My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0423_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0423_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:38:43 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:21:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
143
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
l <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />7 <br />� <br />City Council Study Session <br />Monday, Apri116,2007 <br />Page 5 <br />expanding it to include additional issues made apparent during the <br />study, with City Attorney Squires opining that the City didn't appear <br />to meet any of the three possible circumstances outlined by State <br />Statue as applicable; the complexity of the issue, including issues out- <br />side the lot split issue related to zoning, which would be included in <br />the Study Group's report to the City Council as future policy discus- <br />sion issues; and how current zoning regulations fit into the community <br />regarding prevailing lot widths and sizes. <br />�, <br />l� Ms. Bakema� noted that the group hadn't looked at ordinances from <br />] 1 other cities, but had been concentrating on the City's own ordinances <br />1� related to actual lot size square footage and neighborhood characteris- <br />1 ti� tics. <br />1� <br />�,� Mr. Doherty advised that the groups' final report would include six to <br />1� ten policy-related questions that had been identified; some including <br />1� recommendations of the group and some requiring ongoing analysis. <br />3 �3 <br />1 �� <br />�� <br />�l <br />�� <br />�� <br />�4 <br />�� <br />26 <br />�7 <br />�� <br />�� <br />� [� <br />,� � <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�� <br />3� <br />�� <br />�� <br />�{� <br />Councilmember Ihlan opined that the moratorium needed to be ex- <br />tended and expanded with additional issues that had been identified by <br />the study group, via a different study group, to allow the City Council <br />adequate time to make policy decisions without land use applications <br />before them; and expressed concern regarding "Monster Houses" or <br />"McMansions," and provided several recent newspaper articles as <br />Bench Handouts. Councilmember Ihlan also encouraged a thorough <br />review of ordinances from the Cities of Bloomington, Edina and �Vlin- <br />netonka; review of tree preservation ordinances; in addition to more <br />public comment opportunities; and determining minimum lot sizes by <br />taking into consideration the median size of lots within a 500 foot ra- <br />dius, defining a neighborhood, and calculating minimum lot sizes and <br />dimensions and houses relative to the lots. <br />Councilmember Pust congratulated members of the community for <br />their participation; and sought further comment from staff regarding <br />the four different actual lot split scenarios used and specifics of the <br />questions asked and measurements of neighbors before, during and af- <br />ter the projects, and if their opinions had changed during the devel- <br />opment process. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.