2010-12-01_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, December 01, 2010 Page 4 date. Unfortunately, Mr. Paschke noted, with the extensive revisions and the 153 formatting changes between the existing and proposed code, there was no good 154 way to track changes comparably. Mr. Paschke advised that, due to the 155 frequency of Planning Commission meetings over the last few months, in 156 addition to several scheduling delays due to meetings scheduled and a quorum 157 not being available at all of those meetings requiring rescheduling, some meeting 158 minutes and discussions in detail documenting the changes were still pending. 159 Mr. Paschke suggested that Commissioners include their specific concerns 160 within various districts or in certain subsections in the record of tonight’s meeting 161 to ensure the City Council was aware of their opposition to those areas, while 162 supporting the overall zoning map and code. 163 Vice Chair Boerigter advised that he didn’t want the City Council to be unaware 164 of or have the impression that individual Commissioners were providing a blanket 165 endorsement of all sections of the propped code, as would be indicated by a 166 motion unanimously approved by the Commission for recommendation to the 167 City Council; or how the City Council could be alerted to things that require an 168 additional look. 169 Mr. Paschke suggested that the Commission had several options: a motion to 170 separate each chapter and the map and make independent recommendations for 171 approval of each district or denial one or more of them for previously-stated 172 reasons; support it while stating their opposition to those specific sections; or 173 support the motion on a split vote. 174 Rather than anticipating that the City Council would or could review the meeting 175 minute record of each discussion, Vice Chair Boerigter suggested that the 176 Planning Commission vote the motion for all districts up or down, with each 177 Commissioner given the opportunity, for the record, to address remaining 178 concerns, make comments specifically addressing any remaining issues; or 179 those items needing extra attention or not unanimously supported; while 180 providing the City Council a review of their individual rationale or comments. 181 Commissioner Gottfried concurred with Vice Chair Boerigter. 182 Commissioner Gisselquist also concurred that it was best to vote the entire 183 document up or down, and recognize that this rewrite had been a long process, 184 with numerous comments and concerns addressed throughout, and that the 185 record would reflect the debate and discourse throughout that process. While 186 noting that there remained some areas of concern in this draft, and 187 Commissioners may have voted in opposition to certain sections or chapters, 188 Commissioner Gisselquist opined that it was important to forward the draft 189 document to the City Council as an entire package as presented. Commissioner 190 Gisselquist thanked staff and consultants for their massive work and their 191 response to comments and concerns of the public and the Commission; and for 192 implementing those important portions of the Imagine Roseville 2025 community 193 visioning process, as well as the 2030 Comprehensive Plan process, since both 194 of those had significant citizen input in shaping this zoning rewrite and map as 195 presented. Commissioner Gisselquist expressed his support of the document. 196 By consensus, Commissioners concurred. 197 Public Comment 198 Vice Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing for PROJECT FILE 0017 at 6:05 199 p.m., with no one appearing to speak to this issue. 200 MOTION 201 Member Gisselquist moved, seconded by Member Wozniak to 202 RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of the OFFICIAL ZONING 203 MAP and new regulations for Title 10, Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to the 204 INTRODUCTION; ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT; 205