My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2014_0220
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2014
>
CC_Minutes_2014_0220
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/24/2014 1:22:23 PM
Creation date
3/26/2014 1:35:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/24/2014
Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
Special City Council Meeting <br /> Thursday, February 20, 2014 <br /> Page 2 <br /> 11. Public Hearings <br /> 12. Budget Items <br /> 13. Business Items (Action Items) <br /> 14. Business Items—Presentations/Discussions <br /> a. Discuss Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area <br /> To focus tonight's discussion, Mayor Roe suggested breaking discussion into two <br /> groups: geographical divisions and different subdistricts within the Twin Lakes <br /> Redevelopment Area, and permitted uses in each subdistrict. Mayor Roe noted <br /> that the map provided in the meeting packet prepared by staff did not appear to <br /> coincide with the City Council's last discussions regarding district configurations; <br /> and asked that before beginning the Council discussion, staff provide their ration- <br /> al in making those adjustments. <br /> Councilmember McGehee expressed her preference that discussion move beyond <br /> particular uses and zoning code into a broader policy discussion. <br /> Mayor Roe agreed, with those discussions following and informed by the first two <br /> focus areas. <br /> City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed the adjustments made by staff to maps <br /> since previous discussions, in two areas and displayed those two revisions. <br /> Mayor Roe corrected staff's line to the east of Cleveland went north at Mt. Ridge <br /> Road in the L-shaped area, which staff duly noted and corrected. <br /> Mr. Paschke advised that modifications were based on the regulating plan and <br /> things that may take place in the future. As displayed on the map, Mr. Paschke <br /> noted that it would include the connection of Twin lakes Parkway creating a sepa- <br /> rate and distinct box at County Road C and similar uses to the south. Mr. Paschke <br /> advised that he didn't think some uses may be appropriate from the standpoint of <br /> their location adjacent to Langton Lake and property under one sole ownership <br /> (PIK property) and potential land assembly that may be obvious to acquire and <br /> redevelop if split into two districts creating a potential conflict within those dis- <br /> tricts and permitted uses. Mr. Paschke opined that this delineation allows focus <br /> on specific areas and how they complement each other to some degree, with keep- <br /> ing them attached to the area more to the south based on the future Twin Lakes <br /> Parkway. <br /> City Manager Trudgeon concurred, noting that as staff considered uses and what <br /> made sense, part of their rationale had been looking at subdistricts and uses for <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.