Roseville Electric Building,
116 S. Grant Street, 1st Floor
roseville.ca.gov
The City of Roseville welcomes your participation.
Meeting Schedule: Regular meetings of the City Council are held on the first and third Wednesday of each month at 6:00 p.m.
Two Public Comment Periods for Non-Agenda Items: A total of twenty-five (25) minutes is allotted for public comments. At the beginning and end of the meeting, each speaker has three (3) minutes to address the Mayor/Chair on issues that are not listed on the agenda and are within the City’s jurisdiction. Please submit a yellow speaker card to the City Clerk before the item is heard if you wish to make a comment. You will still have an opportunity to comment if you haven’t filled out a yellow speaker card.
Brown Act: The City Council cannot discuss or act on items not listed on the agenda. Public Comment on Agenda Items: Each speaker has five (5) minutes to address items that are listed on the agenda.
Levine Act Provisions: If you’ve made a campaign contribution totaling more than $500 ($250 prior to January 1, 2025) to City Council Members in the last twelve (12) months, you must disclose it before addressing an item on the agenda. Please visit Levine Act – City of Roseville for updated forms and information.
Audio/Visual Presentations: If making a presentation regarding an agenda item, audio/visual materials must be submitted to the City Clerk for consideration at least 72 hours in advance.
Americans with Disabilities Act: If special assistance is required to participate in a meeting, including the need of auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City Clerk at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting. City Clerk 311 Vernon Street [email protected] 916-774-5263 TDD: 916-774-5220
Security Measures: All meeting attendees must successfully pass through a security metal detector. Any person with a prohibited item will not be allowed entry. Prohibited items include but are not limited to firearms (even with valid CCW), knives, pepper spray/mace, explosives of any kind/any weapons and/or dangerous devices of any kind, illegal drugs, and alcohol.
Viewing Options: The City of Roseville provides three options for viewing meetings:
Krista Bernasconi, Mayor
Karen Alvord, Vice Mayor
Bruce Houdesheldt, Councilmember
Tracy Mendonsa, Councilmember
Pauline Roccucci, Councilmember
Dominick Casey, City Manager
Michelle Sheidenberger, City Attorney
Carmen Avalos, City Clerk
AGENDA
City Council Closed Session Meeting
June 17, 2026
5:00 PM
Roseville Electric Building,
116 S. Grant Street, 1st Floor
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. ROLL CALL
III. PUBLIC COMMENTS
IV. CLOSED SESSION
1. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation Summary: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) Significant exposure to litigation – two cases
CONTACT: Michelle Sheidenberger 916-774-5325 [email protected] V. ADJOURNMENT
From: Richard Ryan
To: Isom, Mike; Casey, Dominick; City Clerk
Cc: DeVore, Ryan; Sheidenberger, Michelle; Anguiano, Melissa; Wiley, Wayne Subject: POSITION PAPER: Deferral of June 17th Funding Item / Downtown Specific Plan Parking Mitigation (MM 4.6- 5)Review of Downtown Specific Plan Parking Mitigation & Infrastructure Grant Funding Options Date: Monday, June 1, 2026 12:42:26 PM
External: This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening attachments, or taking further action.
To the Roseville City Clerk:
Please accept the attached formal position paper and technical planning analysis regarding the upcoming June 17th City Council funding item for the proposed 123- space Union Pacific surface parking lot. Pursuant to standard municipal procedure, you are hereby directed to disseminate this document to the Honorable Mayor and members of the Roseville City Council so it may be entered into the official public record.
To: Mike Isom, Development Services Director, City of Roseville, City Council, City Manager
From: Richard Ryan, Individually and on behalf of "Old Town Needs Parking" Date: June 1, 2026
Subject: Technical Review of Downtown Specific Plan Parking Mitigation & Infrastructure Grant Funding Options
Mr. Isom,
Thank you for your detailed assessment regarding the City’s compliance tracking for the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) and Mitigation Measure 4.6-5. I appreciate your perspective on how the rolling 20-year planning horizon and current buildout percentages govern the timing of regional infrastructure.
While we understand that standard environmental mitigation is designed to pace alongside active redevelopment, we would like to share our interpretation of the specific language governing Mitigation Measure 4.6-5. Our reading of the adopted Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) framework indicates that the programmatic "Implementation" directive explicitly states, "The City of Roseville shall provide an additional 580 parking spaces in the Plan area." Because this was framed as a direct municipal responsibility rather than a burden shifted onto private infill parcels, we believe the long-term delivery of these shared spaces remains a vital baseline project for the City to anchor.
Furthermore, from a technical tracking standpoint, our review of the historical 2009 environmental documents suggests that the 429-space Oak Street Garage does not
satisfy the plan’s regional net surplus targets. Because the 2009 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) incorporated an anticipated 250-space capacity goal within its baseline infrastructure models for the three planned garages—Oak Street, the Depot, and Pacific/Church—it is our interpretation that the original 250 spaces should be deducted from the Oak Street Garage's 429 stalls when calculating progress toward the 580 net-new space target.
Following this same structural logic, Historic Old Town (DT4) is similarly owed a base allocation. The permanent deletion of the multi-level parking structure at Pacific and Church Streets—which carried a baseline public allocation of 273 public spaces under the original 2009 Downtown Specific Plan Pre-Design Site Framework—leaves Historic Old Town (DT4) with a severe localized deficit before the 580 net-new target is even factored into your progress models. Without accounting for these baseline figures, the spatial and mathematical distribution of parking leaves a severe localized deficit that heavily impacts the Historic District.
As you know, the unique physical configuration of Old Town’s historic lots makes it exceptionally difficult to include modern on-site parking stalls without entirely eliminating viable commercial building footprints. This constraint naturally places a heavier reliance on the centralized "Park-Once" infrastructure originally envisioned for DT4.
We understand the City is currently moving forward, prior to City Council's formal funding approval, with site preparation for a 123-space at-grade surface parking lot on the Union Pacific parcel near Lincoln and Pacific Streets. While we welcome any effort to create parking, this 123-space lot layout creates an acute economic threat to our district under its current timeline.
Without a formal extension of the private lot lease at 400–430 Lincoln Street prior to its July 21st expiration, our local businesses face a complete inventory shutdown during the estimated six-month construction and grading period of the 123-space lot.
Shuttering Old Town's primary off-street parking for six months without an active interim plan will irreversibly damage Old Town businesses, exposing the local economy to severe disruption and drawing intense public and media scrutiny.
Furthermore, once operational, the physical location of the 123-space at-grade lot creates long-term commercial and safety challenges. The walk distance from this lot —paralleling the active track line until reaching the far end of the commercial core at the Boxing Donkey—is excessively long. For patrons departing dining and nightlife venues at 1:00 AM or 2:00 AM, this poorly lit, isolated pathway raises serious pedestrian safety and civil liability concerns. The safety concern alone will actively discourage nighttime patrons, and the additional walking length will harm daytime business traffic.
A permanent, structural solution is needed to solve both the safety and capacity issues. A multi-level parking structure built at the location planned for the 123-space lot could incorporate a short, 30-second, highly lit, safe, and secure walkway leading straight from a new garage directly to the Town Plaza and Historic Fire Station at the central Historic Old Town intersection of the Lincoln-Church-Main streets. This design
would dramatically reduce walking distances, eliminate pedestrian vulnerabilities along the tracks, and establish a landmark, permanent infrastructure asset.
The Union Pacific parcel represents the only viable, sufficiently sized footprint remaining in Historic Old Town capable of accommodating a multi-level structure that can mathematically satisfy both the 250 baseline and 580 net-new mitigation mandates. Building a $2.3 million inferior surface lot that will be completely filled with Capitol Corridor commuters as soon as Phase One rail service starts makes no sense. When a garage is inevitably forced to be built later on this exact site, it will hit our local businesses a second time with a total lack of parking for an estimated year or more of structural construction.
We understand that City Staff has communicated to Fehr & Peers an anticipation of constructing a 305-space facility at the existing Depot surface lot site to yield a net gain of 226 additional spaces. Critically, a spatial review of the municipal grid confirms that the total physical walking distance from the proposed Union Pacific garage site to the Depot platform is exactly 1,000 feet (consisting of 200 feet from the garage footprint to the central Town Plaza, 500 feet from the Town Plaza to Pacific Street, and 300 feet along Pacific Street to the transit platform). [1 ]
Because this 1,000-foot path sits well under the state's strict 1,320-foot (quarter-mile) premium funding threshold, the Union Pacific parcel qualifies for the highest tier of state Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) grant scoring metrics. Rather than funding separate parking facilities piecemeal out of local taxpayer funds, a single, centralized garage on the Union Pacific site can seamlessly serve both needs. This layout allows regional commuters to walk a highly walkable 1,000 feet directly past our active local storefronts during the day, generating valuable economic foot traffic, while providing our evening dining and nightlife patrons with a safe, direct, 200-foot well-lit pathway straight into the central Town Plaza intersection.
Our shared priority is to completely avoid a protracted legal dispute that would stall the construction of the 123-space lot and leave Old Town with significantly depleted parking resources. However, if the City and the businesses in Old Town cannot agree on a collaborative path forward—combining a temporary lease extension at the 400- 430 Lincoln lot with a joint commitment to pursue a permanent structural solution— the merchants will be left with no recourse but to seek a formal judicial remedy to halt the current un-vetted surface lot grading. An escalation to formal litigation would inevitably trigger an extensive discovery process and staff's reluctance to engage with state-funded alternatives.
Before scheduling a collaborative workshop, we feel it is necessary to establish the City's formal position to delay the 123-space lot approval set on the City Council's June calendar. If Development Staff proceeds with placing the 123-space lot funding approval on the June 17th agenda, it will evidence a lack of a good-faith commitment to explore a joint venture (JV) to secure Infill Infrastructure Grant (IIG-C) funding.
Advancing this item will inevitably attract public scrutiny and mobilize a substantial coalition of local merchants to the council floor, resulting in an at-grade layout that actively hurts business and represents a waste of public funds when it is eventually
torn up.
However, if Staff removes the 123-space lot approval from the calendar and agrees to actively pursue the IIG-C funding, the existing surface lot lease can be renegotiated at fair market value (FMV). This solution maintains the status quo of the 400-430 Lincoln parking lot lease, keeps our businesses solvent, and gives us a unique, immediate opportunity right now to capture state infrastructure funding rather than forcing the City to pay entirely out of its own municipal budget later.
Rather than proceeding down a path that creates financial waste, public friction, and expends an estimated $2.3 million on an inferior surface lot, we request the City's formal position on delaying the June 17th item. This allows us to hold off and jointly explore a public-private joint venture application for the state’s Infill Infrastructure Grant program to systematically build the permanent parking garage that everyone recognizes Historic Old Town needs and will eventually require.
Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your continued dedication to Roseville's downtown core. We look forward to receiving the City’s position on these immediate calendar adjustments.
Sincerely,
Richard Ryan
Individually and on behalf of "Old Town Needs Parking"