My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2006_0508
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
CC_Minutes_2006_0508
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:37:57 AM
Creation date
6/20/2006 3:08:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
5/8/2006
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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 - 05/08/06 <br />Minutes - Page 28 <br /> <br />proposed project area; cited past notice areas; opined the impact <br />on Langton Lake and surrounding neighborhoods, asbestos <br />concerns, and public health and nuisance Issues. <br />Councilmember Ihlan expressed concern that not a single <br />resident got a mailed notice, and spoke in support of making <br />notification of those impacted residents. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing noted those concerned citizens at the Planning <br />Commission hearing; and clarified the actual application for an <br />interim use permit to crush concrete on site. <br /> <br />Ihlan moved, Kough seconded, that staff provide mailed notice <br />to the surrounding residential areas in accordance with the same <br />notice previously provided for land use applications, including <br />at least the area south of County Road D; west to Snelling; and <br />at least to County Road C, perhaps the James Addition <br />neighborhood, to provide opportunity for public comment as the <br />City Council considers this request at their upcoming meeting. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kough spoke in support of the motion. <br /> <br />Mayor Klausing spoke in opposition to the motion, given the <br />additional cost of mailed notice; suggesting use of other media <br />notification sources. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that costs for public mailed notice <br />should not be a consideration, given that the City "is going to <br />subsidize $40 million" for the area's redevelopment; and the <br />hazardous dust proposed near a residential neighborhood. <br />Councilmember Ihlan further opined that the Council was about <br />to "vote down her proposal to let the public know" about the <br />proposed interim use permit, based on the subject of cost. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust took issue with Councilmember Ihlan's <br />comments regarding her intended vote; and questioned the <br />approximate cost for mailed notice. <br /> <br />Councilmember Maschka, while initially supportive of the <br />mailed notice, changed his mind and spoke in opposition to the <br />motion following recent discussion and implications. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.