My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012_0709_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2012
>
2012_0709_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/12/2012 2:46:09 PM
Creation date
7/5/2012 4:14:34 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
337
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
AttachmentB <br />compelling and cogent defense of its February assertion that the Wal-Mart <br />project was in compliance with city policies and regulations. <br />To believe that city staff had not made a determination as to <br />st <br />compliance when the city review process first began well before the June 21 <br />Determination of Compliance letter is to suggest that city staff is incompetent or <br />failed to perform its duties <br />We therefore request that the record for this administrative appeal include the <br />st <br />February 1 Planning Commission minutes, the written communications <br />submitted by residents at that time, and the staff recommendation to the Planning <br />Commission. <br /> <br />2) Zoning Ordinance is in Conflict with Comprehensive Plan <br />The city staff determination avoids one key conflict with the <br />a) <br />Comprehensive Plan: This district is Community Mixed-Use, which is <br />described in the Comprehensive Plan in Chapter 4 on Land Useas <br />- and High-Density <br />Residential, Office, Community Business, Institutional, and Parks and Open <br />Wal-Mart does not qualify as a <br /> (page 4-8). In our view, <br />community business, <br />but rather as a regional business which is <br />defined in the Comp Plan as-format stores [that] are <br />located in places with visibility and access from the regional highway system <br /> <br />(page 4-8). <br />According to a legal counsel letter from city attorney Charles Bartholdi <br />b) <br />dated December 9,2011, <br />Bill Malinen, the Comprehensive Plan is in conflict with the Zoning <br />Ordinance with respect to allowing a Regional Business to develop in <br />the Community Mixed-Use (CMU) district, and that, he indicates, is <br />problematic and ought to be changed: <br />i.Regional Business use is allowed in a <br />Community Mixed-Use District under the Zoning Code, there is an <br />apparent conflict between the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning <br />st <br />(page 3, 1 paragraph). <br />ii. Additionally, the lawyer advises that t in <br />the event of a conflict between the Comprehensive Plan and the <br />nd <br />(page 3, 2 <br />paragraph). <br />iii. And finally, the city attorney concludes <br />that to the extent the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code may <br />SWARN Appeal--July 2, 2012 <br />4 <br />Page4of18 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.