My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-10-05_PC_Agenda_Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
2016 Agendas
>
2016-10-05_PC_Agenda_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2016 11:28:35 AM
Creation date
10/27/2016 11:28:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
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
Attachment B <br />originally, seeking that this closer attention to potential inadvertent weaknesses could be <br />addressed. <br /> Councilmember Etten stated his approval in having this come back, both or either topic. <br />Councilmember Etten noted if the PUD allowed up to a 50% increase and review of each <br />specific case for other features, he was fine; but stated he wasn’t interested in changing the <br />bulk of current provisions. <br /> Mayor Roe clarified he was seeking discussion, not personally advocating; but wanted to <br />further think about both avenues. <br /> Mayor Roe thanked staff for bringing this additional information forward and their <br />thoughtful approach in doing so. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.