My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2008_0128_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2008
>
2008_0128_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/28/2011 4:33:23 PM
Creation date
12/28/2011 3:54:10 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
280
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
Draft Planning Commission Minutes Attachment A <br />PROJECT FILE 0011 <br />Consideration of revisions to the City Code that would clarity the text pertaining tocul-de-sacs and <br />eliminate contradictory references <br />Chair Bakernan opened the Public Hearing for Project File 0010. <br />City Engineer Deb Bloom reviewed recent court action (October 8, 2007, Ramsey County District Court — <br />Boryczka v. City of Roseville); and the court order and judge's ruling that the City had been incorrectly <br />interpreting City Code, Section 1103.021 D (Cul-de-sac Reductions). Ms. Bloom reviewed the history of staff <br />interpretations that reductions in the right-of-way cul-de-sac dimensions could be approved if of the three <br />(3) criteria were met; and the judge opining that all three of the criteria must be met in order to allow a sub- <br />standard cul-de-sac, <br />Ms. Bloom reviewed existing caul -de-sac inventories, their locations, and relevant code sections; with staff <br />recommending, along with the City Attorney, that City Code language be revised to conform to previous City <br />Council decisions by initial amendment to consolidate and clarify ref erences'to cul-de-sacs and turnarounds; <br />based on Attachments A and B of the staff report. <br />Discussion included process of staff s preparation and presentation of feasibility reports for future construction <br />projects; process for unusual circumstances for the cul-de-sac approval process previously used; application <br />of consistent standards* purposes for deviations (i.e., preservation of wetlands); and required flexibility. <br />Public Comment <br />Chair Bapeman closed the Public Hearing, with no one appearing to speak, <br />MOTION <br />Member Wozniak moved, seconded by Member Doherty to SUPPORT AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL <br />OF THE PROPS OED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, based on comments and <br />findings of Section 5 and 6, and the recommendations of Section 7 of the report dated December 6, <br />2007. <br />Ayes: 7 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br />Chair Bakernan noted that this item was scheduled for City Council review on December 17, 2007. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.