My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0725
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0725
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2016 2:31:57 PM
Creation date
8/17/2016 1:47:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/25/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 25, 2016 <br />Page 34 <br />Etten moved, Roe seconded, approval of the draft Request for Proposals (RFP) <br />and directing staff to issue the RFP, amended as follows: <br />• Section C.1 Public Safetv, Pa�e S <br />Strike this paragraph entirely <br />• Section D. Public Enga�ement, Pa�e S <br />Include a requirement and emphasis that consultants show their previous <br />public engagement efforts informing this update; and that past Roseville- <br />specific public engagement processes include a model similar to that of the <br />Park Master Plan process, in addition to those listed (e.g. Imagine Roseville <br />2025). In other words, Mayor Roe asked that an emphasis be placed in that <br />paragraph that this comprehensive plan update process be informed by pre- <br />vious public engagement of the consultant and successful models in Rose- <br />ville. <br />• Section C.4. References, Pa�e 6 <br />Review the need for specific references; but note the consultant will be eval- <br />uated on their public engagements efforts in the pas� <br />• Section E, Selection Criteria, Pa�e 9 <br />Fourth bullet point from bottom, revise to read: "Ability to work as a team <br />with City Council, advisory commissions and committees, [�J staff, [the <br />public, and in geographic areas beyond RosevilleJ <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: McGehee, Willmus, Etten, and Roe. <br />Nays: Laliberte. <br />Motion carried. <br />d. Consider a Conditional Use (CU) to Allow a Drive-through at 2425 Rice <br />Street (PF15-0012) <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed this request brought before the Planning <br />Commission in July of 2015 for approval of a proposed drive-through as a Condi- <br />tional Use at 2425 Rice Street, with modified conditions. Mr. Paschke advised <br />that soon after, with some concerns raised before City Council approval as rec- <br />ommended by the Commission, the applicant was asked to defer the drive-through <br />until a tenant was found for the corner parcel and the actual use of the facility <br />could be further analyzed by the city's planning and engineering staff specific to <br />parking, traffic flow on site, and onto city and county streets. Mr. Paschke noted <br />those concerns were with circulation of the site itself depending on drive-through <br />configuration and potential traffic stacking. <br />Since that time, Mr. Paschke advised that the applicants had worked toward and <br />found a tenant for that space; and staff had subsequently analyzed modifications <br />to the drive-through as presented tonight; and addressed in recommended Condi- <br />tion D of the draft resolution (Attachment E) to provide signage, striping and <br />curbing of the drive-through beyond general and specific criteria previously re- <br />viewed as part of a drive-through use as a CU. Mr. Paschke noted additional mit- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.