My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0718
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0718
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2016 3:26:11 PM
Creation date
7/26/2016 10:10:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/18/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
a�,�� ����� <br />s�t� r$,�.o�� <br />G. �c� �v�H�c � <br />n�.��`'� <br />July 18, 2016 <br />Mayor and Council members <br />Roseville City Council <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, MN 55113 <br />Re: 1926 Gluek Lane Roseville, MN minor subdivision (PF16-014) request for removal on consent agenda <br />and reconsideration based upon the facts <br />Dear Council Members, thanks for your time and your consideration of my request for a minor lot <br />subdivision at last week's meeting. I appreciate your commitment in keeping Roseville safe and a <br />desirable community in which to live. We all want to do the right thing for our neighbors and our <br />neighborhoods. <br />However, I would like to move for removal of item 8a from the consent agenda. <br />My basis for removal and further discussion is in response to the facts forming the denial are: <br />(Pertaining to the Denial of Minor Subdivision letter l dated on Tuesday July 15 through US Mail). <br />• Fact one: not relevant <br />• Fact two: not factual <br />Fact three: specifies requirements that are not supported by the city code and were not publicly <br />disclosed requirements prior to this subdivision request <br />Once removed, I would further like to move, in accordance to Rosenberg's Rules of Order, that one of <br />the three Council Members in the majority of this vote enter a motion to reconsider based upon the <br />following responses of the "facts" that formed this subdivision denial. <br />In accordance with the options provided to the Council, there was a 3-2 vote to deny this subdivision at <br />the July 11th meeting. The denial was supported by three statements of fact, as follows: <br />1) The existing storm water runoff and drainage issues in the area are extreme <br />2) The proposal does not meet minimum requirements of the city code for lot width <br />3) The marginal runoff from the residential development intended for the subdivided parcel might <br />be injurious to other homes in the surrounding neighborhood. <br />There is no definition of what constitutes a"fact" in the city vocabulary. Needing to understand these <br />"facts" outlined by the Council, I referred to, what I felt would be a mutually agreeable definition source: <br />Merriam-Webster. Their definition of fact is: <br />Something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence : a true <br />piece of information. <br />_ _ <br />_ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ <br />1926 Gluek Lane Minor Subdivision request PF16-014 response to facts of denial <br />1�Page <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.