My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2011_0321
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2011
>
CC_Minutes_2011_0321
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2011 1:26:02 PM
Creation date
3/31/2011 1:25:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
3/21/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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,March 21, 2011 <br /> Page 26 <br /> comments and findings of Sections 4-6 and the conditions of Section 7 of the Re- <br /> quest for Council Action (RCA) dated March 21, 2011. <br /> Councilmember Pust spoke in support of the motion; while recognizing that addi- <br /> tional study may be needed for County Road C-2. Councilmember Pust sug- <br /> gested that additional study of the situation would be beneficial and once and for <br /> all put to rest the various opinions and settle those disputes for the entire commu- <br /> nity and affected neighborhoods. Councilmember Pust noted the need for the en- <br /> tire community to talk it through, addressing changes to the community and how <br /> to resolve the situation. Councilmember Pust expressed appreciation for the res- <br /> pectful discussion of the neighbors and their differing views; and suggested fur- <br /> ther review and study of this topic at community meetings, and not linked to to- <br /> night's action. <br /> Councilmember Willmus spoke in support of the motion; opining that the deci- <br /> sion was not contingent upon whether or not to open County Road C-2. However, <br /> Councilmember Willmus advised that he would support a detailed look and traffic <br /> study for the area as outlined by Councilmember Pust; opining that it may be time <br /> to revisit this issue and make an informed decision. <br /> Councilmember McGehee spoke in support of the motion. Councilmember <br /> McGehee advised that she was not supportive of reviewing every little traffic is- <br /> sue as an individual situation,but opined that it was important to keep as much <br /> pass-through traffic out of residential neighborhoods as possible. Councilmember <br /> McGehee opined that it appeared that there was no overall plan to address the im- <br /> pact of traffic trying to get through the community. Councilmember McGehee <br /> opined that it was important to recognize that Roseville was a regional service <br /> community for regional shopping, senior housing and its other amenities; and <br /> when the freeways get jammed up,people look for alternatives, and Roseville's <br /> well-maintained public streets served their purpose. Councilmember McGehee <br /> questioned whether we had any obligation to provide through access on every <br /> neighborhood street. <br /> Johnson moved, Pust seconded, extending the meeting to 10:35 p.m. <br /> Roll Call <br /> Ayes: Pust; Willmus; Johnson; McGehee; and Roe. <br /> Nays: None. <br /> Councilmember Johnson spoke in support of the motion; and commended the res- <br /> idents on both sides of the issue of County Road C-2 coming to the City Council <br /> in such a respectful manner. Councilmember Johnson noted that the developer <br /> had come out shining and commended their company on their proposal and their <br /> reputation. Councilmember Johnson recognized the positions of both Josephine <br /> 1H <br /> II <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.