My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2016_0822
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2016
>
CC_Minutes_2016_0822
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2016 1:47:11 PM
Creation date
9/14/2016 10:31:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/22/2016
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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, August 22, 2016 <br />Page 11 <br />Councilmember McGehee stated her preference for setting caps for im erv' <br />surfaces allowed and not exceeded based on who the city engineer happe ed to us <br />and that interpretation and analysis. be <br />Mayor Roe clarified that city triggered review and analysis only occurs if a a <br />exceeds the established cap, requiring further review and a p rcel <br />and mingation to address it accordin 1 pproval for any excess <br />was not to approve the ordinance, but to amend d�aft aner clarified this motion <br />the City Council, and any subsequent lan �age currently before <br />rate motions before a final motion to adopt�theo d nan e ents may follow as sepa- <br />Councilmember Laliberte noted on reading the May 2016 Cit <br />minutes, as reflected, she was uncomfortable with the propo alCandcwas mting <br />more comfortable with the 35% proposal. Even thou uch <br />ceed that percentage, Councilmember Laliberte stated�thhat did nt �at onali e moX- <br />ing the percentage over 35% to a c c o m m o d a t e t h o s e parce ls. <br />v <br />Roll Call <br />Ayes: Willmus, Laliberte, Etten, McGehee and Roe. <br />Nays: None. <br />Councilmember McGehee suggested a motion to limit the extent the Cit <br />neer was authorized to approve various impervious surface amounts; su y Engi- <br />it exceeded 10% of the adopted cap set by the Cit Council, an a g�esting if <br />to come before the Council for consideration and ction. y pprovals needed <br />Mayor Roe clarified that, if a parcel desi <br />coverage limits, the onl �ated LDR-1 exceeded 30% impervious <br />with mitigation approv d by the C ty Eng eer,�wi h SO�oould be approved was <br />the absolute maximum applicable per city code. mProvement area as <br />Councilmember McGehee stated her preference to see no more than 60°/ <br />impervious coverage; and opined she was not ha o total <br />tion variable. ppy with this open-ended mitiga- <br />Mayor Roe questioned the downside of mitigating excessive impervious surfa <br />Councilmember McGehee opined, in some instances, a heavil ces. <br />ed her idea of green space, which was her overall concern. y-paved site violat- <br />permeable pavers, Councilmember McGehee opined there couldt no longer be a <br />limit to "hard" surfaces. <br />Mayor Roe noted there were already limits on LDR-1 in addition to the ro os <br />SO% limit for LDR-2 parcels in accordance with the previous motion thapispo ed <br />before the Planning Commission. <br />go <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.