My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_0110_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_0110_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 10:10:45 AM
Creation date
9/14/2009 9:58:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
252
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
City Council Regular Meeting —12/20/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 11 <br />detailed investigations, continuing to revise plans in light of <br />expressed concerns, and then to return with additional <br />information and a revised plan that addresses a11 concerns to the <br />maximum extent feasible. <br />Councilmember Maschka said he opposed as an eyesore any <br />visible mechanical equipment on rooftops. <br />Maschka moved, Kough seconded, approval of the General <br />Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment for <br />Rosedale Center pursuant to paragraph 9.1 of the Staff Report, <br />allowing an easterly expansion of the mall, totaling <br />approximately 132,697 square feet and associated site <br />improvements, subject to the conditions 9.1 a.—k. as outlined in <br />the Staff Report dated December 20, 2004, and recommended by <br />the Planning Commission. <br />Councilmember Ihlan and Mayor Klausing described their views <br />about concept approval for land use requests. Councilmember <br />Kough spoke in favor of the Rosedale concept. <br />Councilmember Ihlan proposed an amendment to paragraph <br />9. l.c. clarifying that the requirements and conditions for <br />approval in that sub-paragraph apply to the Twin Lakes "traffic <br />studies," and not just to a"traffic study." Councilmember <br />Maschka and Councilmember Kough, the maker and second for <br />the main motion, accepted that clarifying amendment. <br />Then, Councilmember Ihlan asked for an amendment relating to <br />a schedule for traffic mitigation measures and costs. She <br />proposed amending paragraph 9.1.c to include an additional <br />sentence requiring "Agreement regarding the schedule for <br />needed traffic mitigation efforts, both short-term and long-term, <br />and agreement on allocation of traffic mitigation costs." <br />Following discussion, this amendment was accepted by <br />acclamation. <br />Councilmember Schroeder spoke in favor of interior access from <br />the proposed Mall addition to the interior of the existing Ma11. <br />Mr. Schupp said they would look at that. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.