My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2003_0818
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2003
>
CC_Minutes_2003_0818
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2008 1:58:11 PM
Creation date
4/13/2006 2:16:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/18/2003
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
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 - 8/18/03 <br />Page 14 <br />Mayor Kysylyczyn sought additional information <br />regarding the process from Mr. Paschke; and cautioned a <br />careful review of state statute and city code relating to <br />environmental issues to ensure the City's policies were <br />consistent. Mr. Paschke suggested continuing the decision <br />for provision of additional information, potentially <br />requiring an extension of the sixty (60) day review period. <br />City Attorney Anderson concurred with Mr. Paschke, to <br />allow time to discuss the project in more detail with staff; <br />and requested further time to review the recently-adopted <br />amendment to the City's subdivision ordinance. <br />Councilmember Maschka offered his support of a motion <br />to table, rather than deny the project; specifically <br />requesting that the developer work with staff, following <br />the comments received by the developer tonight, and <br />return with a revised concept plan with reduced density. <br />Councilmember Schroeder questioned whether the <br />Council could approve the concept with conditions to <br />allow the developer to proceed. <br />Councilmember Klausing opined his lack of support for <br />moving forward until environmental impact issues were <br />addressed. <br />City Attorney Anderson reiterated his desire to seek <br />additional information regarding state statute, and from <br />staff to hear their rationale and expertise in making their <br />initial determination that there was no signi~ cant <br />environmental impact related to this project. <br />Further discussion included criteria for environmental <br />impact statement requirements; and ability to obtain a <br />standard form available from the Environmental Quality <br />Board that outlines those considerations in determining <br />environmental impact. <br />Councilmember Kough recommended tabling the issue <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.