My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0823_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0823_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 11:15:31 AM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:44:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
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.
/
232
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 — 08/09/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 25 <br />important as the interior of a site, particularly when the <br />project was to be phased. <br />Discussion included zoning designations; consistencies <br />with the visioning process; and protection of the planning <br />process. <br />Sean Regan, Property Owner on County Road C, <br />between Fairview and Snelling Avenues <br />Mr. Regan acknowledged the Council's need to receive <br />public input, but also recognized the need for the Council <br />to make a decision to facilitate those property owners in the <br />area who need to make substantial property and/or <br />investment decisions. Mr. Regan noted that his business <br />would not only be impacted by the Twin Lakes project, but <br />considerations needed to be reviewed by him related to <br />impacts of the pending County Road C reconstruction <br />project. Mr. Regan emphasized his preference for the <br />Council to make a decision one way or the other in the <br />interests of those businesses impacted. <br />Mayor Klausing closed public comment. <br />[4.1] Maschka moved, Schroeder seconded, enactment of <br />Ordinance No. 1309 entitled, "An Interim Ordinance <br />Adopting a Development Moratorium for Properties <br />located within the Twin Lakes Master Plan Area." <br />Councilmember Ihlan spoke against the motion, opining <br />that it was not necessary to include the entire Twin Lakes <br />area, or the appropriate to single out the current <br />development team, but rather the purpose should be to <br />protect the City's planning process. <br />Councilmember Schroeder spoke in support of the motion, <br />opining that the City had selected the Master Developer, an <br />in an effort to move forward on the path already chosen by <br />the City Council, and given the fact that the City didn't <br />have an ownership interest in the properties, this was an <br />appropriate means to move the proj ect along in order to <br />make further determinations as to whether it was feasible. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.