Our Towns - Placer County News
Comments (0) | | Print

More units could ruin Roseville developments, resident says

Published: Thursday, Sep. 18, 2008 - 12:00 am | Page 1F

When Rich Fabbre retired and left Virginia, he and his wife chose to settle in Roseville to be close to their son and grandkids.

After looking at several neighborhoods, they picked WestPark – a housing development under construction near the city's western edge – for its blend of single-family houses, town homes, row houses and apartments.

"There's a very good mix, and because of that there's a wide price range that attracts a very diverse population," Fabbre said. "That's really kind of neat. There's schools out here, parks, shops, just everything that makes a place somewhere you want to live."

But plans to squeeze more homes into west Roseville could upset that delicate balance, Fabbre says.

He and other residents are fighting proposals to add 216 housing units to WestPark and more than 2,000 to nearby Fiddyment Ranch. The changes would require amendments to the city's specific plan for the area.

"They had a great plan, but now they're going around and tweaking with it in pretty significant ways that I think basically destroy all of the good things about it," Fabbre said.

Last month, the Roseville Planning Commission recommended approval of an application by WestPark builders, Pulte Homes, Lennar Corp. and Centex Homes to relocate some land uses.

Commercial space and high-density residential units would be moved next to a planned elementary school and park to create a neighborhood hub.

The applicants also want to increase single-family homes, apartments and condominiums without adding to the acreage. For single-family houses, builders have asked to boost the density from three or four units per acre to five.

"This gives us the ability to maximize the density that's allowed under the specific plan," Pulte Homes Vice President of Land Rick Jordan said.

"We're definitely seeing the market moving towards something that's more affordable for most buyers in Placer County. We think this will help us achieve that."

Lots for these additional detached, single-family homes would shrink from approximately 7,000 square feet to 4,500 to 5,000 square feet.

The city's planning department studied the proposal, analyzing issues such as traffic, schools and water supply, and found no significant impacts, project planner Steve Lindbeck said.

"In several ways, this is a better land use plan than the existing one. For one thing, it makes a more compact, walkable community, and we think that's a good thing," said Lindbeck.

"It doesn't change (existing) neighborhoods. It changes future neighborhoods that are a half-mile or a mile away."

An even larger proposal, however, is looming for the city's western area.

Developer Signature Properties has asked the city for an amendment increasing the number of medium- and high-density residential units.

The proposal includes a project for seniors that ranges from independent-living homes and apartments to skilled nursing facilities.

"Basically, we're using the existing entitled land more efficiently," Signature President John Bayless said. "It sounds ominous, but you add a couple of apartment complexes that were never part of the plan, and the unit count goes up quickly."

Fabbre has an e-mail list of 80 neighbors and counting who have expressed concern about the two proposals. The residents sent e-mails and letters to the city to voice their opposition.

"There's a lot of people who believe the water supply is not capable of handling that much increase in effectively the same footprint," Fabbre said.

He learned about the Fiddyment Ranch proposal after he began researching builders' plans for WestPark.

"It makes the 216-home increase look like the tip of the iceberg," Fabbre said. "You can't help but wonder if there's a piecemeal approach, taking a little bit at a time so that it kind of gets through without the real obvious impacts coming into the fore."

Lindbeck pointed out that both the WestPark and Fiddyment Ranch proposals would help the city meet its state-mandated affordable housing criteria.

Most affordable housing built in Roseville has been in the higher-density range, 13 to 18 units per acre, according to Lindbeck.

The state's threshold, however, is 20 units per acre.

"Although we have always been ahead of the curve in building high-density, the state is interested in the future," Lindbeck said.

A neighborhood informational meeting is scheduled Tuesday to discuss the WestPark proposal, which is tentatively scheduled to go to the City Council for approval Oct. 15, Lindbeck said.

The city plans to conduct an environmental analysis for the Fiddyment Ranch proposal, beginning next year.


Call The Bee's Jennifer K. Morita, (916) 773-7388.


About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.


Sacramento Bee Job listing powered by Careerbuilder.com

Quick Job Search
Buy
Used Cars
Dealer and private-party ads
Make:

Model:

Price Range:
to
Search within:
miles of ZIP

Advanced Search | 1982 & Older