Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, May 05, 2010 <br />Page 8 <br />Ayes: 6 <br />356 <br />Nays: 0 <br />357 <br />Motion carried unanimously. <br />358 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the next step would be for the City Council to take action, <br />359 <br />requiring a super-majority vote. <br />360 <br />d. Project File 0021 <br />361 <br />Request by the Roseville Planning Division to consider an ordinance <br />362 <br />establishing floodplain regulations for the City of Roseville. This request <br />363 <br />has been mandated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency <br />364 <br />(FEMA) and is being administered through the Minnesota Department of <br />365 <br />Natural Resources (DNR) <br />366 <br />Chair Doherty opened the Public Hearing for Project File 0021at 8:42 p.m. <br />367 <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed staff’s analysis of this federally- <br />368 <br />mandated adoption of floodplain regulations, requiring creation and adoption of a <br />369 <br />floodplain ordinance consistent with the model ordinance provided by the DNR <br />370 <br />and customized to the City of Roseville’s needs. <br />371 <br />Staff recommended approval of the draft ordinance and forwarding it to the City <br />372 <br />Council for approval; and continued work by staff with the DNR on a conditionally <br />373 <br />approved version if slight modifications are necessary for submittal prior to City <br />374 <br />Council approval; as detailed in the Request for Planning Commission Action <br />375 <br />dated May 5, 2010. <br />376 <br />City Engineer Debra Bloom was available to answer any technical issues; and <br />377 <br />clarified that floodplains were around those lakes in Roseville, with flood areas <br />378 <br />and land described surrounding them addressed in the ordinance guidelines and <br />379 <br />regulations. <br />380 <br />Discussion included identification of floodplains in Roseville around lakes; with <br />381 <br />the only impacts on larger bodies of water defined by acres, not depth. <br />382 <br />Chair Doherty closed the Public Hearing at 8:44 p.m., with no one appearing for <br />383 <br />or against. <br />384 <br />MOTION <br />385 <br />Member Doherty moved, seconded by Member Gisselquist to <br />386 <br />RECOMMEND ENACTMENT of Ordinance No. ___ entitled, “Floodplain <br />387 <br />Ordinance…,” based on the detail in the Request for Planning Commission <br />388 <br />Action dated May 5, 2010. <br />389 <br />Ayes: 6 <br />390 <br />Nays: 0 <br />391 <br />Motion carried. <br />392 <br />Mr. Paschke advised that this case was scheduled to go before the City Council <br />393 <br />on May 17, 2010. <br />394 <br />e. Review a proposed TEXT AMENDMENT to Section 1010 (Sign Regulations) <br />395 <br />of the City Code relating to the date that political campaigns can post <br />396 <br />political signs. <br />397 <br />Chair Doherty opened the Public Hearing for the proposed ZONING TEXT <br />398 <br />AMENDMENT at 9:47p.m. <br />399 <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed staff’s analysis of the request to revise <br />400 <br />Section 1010.03B10 of Roseville City Code regarding political signs to be <br />401 <br />consistent with recent changes in date of the primary election. <br />402 <br />Staff recommended approval of the requested ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT as <br />403 <br />detailed in the Request for Planning Commission Action dated May 5, 2010. <br />404 <br /> <br />