My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011_0328_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2011
>
2011_0328_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2012 1:34:38 PM
Creation date
12/20/2011 12:00:09 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
97
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
Secondly, the Council should also prioritize these items as some may be more important than <br />2,,'i others. Staff has included a brief discussion below on each item to help foster the discussion. <br />29 0 Review/Amend the Sign Regulations Chapter 1010. The sign ordinance was updated <br />30 in 2007 and is in relatively good shape. However, staff would like to review the whole <br />3 1 'ocumi en for any potential changes and add language regarding digital display signs. <br />32 0 Review/Amend the Shor eland, Wetland, and Stormwater Management Chapter <br />33 1017 and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Chapter 1018. Staff would like to <br />34 separate Shoreland Tana gemeniftom the existing chapter. For the Shoreland and <br />35 Welland Chapter, whi ch regulates development on lakes, rivers, and wetlands, staff is <br />36 waiving for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to update their model <br />37 ordinancefor the City to use as a template. The current shoreland regulations d ate ftom <br />38 the 1970s and need to be updated. Staff has not received any information on a timetable <br />39 for the DNR, b�ut the model ordinance could be released later this year. <br />40 In regards to the Stormwater Management (7hapters, is intended to move these <br />4 1 regulations out of the zoning code and into Chapter 8 Public Works. Since Public Works <br />42 staff regulates and enforces storm�water ordinances, it seems to be appropriate to locate <br />43 this section into Chapter 8. For the same reasons, Chapter 1018 Erosion and <br />44 Sedimentation (7ontrol should be relocated to Chapter 8. <br />45 Review/Amend the Sexually Orientated Uses Chapter 1020. The regulations <br />46 governing sexually orientated uses have not been updated since 2'002'and staff would like <br />47 to review the ordinance with the (7ily .41torney to ensure that the chapter reflects modern <br />48 societ y and our community's values. <br />49 Review/Amend the Subdivision Regulations - Title 11. Staff would like to do a <br />comprehensive review of Title 11, Subdivision to ensure the regulations are adequate to <br />govern the subdivision of land for development and the construction ofpublic <br />infrastructure. This Title outlines the process of approving subdivision plats (including <br />minor subdivisions), sets the application submittal requirements, sets public <br />improvements standards, sets design standards fob' public infrastructure and minimum <br />standards fob' lot size and area, and establishes the park dedication requirement. <br />Add incentives for the use of energy-�efficient practices, xeriscaping, native planting, <br />and community involvement. Staff believes that using incentives is the proper way to <br />encourage the abovementioned items versus a strict mandate or requirement. Incentives <br />can take many forms from reduced timeline fog' review and approval, reduced fees, <br />60 additional density, etc. The City Council should discuss if and how incentives should be <br />6 1 used. <br />62 Community-�based planning through Charrette Process.. charrette is collaborative <br />63 process in which groups ofpeople draft a solution to a problem and is a technique used <br />64 in many different disciplines. In the municipal context, local elected officials, property <br />65 owners, staff, and stakeholders come together to work out an acceptable solution to an <br />66 issue. It is often used to tackle design topics but is used for more broadly based planning. <br />67 While a charrette can be highly effective, it does take additional time and cost than a <br />68 typical review process. Nevertheless, it can be extremely effective on highly charged <br />69 topics and can help a community arrive at an optimal solution. It is often a perfect fit for <br />"7 ('-) a publically-led project. <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.