My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2013_0520_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2013
>
2013_0520_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2013 2:45:33 PM
Creation date
5/22/2013 11:15:05 AM
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.
/
345
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
Attachment A <br />EA3,2013RP <br />XTRACT FROM THE PRILOSEVILLELANNING <br />CM <br />OMMISSIONINUTES <br />a. PROJECT FILE 0017 <br />Request by Roseville Planning Division to amend Section 1009.06 Zoning Changes <br />of Title 10 Zoning Ordinance to clarify the initiation process for a zoning map <br />and/or zoning text amendment (PROJ-0017) <br />Chair Gisselquist opened the Public Hearing for Project File 0017 at approximately 7:40 <br />p.m. <br />City Planner Paschke reviewed this requested TEXT AMENDMENT to the Purpose <br />Statement (Section 1009.06) for the purpose of clarifying and expanding what entities <br />could initiate a zoning map and/or text amendment to be consistent with State Statute <br />allowances versus the language created by staff in 2010 for that Purpose Statement. <br />At the request of Member Murphy, Mr. Paschke defined “planning agency” as the <br />Commission and/or Planning Staff, either one defined as an agency in accordance with <br />State Statute. Mr. Paschke advised that the current code didn’t spell it out, and it was <br />creating a conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, and after being brought to the attention of <br />the City Attorney, and supported by that office, it was determined to be prudent to clarify <br />the process to facilitate conducting business. <br />At the request of Member Murphy, Mr. Paschke and Mr. Lloyd reviewed how and when a <br />property owner, by petition of at least 50% of property owners per current State Statute <br />and City Code could initiate the process, with City Code defining those boundaries <br />elsewhere. <br />Chair Gisselquist closed the Public Hearing at approximately 7:48 p.m. <br />MOTION <br />Member Daire moved, seconded by Member Cunningham to recommend to the <br />City Council APPROVAL of the proposed TEXT AMENDMENT, as detailed and <br />based on the comments and findings of Section 4-6, and the recommendation of <br />Section 7 of the staff report dated April 3, 2013. <br />Ayes: 7 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.