My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2003_0609_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2003
>
2003_0609_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/1/2011 7:12:06 AM
Creation date
10/21/2011 3:10:07 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
2 Andrea bobbins. 2673 Woodbridge, said she was concerned that the City parks <br />3 Department will light and rent out the fields for public soccer fields. Why is there need <br />4 for lights? <br />5 <br />6 Member Peper asked if maple shade trees could be extended along the Woodbridge edge <br />7 of the site (yes). Thomas Paschke explained that boulevard trees are required and could <br />be part of the master plan. <br />9 <br />to Member Traynor asked why the school is oriented along lice instead of Woodbridge. <br />1 1 (existing school is on Rice Street). Placing school on Woodbridge would be more buffer <br />12 and parking would be away from Woodbridge; Thomas Paschke said the old and the new <br />13 school would be integrated. Member Traynor asked for explanation of "drivers'' vs <br />14 ;ipermits } }. <br />15 <br />16 Chair Duncan asked if there were regulations of play field hours of operation. (Could <br />17 limit the lighting). Thomas Paschke explained that the zoning shows a school as a <br />18 permitted use in R- zone currently. The Concept Master Plan helps to explore and <br />19 answer concerns. <br />20 <br />1 Chair Duncan asked# with no PUDI, what could the developer do? Thomas Paschke <br />explained the structure and parking are permitted, but setbacks, heights, s ignage} <br />3 landscaping and parking are issues that can be regulated. <br />4 <br />5 Member Mulder asked if students would be in the north lot. Could Woodbridge exit be <br />6 chaired or gated on week days to force student entry from Rice Street? This could be a <br />27 PUD regulation that could reduce impacts on Woodbridge. <br />9 Member Stone asked the number of parking spaces in the south parking lot (83). <br />30 <br />31 Richard Jacobsen expressed concern with parking; lot lighting and three -story building <br />32 lighting could produce additional lights in the neighborhood. <br />33 <br />34 Chair Duncan closed the hearing. <br />35 <br />36 Member Mulder said the plan is relatively good, but he is concerned abort chaining the <br />37 parking lot as well as lighting. <br />38 <br />39 Chair Duncan explained issues of traffic and parking. Should traffic and parking study <br />40 be done? Thomas Paschke said a traffic study would help. Member Traynor said staff <br />should work on the traffic plan with neighbors and return. There are issues here not fully <br />42 flushed out. Member Mulder explained the need for a better plan. Thomas Paschke <br />43 explained the traffic study will work to show generation issues and traffic management <br />44 on the site. <br />s <br />45 <br />46 Member Traynor said successful proposals need neighbors and applicants to work <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.