My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-11-23_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
201x
>
2010
>
2010-11-23_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2011 8:54:04 AM
Creation date
11/19/2010 2:16:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
11/23/2010
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
5. Land Use Review Role of PWETC <br />Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon was present to discuss land <br />use application approval process, timelines per state statute, and to discuss areas <br />where the PWET Commission could provide input in the process. Mr. Trudgeon <br />provided several bench handouts for reference during the discussion, further <br />detailing the land use application and approval process and the role of the <br />Planning Commission in accordance with State Statute and City Code; and Public <br />Hearings held at the Planning Commission level in accordance with City Code; all <br />within the proscribed 60 -day review period allowed by statute for land use <br />applications. Mr. Trudgeon reviewed the City's "One -Step Land Use Application <br />Process" and the types of applications reviewed administratively by staff and <br />those requiring the more formal review and public hearing process before the <br />Planning Commission, with mailed and published public notices. <br />Mr. Trudgeon reviewed a sample application and the approximate time line to <br />proceed with the 60 -day application/review process for land use applications, with <br />few exceptions; and ramifications in not meeting that approval deadline through <br />arbitrary automatic approval indicating the City didn't meet due process for the <br />applicant. Mr. Trudgeon noted that the City could request extension for an <br />additional 60 days; or the applicant could waive the review time or voluntarily <br />extend the review time for special projects or unique issues. <br />Mr. Trudgeon provided some items for discussion and /or considerations in <br />determining a role for the PWET Commission in becoming involved in land use <br />cases: <br />The 60 -day review rule <br />How will adding another layer of review or adding another commission to the <br />approval process compromise the ability to make a timely decision, depending <br />on meeting schedules and ensuring all meeting deadlines are met? <br />Are we adding another level of bureaucracy <br />Are we making the process user friendly for the applicant; whether <br />homeowners or big developers? <br />Mission of the PWET Commission <br />In the City Council's charge to and in defining the role of the PWET <br />Commission, with land use applications already reviewed by Planning <br />Department staff, the Design Review Committee (DRC representing <br />management staff of each City Department), and potentially the Planning <br />Commission, and ultimately the City Council in determining compatibility of <br />the land use application with City Code and the Comprehensive Plan, would <br />the PWET Commission's review of land use cases detract from their other <br />agenda items and interests? <br />Focus on specific transportation and /or environmental interests <br />o Traffic Studies <br />Mr. Trudgeon noted that every land use or change impacts roadways in <br />some way; with some major developments or redevelopments requiring <br />Page 3 of 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.