My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2019_0722
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2019
>
CC_Minutes_2019_0722
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2019 11:24:29 AM
Creation date
8/13/2019 11:24:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/22/2019
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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 22, 2019 <br /> Page 13 <br /> Councilmember Groff stated one part mentions pedestrian walkways, etc., so if <br /> something changed such as a bike path and the drive through interfered with that <br /> as well, this would be triggered. <br /> Ms. Gundlach explained the language specifically speaks to primary driving en- <br /> trance, exit, pedestrian walkways or parking facilities, so whether it is a bike lane <br /> or pedestrian walkway, if there is a problem, presumably the City of Roseville <br /> will hear about it and can take action with the property owner to figure out how <br /> the owner can comply with the condition. She thought the language was sufficient <br /> to accommodate that and there is always the threat to revoke it if needed for non- <br /> compliance. <br /> Mayor Roe indicated it is talked about in the language as adjusted and anything to <br /> do with interfering with these aspects of the facilities on site. He wondered if <br /> there needed to be something in the language that talks about if their operation is <br /> impacting facilities off site, such as blocking a lane of traffic on a public street <br /> with a que that is long. He asked whether the language as written covers that or <br /> does it need to be adjusted to indicated on/off the site. <br /> Mr. Paschke thought it would be a problem no matter what. He thought it would <br /> be something that is reviewed and discussed up front and would be approved in a <br /> manner staff believes would not have that consequence. <br /> Ms. Gundlach noted the Council is only seeing one condition within the Ordi- <br /> nance. There are other conditions that address other possible concerns. <br /> Councilmember Etten stated on line 21, it specifically mentions safety of pedes- <br /> trian bicyclists which he thought addressed Councilmember Groff s concern. He <br /> noted on line 25, in the middle of the line, it starts in red, "Such circulation plan <br /> meeting the intent of this section." His first question is around the word "intent," <br /> and asked if instead it should state "standards or conditions of this section" rather <br /> than"intent"because that sounds very squishy to him. <br /> Ms. Gundlach indicated that wording can be changed. <br /> Mayor Roe suggested the wording be changed to read "such circulation plan shall <br /> be made a condition of approval" because it is referred to above that there has to <br /> be a circulation plan. <br /> Councilmember Etten thought that would be okay. He noted the other word he <br /> had a problem with was "such." He would like that word replaced with some- <br /> thing else. <br /> Mayor Roe suggested changing the word "such"to "the." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.