Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident raises safety and notification concerns after Sunrise Avenue traffic study surfaces
Summary
A resident asked the Planning Commission to review a 2020–2023 traffic study for Sunrise Avenue; staff later reported the nearby medical building project at 705 Sunrise was appealed to and upheld by city council with reduced tree removal.
A resident urged the City of Roseville Planning Commission on March 13 to scrutinize a traffic study covering collisions on Sunrise Avenue between Coloma and Kirby and to improve project notification after she said the study was not presented when the commission considered a nearby medical building.
Jennifer Chapman, of 707 Sunrise, told commissioners she discovered a 2020–2023 traffic study after the Planning Commission approved the 705 Sunrise medical building project and said the Roseville Police Department had requested the study. “This report surfaced as a result of…our concerns and starting to kind of inquire into traffic safety,” Chapman said. She said the study concluded collision levels were not unusual for the volume of traffic but warned that unreported incidents and “drive‑away” crashes could undercount collisions in official statistics.
Chapman also disputed whether nearby residents and tenants had received timely notice of the project, saying multiple tenants at the Terraces of Roseville — a senior complex very close to the site — were not notified in time to formulate comments. “We were not notified,” she said, and urged the commission to ensure future notice reaches affected residents.
During the meeting staff later reported that the 705 Sunrise Office Building project had been appealed to the City Council after the Planning Commission approved it on Jan. 9. Planning Manager Greg Bitter said Council heard the appeal and denied it, approving the project with one change: the applicant agreed to remove two trees instead of three and to abide by municipal requirements when encroaching within the drip line of protected trees. Bitter said those conditions and the rest of the project remain approved as previously recommended by the Planning Commission.
No formal action was taken by the Planning Commission on traffic‑study review at the March 13 meeting; the item was raised during the public comment period and staff said they would continue to note project appeals and conditions in future reports.
