My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2007_0723
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2007
>
CC_Minutes_2007_0723
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/12/2007 11:59:30 AM
Creation date
9/12/2007 11:59:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/23/2007
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
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
e~ular City C®uncil eetin~ <br />®nday, July 23, 2007 <br />Pale 49 <br />Councilmember Pust opined that staff had heard clearly, and if they <br />were not prepared by the August 13, 2007 meeting with an inclusive <br />PUD based on Council discussions, they would not bring the item <br />forward at that time. Councilmember Pust further opined that she <br />didn't want to set a precedent of the City Council determining when <br />specific items came before the City Council at specific meetings. <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke in support of the motion; opining that the <br />City Council needed to set its own agenda; and it was clear the item <br />would not be ready by August 13, 2007. <br />® Call <br />Ayes. Ihlan and Kough. <br />ayso Pust; Roe; and Klausing. <br />®ti® fails . <br />1VIr. Paschke advised that the City's Traffic Consulting Engineer, IVIr. <br />Vaughan with SRF Consulting, was present to comment on the traffic <br />study; and also noted that John Livingston, Hotel/Restaurant Appli- <br />cant, 2700 Cleveland Avenue, and Robert Hajek, Xtra Lease, repre- <br />senting owner of the trucking site (office address: 3433 Broadway <br />Street NE, Suite 110,1VIlnneapolis, l~~N 55413) were present. <br />Mr. Paschke advised that staff remained consistent in their recom- <br />mendation for DENIAL of the request, based on the findings detailed <br />in Section 11.1 A of the staff report dated July 23, 2007. <br />Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether or not an environmental re- <br />view was required, that the Council's call for a discretionary EAW by <br />the applicant would hold the 60-day calendar versus staffs recom- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.