CC_Minutes_2016_0516 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, May 16, 2016 Page 28 Councilmember McGehee noted that all EAW's to-date in Roseville had been cit- izen-initiated rather than city initiated (e.g. asphalt plant). Councilmember McGehee asked that health, safety and welfare concerns be included as part of any EAW review to address any other potential issues (e.g. Interim Use for con- crete crushing and greater impacts beyond 500'). Mr. Paschke noted that was the point staff was trying to make that whether to- night or for a future topic of discussion, the City Council needed to select what uses in these areas rose to that greater notification need. Mr. Paschke suggested that needed to be a City Council discussion to direct staff and not a staff determi- nation; but needing City Council and/pr, Planning Commission discussion to es- tablish those parameters in code or via a policy for specific uses. Mayor Roe noted existing code language addressing those types of impacts; and suggested simply referencing those having extraordinary impacts would suffice, while recognizing there would still be subjective analyses for particular uses. Mr. Paschke clarified that was addressed under performance standards. However, Mr. Paschke also addressed when the clock started ticking for applications; and suggested perhaps any Interim Use should be subjected to the extraordinary noti- fication ruling. Mayor Roe suggested staff look at current performance standards and how lan- guage could be inserted to address the extraordinary notice point. Councilmember McGehee suggested guideline stating until staff signs off on an application or until they moved it to the City Council for a decision, the clock didn't start until then. Mr. Paschke questioned if that was even possible. Mayor Roe suggested language such as "If in the city's judgment, city code per- formance standards may require. .., an application would not be deemed complete until judgment was made by the city that extraordinary notification was required." City Attorney Gaughan advised that, whatever requirements existed, the city would need to clearly define them so the applicant knows before they submit any- thing whether their application was complete or not. Mr. Gaughan advised that he wanted to avoid any scenario where the applicant provided what they reasonably believed to be a complete application, and the City Council or its staff used their discretion to state they wanted more. Mr. Gaughan noted the city wanted its sys- tem to be set up for clarity in determining what consisted of a complete applica- tion.