My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0723_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0723_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2014 4:20:04 PM
Creation date
9/21/2012 1:04:38 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.
/
676
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 Meeting <br />DR.AFT Minutes of Monday, Juue 18, 2007 <br />Page 22 <br />1 Mayor Klausing expressed concern with the Planning Commission <br />2 recommendation for denial, in addition to the mass of the proposed <br />3 building. <br />4 <br />5 Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her concerns that, if this plan goes <br />6 forward as it stands, there were many issues remaining that needed <br />7 additional information: proximity to wetlands and mitigations issues; <br />8 environmenta� concerns; huge loss of trees in a currently-wooded and <br />9 undeveloped area; loss of natural wildlife habitat; and impervious sur- <br />10 face increases. <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />Councilmember Roe advised he was ready to take action tonight, and <br />required no additionai information to make an informed decision. <br />Councilmember Pust opined that the proposal needed more work. <br />Councilmember Kough opined his support for the project as pre- <br />senied, and to accommodate the housing goals of the City. <br />2� Mr. Hall reviewed comments made regarding the building's mass, and <br />2� presented several pictures to the City Council, noting that the eleva- <br />22 tions presented at the Planning Commission meeting were of the rear <br />23 of the building, and compared the elevations of the front of the build- <br />24 ing; in add�tion to reviewing actual distances of single-family homes <br />25 along Brenner to the project site itself. <br />26 <br />27 Mr. Hall expxessed disappointment that the developer had not been <br />28 able to respond to citizen concerns at the Planning Commxssion level, <br />29 with the Public Hearing being closed prior to them being able to chal- <br />30 lenge some of th� findings presented by neighbors, and accuracy and <br />31 detail of the shadow study presented by the adj aining neighbor. <br />32 Therefore, Mr. Hall introduced Mr. Kevin Tepin, of Shole Madsen to <br />.33 present a detailed shadow study demonstration to the City Council at <br />34 ihis time. <br />35 <br />36 Kevin Tepin, 5hole Madsea <br />37 Mr. Tepin used a software program to show impacis on neighbors us- <br />38 ing various video timelines and monthly projections on a scale model <br />39 to represent accurate shadows to all buildings. Mr. Tepin noted the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.