My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2008_1013
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2008
>
CC_Minutes_2008_1013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/27/2008 1:42:01 PM
Creation date
10/27/2008 1:41:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
10/13/2008
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
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
MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee <br />FROM: Tam McGehee <br />DATE: September 11, 2008 <br />RE: Comprehensive Plan <br />I would like to respond to several issues raised by individual writings included in the <br />current packet. First, it is my understanding that a Comprehensive Plan is a plan that is to <br />incorporate the goals, wishes, aspirations, and plans of the residents for their community. <br />To me, the Comprehensive Plan is a plan of, by, and for the residents. <br />In Mr. Rancone's letter to City Council Members, City Development Staff, and the <br />Steering Committee, Mr. Rancone has labeled himself as a "corporate citizen." He is not <br />a resident. Although he may own corporate properties in Roseville, the income stream <br />from those properties pales in comparison from that of the residents living within the City <br />of Roseville and neither Mr. Rancone nor the president of the company live in Roseville. <br />Ms. Pust would have us believe that there is no consensus on the 100,000 sf limitation on <br />Community Business. However, Roseville residents, from the time of the Vista 2000 <br />right through the Imagine Roseville 2025, have clearly stated that they want no <br />more "regional retail" as represented by Rosedale and no more retail, in general. <br />We have had several elections where "Big Box" has been an issue and the residents <br />have resoundingly voted against this concept. There is clear resident support for <br />limitations on additional retail in Roseville as well as a desire to have commercial <br />ventures here that serve this community first. This includes head-of-household jobs, <br />standard working hours (not 24/7), and plans that reduce traffic and congestion on <br />our residential streets. <br />These desires can be met through a variety of methods, but they must be protected within <br />the Comprehensive Plan. In the past Roseville chose to incorporate the fruits of <br />substantial planning (by residents, staff, and consultants) into the Comprehensive Plan. <br />Some other communities have chosen to address the residents' goals and desires through <br />very precise land use and zoning regulations. Some communities have a combination, <br />placing some master plans into the Comprehensive Plan coupled with very stringent land <br />use regulations and definitions. Of the written responses, Dan Roe appears to propose a <br />good balance for Roseville. His plan appears, at least in theory, to advocate some Master <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.