARE UNITS ALLOCATED TO THAT PARCEL WITHIN THE OVERLYING SPECIFIC PLAN. This amendment is a small tweak to the language that essentially just adds the words specific plan or master plan. This is to address kind of the unique circumstance that we find in something like the campus Oaks master plan. We're doing this to just ensure consistency across all commercial parcels throughout the city. Also, within this section, the commercial use table, we've been asked by the State Department of Housing and Community Development, or HCD, to explicitly state that the multifamily housing that is allowed by right within the regional commercial zone, or RC zone, must have a minimum density of 25 units per acre. Now, this is an existing condition that is the minimum required density, but they ask that we explicitly state it within a footnote in this table. The last change to the zoning ordinance is within the density bonus section of the code. This is done pretty much every year the state passes new legislation that affects this section. So this year's changes are the state's attempt to prevent developers from using affordable housing incentives for hotels or for excessive commercial development, which was not their intended use. First, they are explicitly stating that any type of lodging is not eligible for an incentive or a concession, and that these incentives and concessions can no longer be used to increase the commercial floor area of a mixed use product, or excuse me, project, so a commercial and a residential component, to more than two and a half times the allowed floor area ratio allowed by local zoning ordinance. They also require the deed restrictions that are placed on mixed-use developments must prohibit short-term rentals. These changes, in effect, would ensure that projects that are receiving these density increases, as well as waivers, concessions, et cetera, are actually prioritizing affordable housing units as opposed to trying to increase commercial floor areas or visitor-serving uses like hotels and lodging. Additionally, the last change to this section is in regards to the pro forma requirement. So when we renewed our pro housing designation last year, HCD requested that we remove the language requiring that a developer submit a pro forma to qualify for a density bonus. A pro forma is a financial document. It explains the sources of income and expenses for the developer. It's used primarily to determine whether a housing project is fiscally viable. And in the past, it was required in order to show that a density bonus was necessary to make a project pencil out. There is existing case law that states that this pro forma cannot be required. But in practice, the city has not actually required one in probably well over a decade. So we're simply removing it from the code entirely. The amendments to the subdivision ordinance are all to do with the ministerial mapping, the 10 lot map subdivision process. This was introduced a couple years ago. So first, it authorizes that a proposed subdivision can designate what's called a remainder parcel. So this parcel, it would not count against the 10 lot maximum that's typically allowed, meaning you could technically end up with 11 lots in some scenarios. The example that we like to use is, let's say you have an existing home on a parcel that is eligible for this process. The developer wants to add 10 additional units to the parcel. They would be allowed to because they would designate the parcel with the existing home as the quote unquote remainder parcel. Technically, this is only allowed if the parcel retains an existing land use or structure. It does not contain new residential units. You couldn't, you know, designate a remainder parcel and then build a new unit on it. And it's not exclusively dedicated to serving the housing development project. Secondly, the amendment specified that parcels in the subdivisions can't be sold, leased, financed separately from one another unless they meet one of the following criteria. One, they would have to contain a new, what they call a compliant residential unit. That just means a housing unit that's been finaled by the building department. Two, an existing legal structure. Three, are designated for a common area or open space. Or they are the last remaining parcel within the subdivision. The thrust of this set of amendments is essentially to prevent a developer from speculatively buying a parcel, splitting it up, and then selling off the individual parcels before anything's been built. This is trying to cut down on developers essentially creating untenable built environment circumstances is the simplest way to put it. It's ensuring that whoever buys the parcel and splits it is on the hook for actually building the units and ensuring that they're done so in a responsible manner, essentially. Finally, the last little tweak that we're making is actually just renaming the section overall from Ministerial Multifamily Map to Ministerial Ten-Lot Map. This is just to reflect the fact that the process already applies to projects in both multifamily and, in certain cases, single-family zones. So this is just a staff-initiated change, just a little cleanup item, basically. In terms of outreach and environmental review, staff discussed these proposed amendments at the ARCONA board meeting of March 19th of this year. The board members at the time had no questions about these subject amendments. And consistent with the noticing requirements for a citywide project, a public hearing notice was published in the Press Tribune. It was published on the ARCONA website. To date, no additional comments or concerns have been received. And in terms of the environmental review, the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to guideline 15061 , in that it is a policy and procedure-making activity. It's not a activity that would result in immediate physical environmental impacts. So in conclusion, staff finds that these proposed amendments are consistent with the public interest, health, safety, and welfare of the city, consistent with the general plan, and those are our proposed recommendations. As a gentle reminder, we're asking only for review and comment on the subdivision ordinance because technically the Planning Commission is not designated as the hearing body for that ordinance. Thank you and I'm available to answer any questions. Thank you.

Commissioners, are there any questions for staff at this time?

Are you guys trying to catch up to match the state law to municipal code or are you just going through doing a spring cleaning type of thing, going through each section to make sure everything's cleaned up.

So in this case, it's mostly column A. So this is mostly state legislation-based. There are a couple of small little house cleaning tweaks. The language, you know, the titling of the ministerial multifamily map section, things like that. We are going to be coming back later in the year with more house cleaning items and more city-initiated changes to the zoning ordinance. But this spate of changes is primarily in response to state legislation.

The proposed mixed use development along Douglas Boulevard, what would be the impact on that on a project someone might bring forward of the changes in the mixed use?

What project? We're not sure which mixed-use.

Well, you know, I guess it says residential density bonus. Rules are changing.

So I don't... Is there a specific... I'm asking because I don't understand it. Is there... When you say mixed-use development on Douglas, we're unfamiliar with a mixed-use... So isn't there...

Hasn't the city planned for... Oh, our corridor changes. Sure, sure, sure.

Yeah. So this is the density bonus stuff only applies to affordable housing projects. So it's only if you're getting extra units for your affordable housing project because you're affordable. That's what a density bonus is for. And so, as Eric was explaining, All this is doing is saying if you're going to be an affordable housing project and you're going to get extra units because you're affordable, you have to be focusing on building affordable housing. It can't be a big commercial project.

It can't be part of a mixed-use project.

It can be part of a mixed-use project. It's just per what you said.

The stipulations are such that essentially I think what has happened in the past is developers have been using the affordable housing component as a... way to kind of sneak in greater and greater ratios of commercial floor area as part of these projects. I'm sure in order to make some of them pencil out, but ultimately the focus of a mixed use project and getting density bonuses for additional units and additional square footages

has always been intended for additional affordable housing units as opposed to... And what it is is that when you get a density bonus, you get what are called concessions or waivers. And so they'll say, hey, we're doing affordable housing, and instead of getting a waiver to a development standard to make the affordable housing work, they're like, so our big commercial office tower can be 20 feet higher. It's like that's not what the concession and waiver is for. It's supposed to be for the affordable housing.

Thank you. Basically, the state has tightened up some of the regulations, made more clear on all of this. And we're just coming in line with all of those? Correct. Any other questions? I'll now open the public hearing and public comment period. Is there anyone from the public who would like to come forward and address the commission on this item? Hearing none, seeing none, I will now close the public comment period and public hearing. Commissioners, are there any additional questions or comments for the staff? Would anyone like to make a motion?

Sure. I'll make a motion that the Commission consider the two findings of fact and recommend City Council approve the ordinance amendment to Title 19 of the Roseville Municipal Code. and review and comment on the ordinance amendment to Title 18 of the Roseville Municipal Code.

I'll second.

Commissioner Beshears has made the motion, and Commissioner Hagler has seconded the motion. Roll call, please.

Vice Chair Beshears? Yes. Commissioner Meish?

Yes.

Commissioner Hagler? Yes. And Chair Higgins?

Yes. The motion is approved. Next on the agenda is Commissioner and Staff Report. Are there any other reports from staff?

Tonight, Chair Higgins. As I mentioned, I believe at the last meeting, we will not be meeting on May 14th, but there is one item currently scheduled for May 28th. So we do have a commission meeting scheduled for May 28th. And... Kind of in conjunction with the email I sent you last week, you all heard Lauren introduce herself as the planning manager. So she was promoted to planning manager last week, effective this past Saturday. And so you will be seeing Lauren as your liaison going forward. We'll have a hard time not attending these meetings. You'll probably see me in the audience.

You'll have to fill out a blue speaker card.

I'll be here for Commissioner Brashear's last meeting to make sure he leaves. We'll walk out together. I was reflecting on this day. I've known it's been coming since November. And my boss, he said, yeah, you just need to let Lauren sit in your chair and stay away. And I've been either liaison or regularly attending bi-monthly planning commission meetings for 30 years since I started my career in planning. And so it was something that I thought, I don't know how not to go to planning commission meetings. So it's going to be new for me. It's going to be new for Lauren and new for you all. But I have a lot of confidence. that you'll be fine and you'll all still have my phone number. So, and you'll soon have, if you don't, you'll soon have Lauren's phone number.

Does your beloved spouse have a list of things that she'll have you be doing since you have all this free time? Watching the planning commission.

Might as well just come. Watching all the Planning Commission meetings in the region, no. But so it's really, this has been a great experience. The City of Roseville Planning Commissions, all the commissioners that I've worked with have been great. It's been a really, probably a great culmination of this part of my career, being able to work for a city that is so logical, so well-run, and I guess just uses a lot more common sense than some other jurisdictions I've worked for. So I won't throw the city of Sacramento under the bus, but if they're watching, yeah. They've got bus tires on their backs. So I just wanted to let you know, and there are a few projects that will be coming up that I will be in attendance, but I just won't be sitting in this chair anymore.

Okay.

Well, thank you. Thank you, first of all, for the 30 years. And thank you, at least in my term. You know, I'm in my fifth year here. You've been wonderful in terms of responsive for questions and helping us understand and all of that. And so that part of it will be missed, but I know that Lauren's going to be doing just fine, too. Congratulations to you.

I'll choose to fill, but I will be doing my best.

Yeah, no, you're going to be great. Yeah. I mean, I think I'm going on now. nine plus years, maybe the longest running, uh, serving commissioner. And we made it through COVID meetings together. And, uh, Greg, you've always been a huge support and, uh, you know, always available. And, uh, so I'll miss you in that chair, but I did catch the new title change. Yeah.

Wait a minute.

So congratulations. And I'll have more to say. You know, my last meeting. Maybe a little roast. I'll be there for that. I'll be there for that for sure. So you all should come back for that. I'm excited for the changes. So, yeah. Thank you. Congratulations. Anything else?

Otherwise, may I have a motion to adjourn? I'll make a motion. Thank you. Commissioner Brashears has made the motion. Commissioner Mace is seconded the motion. All in favor?

Aye. We are adjourned.

Hey Greg, do we have a design committee meeting next month?