My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2018_0827
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2018
>
CC_Minutes_2018_0827
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/13/2018 3:07:36 PM
Creation date
9/13/2018 3:07:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/27/2018
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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 27, 2018 <br /> Page 8 <br /> Councilmember Etten stated the City Attorney talked about the potential for <br /> changing the criteria which would allow greater control over potentially drive- <br /> throughs in any zone. He suggested the following language "The applicant shall <br /> submit and adhere to an approved circulation pattern. If that pattern creates haz- <br /> ards to safety for pedestrians, bicyclists or automobiles, the use may be terminat- <br /> ed." He stated then if the site changed, it would have to come back for review and <br /> the second one allows that if it is created and creates a problem, then they could <br /> close the drive-through. This would allow control over certain circumstances. <br /> Mr. Gaughan confirmed he did not know if the use could be terminated as it is a <br /> conditional use and if they submit and adhere to a circulation plan, and do not in- <br /> terfere with or reduce safety. But, if the plan is changed and it does impact or <br /> demonstrate that the use will interfere with or reduce safety, then they would be in <br /> violation of the conditions of their conditional use. <br /> Mayor Roe stated simply changing the circulation, absent an analysis of whether <br /> or not it impacts, does not automatically trigger anything other than a review by <br /> staff, unless there is different language in their conditions. <br /> Mr. Gaughan indicated that was correct. <br /> Councilmember Laliberte stated a circulation plan could be submitted and the ap- <br /> plicant could state they are adhering to that plan submitted but what if conditions <br /> change where then the safety or traffic patterns or something else is then negative- <br /> ly affected later on. She stated there is no ending it because they submitted a plan <br /> and are adhering to it. Whereas, if the language Councilmember Etten was sug- <br /> gesting was a condition and situation changes, regardless if the plan is being lived <br /> up to, it is a matter of a safety issue or a traffic issue. <br /> Mr. Gaughan thought they might submit annually the condition of a circulation <br /> plan. <br /> Councilmember Etten advised that would create a headache for someone. <br /> Mayor Roe stated the council has the ability on any conditional use they approve <br /> to look at, if there are specific conditions in the Code, and add any conditions as a <br /> City that they might want as part of approving a conditional use. But then those <br /> conditions carry forward with that approval, with the property. They would need <br /> to be very careful in constructing those conditions if the Council wants to use that <br /> approach. <br /> Councilmember McGehee explained the council has been sitting in the meeting <br /> crafting this and are now being told one more time this is the end of the sixty <br /> days, so they have to turn this down. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.