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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, July 18, 2016 <br />Page 7 <br />Ayes: Etten, McGehee, Laliberte and Roe. <br />Nays: None. <br />Ori�inal Motion now under reconsideration and Restated <br />McGehee moved, Laliberte seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 11337_ (At- <br />tachment A) entitled, "A Resolution Memorializing the DENIAL of a Request for <br />Approval of a Minor Subdivision at 1926 Gluek Lane into Two Parcels (PF16- <br />014);" as amended: changing resolution language from "marginal" to "addi- <br />tiona� " <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Etten, McGehee, Laliberte and Roe. <br />Nays: None. <br />Mayor Roe noted this was a rather unique situation created by not having a full <br />City Council present. <br />b. Adopt a Resolution Memorializing the Denial of a Request for Approval of a <br />Minor Subdivision of 1861 Gluek Lane into Two Parcels (PF16-016) <br />At the request of Mayor Roe, City Manager Trudgeon briefly reviewed this item <br />as detailed in the RCA dated June 20, 2016 and related attachments. <br />Mayor Roe reiterated Councilmember Willmus' desire to remove this item from <br />the Consent Agenda due to his similar concern and use of the term "marginal" in <br />the finding, and potential interpretation with multiple meanings. <br />Councilmember Laliberte stated that she had the same concerns with this subdivi- <br />sion request as she had with the previous request related to water drainage; and <br />questioned why that finding was not also included in this list of findings. <br />Mayor Roe duly noted Councilmember Laliberte's comment. <br />While not having reviewed the meeting tape from the July 11, 2016 meeting when <br />this subdivision request was denied, City Attorney Gaughan stated it was his rec- <br />ollection that only one finding was stated in the motion for denial. <br />Councilmember Laliberte noted that clarification, opining she must be recalling <br />the broader discussion during public comment and discussion with staff and City <br />Council deliberation after public comment. <br />Councilmember McGehee agreed with the recollection of Councilmember <br />Laliberte that staff indicated water issues on this site were even more problematic <br />than the previous subdivision request. <br />Public Comment <br />Arlene Mencke, 1861 Gluek Lane (applicant and owner) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.