My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2006_1204
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2006
>
CC_Minutes_2006_1204
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:43:26 AM
Creation date
12/19/2006 9:11:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
12/4/2006
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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 - 12/04/06 <br />Minutes - Page 24 <br /> <br />the Draft AUAR Update that it would not be identified as an <br />impaired water. <br /> <br />Mr. Stark noted that a public open house seeking comment on the <br />AUAR Update had been held on November 2, 2006, had been <br />noticed in the official newspaper, with mailed notice to those <br />previously expressing interest; and noted that the reason the <br />document, during scoping time periods, was sent to the various <br />agencies was for their expert review and comment. <br /> <br />Councilmember Pust thanked the public who had commented to- <br />date on the process; and noted the numerous opportunities <br />provided for public comment. Councilmember Pust reviewed <br />discussion and issues raised; opining that going forward with the <br />Update and seeking the third scenario seemed beneficial at this <br />time, rather than waiting. <br /> <br />Council member Ihlan opined the need to discuss the cost overruns <br />for the Update so far; and further opined that it was financially <br />irresponsible to move forward at this point, without the benefit of <br />further public discussion. Councilmember Ihlan noted that that <br />Scenario lA included big box retail and gas stations, which had <br />not been included in the previous AUAR; and opined that the <br />Draft Update needed careful City Council review and public <br />input; and should not be "pushed ahead without further financial <br />and environmental review." <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Pust; Maschka and Klausing. <br />Nays: Ihlan and Kough. <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />7. <br /> <br />Councilmember-Initiated Items <br /> <br />7.a Request of Councilmember Ihlan: Consider <br />Moratorium for Twin Lakes Redevelopment <br />Mr. Stark provided a Bench Handout, consisting of a <br />memorandum dated December 4, 2006 to the City from Jim <br />Casserly and Phil Krass, entitled, "Moratorium and Twin <br />Lakes Condemnation" (attached) recommending that the <br />City not make any decision regarding a moratorium until <br />the Twin Lakes condemnation issues had been resolved. In <br /> <br />Councilmember- <br />Initiated Items <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.