My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0913_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0913_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 2:05:59 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:44:45 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.
/
313
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 — 08/23/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 9 <br />Street roadway and utility easement, directly adjacent to <br />386 Wagner Street. <br />Councilmember Ihlan requested clarification on the scope <br />of what was being vacated. <br />Community Development Director Dennis Welsch <br />reviewed the map of the area, identifying the specific <br />parcel under discussion; and other parcels that were part of <br />existing rights-of-way for access to other sites. City <br />Manager Beets and Mr. Welsch noted that Public Works <br />Director Duane Schwartz had approved vacation of the <br />remainder of the roadway and retention of a utility <br />easement on the north portion to accommodate existing <br />utility lines. <br />Councilmember Kough sought clarification of who the <br />responsible party was for paying costs related to vacation <br />of rights-of way; with Mr. Welsch responding that related <br />costs were borne by the application as part of the process. <br />Councilmember Ihlan requested an explanation of how the <br />vacation impacted future size and setbacks of structures on <br />the parcel related to adjacent wetlands. <br />Mr. Welsch noted that, while the vacated easement did <br />become part of the developable lot, the zoning code would <br />still need to be followed as to the ultimate size of a <br />structure and setback requirements. Mr. Welsch opined <br />that, with the easement vacation, a new structure may even <br />be sited further from wetlands. <br />Councilmember Ihlan further questioned whether staff had <br />attempted to negotiate wetland preservation as part of this <br />or any rights-of-way vacations, since it had previously <br />functioned as a neighborhood open space and protected the <br />adj acent wetland area. <br />Mr. Welsch noted that wetlands were appropriately <br />protected by city code through setback and wetland <br />requirements. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.