My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2005_1121
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
CC_Minutes_2005_1121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:28:25 AM
Creation date
11/29/2005 10:04:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
11/21/2005
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
50
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
<br />City Council Study Session - 11/21/05 <br />Minutes - Page 15 <br /> <br />is considered. <br /> <br />Mr. Paschke advised clarified to Councilmembers that the City's <br />Subdivision ordinance had been amended several times as certain <br />issues became prevalent. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan argued that the public comment at the <br />Planning Commission level was related to the specific Anderson <br />proposal, not a policy discussion; and opined that the Council <br />needed to have that discussion, with public input. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka reiterated his opinion that housing was <br />the paramount issue before the City Council for 2006; and <br />addressed various complexities and issues to be considered for <br />all parties, including the School District. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing focused the discussion on how best to achieve <br />the Council's corporate goals; as there appeared to be no <br />majority vote for a moratorium. Mayor Klausing sought <br />consensus as to an outside study via consultant or a study <br />performed by staff. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka noted that the HRA had limited funds <br />and the School District was enthusiastic about their involvement <br />in the process; and opined the need to pursue a work plan (i.e., <br />coordination, process, timing, entities) by all interested parties <br />with all due haste. <br /> <br />Mr. Paschke advised that there were not sufficient staff to <br />perform an in-depth study and continue with the City's current <br />work program. Mr. Paschke also noted the need to involve other <br />outside agencies and/or commissions (i.e., Metropolitan Council; <br />Twin Cities Builders' Association; HRA; Planning Commission; <br />and School District). <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka noted that the discussion spilled over <br />into numerous areas, (i.e., housing; health care; ambulance <br />service; fire relief), and required a global picture that all players <br />needed to review and consider. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan reviewed recent studies (Embrace Open <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.