My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2004_0927
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
CC_Minutes_2004_0927
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:31:50 AM
Creation date
2/15/2006 12:37:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
9/27/2004
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
66
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 Regular Meeting - 09/27/04 <br />Minutes - Page 19 <br /> <br />correct the original error, noting that the public would have <br />another two opportunities to be heard; and opined that the <br />Planning Commission had the right to hold a third meeting if <br />they so chose to do so; and further opined the benefit to all <br />parties of having two opportunities, rather than one extremely <br />long hearing. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schroeder recognized that errors sometimes <br />occur; and opined his support of staff s resolution of the issue, <br />while opening the door for the Planning Commission to hear <br />twice from concerned citizens, or to allow concerned citizens <br />alternative dates for scheduling purposes. Councilmember <br />Schroeder applauded staff for their actions in correcting the <br />situation; and was not supportive of mailing a second notice. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing mentioned other opportunities available through <br />media sources (i.e., cable television) to clarify that no formal <br />action on the project would take place until at least October 14, <br />2004, but that the public would have an opportunity for comment <br />on both the Hearing Date of October 6, and the Continuation to <br />October 14, 2004. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her concerns regarding the <br />notice process, and noted that the record would show that the <br />Council was aware of the process issue. <br /> <br />Council consensus, with the exception of Councilmember Ihlan, <br />was that staff and the City Attorney had taken appropriate <br />actions in correcting the original flaws in the notice process. <br /> <br />Twin Lakes Redevelopment Project, Scope of Mailed Notice <br />of Public Hearing at the Planning Commission <br />Ihlan moved, Klausing seconded, directing staff to extend mailed <br />notice regarding the Public Hearing on the Twin Lakes <br />Redevelopment Project, from Hamline Avenue west; south to <br />Roselawn Avenue; and in Arden Hills to those residents in the <br />"triangle" neighborhood at County Road D, New Brighton Road <br />and Lake Johanna Boulevard. <br /> <br />Ms. Ihlan clarified her rationale for extending the notice given <br />the regional impact of the proposed project related to traffic <br /> <br />Twin Lakes <br />Redevelopment <br />Project, Scope of <br />Mailed Notice of <br />Public Hearing at <br />the Planning <br />Commission <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.