My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2006_0123
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
CC_Minutes_2006_0123
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:29:52 AM
Creation date
1/31/2006 1:21:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
1/23/2006
Meeting Type
Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 - 01/23/06 <br />Minutes - Page 18 <br /> <br />addition to discretion in further notification as warranted on a <br />case-by-case basis. Mr. Welsch reviewed various scenarios and <br />types of public hearings and the process followed by staff. <br /> <br />Mr. Welsch sought Council direction, given city notice cost and <br />property owner interest considerations, as how to proceed in the <br />future. Mr. Welsch addressed the specific issue and resident <br />complaint received related to the Kimco land use hearing; detailed <br />staff s use of the published notice, web site use for agenda <br />updating, posting of the site, and 350' mailing process. Mr. <br />Welsch sought Council direction for establishing a formal <br />ordinance or policy for future mailing, but asked Council <br />consideration of limited staff; and existing staff practice of erring <br />in the name of caution with wider than legally required <br />notification. <br /> <br />Discussion included identification of certain and potentially <br />interested homeowners; standards for staff to apply; other <br />community practices; and use of a larger range on potentially <br />controversial proj ects. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing recognized public comment on the issue at this <br />time. <br /> <br />John Kysylyczyn, 3083 N Victoria Street <br />Mr. Kysylyczyn concurred with a suggestion of Councilmember <br />Kough to use the 350' rule, and make an arbitrary number (i.e., 20 <br />closest residential properties). Mr. Kysylyczyn questioned the <br />policy and goal of the City Council as a determining factor. <br /> <br />City Attorney Anderson <br />City Attorney Anderson responded with a practical use by various <br />county clients with land use issues in unincorporated areas <br />regarding notification, referencing language such as, State Statute, <br />in addition to, "owners of record within 'l4 mile, or the ten nearest <br />properties, whichever would provide the greatest notification." <br /> <br />Dan Roe, 2100 Avon Street <br />Mr. Roe provided a bench handout, with a suggested notification <br />policy for City Council consideration. Mr. Roe's suggested <br />language was that". . . notice be mailed to each of the owners of the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.