2005_0718_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

o� imit number of licenses issued o Require permits for residential rental properties o There could be a mediator for neighbor conflicts Enforce existing codes o Adequately fund positions so there is someone to enforce regulations o Develop a mandatory "Saturday School" for rental property owners — cover topics such as regulatory requirements, neighbor expectations, etc. Create a policy that would require a public input process for businesses proposals that reach certain thresholds of size and activity (inputwould be on architectural design, operations, etc.) What can citizen do to respond to these issues? (Source:Sina]I group discussion reports) • Long-term residents could be ambassadors to new residents • Advocate to improve the content � articles in the Roseville Review • Develop a Community Ed course for new (first-time) home owners • Be more proactive in reporting code violations to the City • Provide citizen input into developnlent projects (e.g. Cub Store) to influence decisions about architectural design, operations, etc. What action ideas were participants willing to support? (Source: Feedback sheets) Twenty-one (21)respondents indicated that they could personally support one or more af the issues and solutions discussed. The solutions identified for support included: • General improvement of communications between the City and Resident ■ Enhancement af Block Captain network as a i�eans to improve coir�rnuications • Creating a City liaison or ombudsman to enhance neighborhood interaction with tlze City ■ Offering community education programs for new homeowners and rental property owners ■ Developing a housing maintenance program • Imposing greater City controls on rental property and limiting the number ■ Dispersing high-density housing through out the city (avoid concentrations) . Rigorous parks maintenance program Were participants satisfied with the meeting? (Source: Feedbacksheets) • Twenty-seven (27) respondents agreed that they had an opportunity to voice then- thoughts duruig small group discussions. • Twenty-eight (28) respondents thought that the dialogue was informative. • Twenty-four (24) respondents indicated interest ii�. sitniiar dialogues on other citywide topics. No one topic was mentioned more than once. Topics mentioned included: o Current development going on in our neighborhood o Crime Watch o Anything and everything! o Useful interaction and ideas o Business expansion and trafiic o Public transportation o Understanding that renters, whether low income or not, are neighbors also South East Area Dialogue Sunin�a�y �- � Apri12�, 2005