My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_1025_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_1025_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 4:22:20 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:45:43 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.
/
268
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 Study Session —10/18/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 31 <br />the Planning Commission meeting, and who the firm actually <br />represented, and who was paying for their services. <br />Community Development Director Welsch advised that he had <br />asked the firm of DSU to provide their expertise and information <br />at the Planning Commission level, to discuss green and open <br />space preservation; and that Rottlund Homes was paying for that <br />service to provide continuity. Mr. Welsch noted that everyone <br />was currently working with the development team, as part of the <br />Master Development Agreement in place. <br />Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her concern that roles of the <br />development team, and the City Council be clearly defined, as <br />well as that of consultants. <br />Councilmember Ihlan further opined the detrimental fiscal <br />impacts of the Twin Lakes project on the City's budget for <br />infrastructure construction and maintenance; increases in public <br />safety services; increased stormwater treatment costs; and <br />additional noise, traffic, light and air pollution in the <br />neighborhood. <br />Councilmember Ihlan also addressed the cost to the City of the <br />loss of quality of life in surrounding neighborhoods and how to <br />quantify those costs. <br />Mayor Klausing sought to clarify the specific questions that <br />could be directed to staff for further clarification (i.e., public <br />safety costs), but questioned how loss of quality of life could be <br />quantified. Mayor Klausing suggested that some costs would be <br />more specifically addressed as the project was further defined. <br />Further discussion ensued. <br />Councilmember Maschka requested that staff research and <br />provide additional information regarding the opinion expressed <br />in Ed Burrell's letter regarding a potential tax shift when taxable <br />structures are cleared for development and implications to the tax <br />base from the time of demolition and redevelopment as it relates <br />to frozen tax capacity. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.