My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2010_0823
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2010
>
CC_Minutes_2010_0823
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2010 1:39:10 PM
Creation date
9/15/2010 1:39:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
8/23/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
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
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, August 23, 2010 <br />Page 17 <br />Discussion ensued related to whether it was more prudent to list distinct manufac- <br />turing and processing uses rather than attempting to anticipate every possible use <br />that may come forward; impacts of proposed uses; designation of high impact in- <br />dustrial activities, whether permitted of conditional uses, and if they go beyond <br />the established standard or threshold, and if mitigation is not evidenced, they pro- <br />ceed to an EAW to make that determination; keeping the code user-friendly but <br />providing for sufficient controls for uses having significant impacts; use of an <br />EAW as a way to measure established standards and enforcement of environmen- <br />tal issues beyond the City's authority and/or expertise, and addressed by the <br />MPCA or another authority. <br />Further discussion included whether all performance standards should tie into <br />some other regulator body for Industrial uses, noting changes based on science or <br />citizen tolerance changes and the subjective nature of various .performance stan- <br />dards; those uses needing City Council scrutiny above that of staff and those uses <br />entrusted to staff to make a determination on whether they met established stan- <br />dards or not; with it up to the City Council to determine if the public health,. safety <br />and welfare was impacted, based on performance standards when considered at <br />the onset of a particular use. <br />Additional discussion included those items asterisked and needing clarification; <br />the need to make a clear designation between improvement surface area and im- <br />pervious surface area to avoid confusion and for consistency throughout the doc- <br />ument. <br />Mr. Trudgeon thanked Councilmembers and the public for their discussion; and <br />asked that additional comments, concerns, or areas needing clarification be di- <br />rected to staff at their earliest convenience as development of the document con- <br />tinued toward a final draft for review. <br />b. Discussion Zoning Text Amendment for new regulations for Title 10, Zoning <br />Regulations, pertaining to Commercial and Mixed Use Districts (PROJ0017) <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke briefly reviewed this item, seeking City Council <br />input into the new Commercial and Mixed Use Districts standards in the text por- <br />tion of Title 10, Zoning Regulations of the City Code, for revision and future con- <br />sideration of final approval, as detailed in the RCA dated August 23, 2010, with <br />modifications listed in Section 4 of that report; with design/performance standards <br />for all districts to be contained in a separate section of the code, currently under <br />development. <br />Acting Mayor Johnson opened the meeting for public comment, with no one ap- <br />pearing to speak at this time. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.