My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2003_0616
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2003
>
CC_Minutes_2003_0616
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2008 1:54:00 PM
Creation date
4/4/2006 11:56:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
6/16/2003
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
Regular City Council Minutes - 06/16/03 <br />Minutes -Page 23 <br />surround hard surface area being relocated on the site. <br />Mr. Wrangle opined his disappointment with the <br />opposition and vehemence from the neighborhood; with <br />the applicant being unaware of the opposition prior to the <br />Planning Commission's Public Hearing; and questioning <br />why none of the petitioners approached the applicant for <br />comment prior to the Hearing. <br />With no further public corrlments, Mayor Kysylyczyn <br />sought Council comment. <br />Councilmember Klausing recognized the various issues <br />presented regarding this project; concurred with the <br />legitimacy of comments regarding departure from <br />standards and frequency for variances, citing others on the <br />agenda this evening, and suggested that future <br />consideration be given to amending the code. <br />Councilmember Klausing opined that the elements <br />considered were consistent with those cited as hardships in <br />past variances requested and granted; expressed <br />disappointment with the animosity among the neighbors; <br />and that the property improvements would ultimately <br />benefit the neighborhood. Councilmember Klausing <br />spoke in favor of the motion, as consistent with past <br />Council actions, and recognizing the Planning <br />Commission reconunendation as a sound one. <br />Councilmember Kough, opining that no apparent hardship <br />existed, stated opposition to granting the variance; opining <br />that there appeared to be hardships for all parties; and <br />expressed concern regarding the potential for drainage <br />issues. <br />Councilmember Maschka had no further comment. <br />Councilmember Schroeder concurred that the Council <br />appeared to be granting numerous variances; supported the <br />second story to the home, but opined that, without <br />sufficient evidence for him to support a hardship, he <br />would be voting against the variance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.