2011-04-06_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, April 06, 2011 Page 9 proposed use, noting that residents were supported of other businesses in their 399 neighborhood, but not this proposal. Mr. Rehmann referenced a 2009 ruling by the North 400 Carolina Appellate Court and institution of a buffer zone for such uses; as well as recent 401 case law in St. Louis Park, MN. Mr. Rehmann appealed to the Planning Commission for a 402 more thorough examination of public record for such proposed uses adjacent to 403 residential neighborhoods; and thanked staff for recommending denial and standing up 404 for citizens that the Planning Commission and City Council represented. 405 Kathryn Park, 2070 Midlothian 406 Ms. Park spoke in opposition to the proposed use, and thanked her friends and neighbors 407 present at tonight’s meeting for sharing that opposition through their attendance. Ms. 408 Park noted the thorough research of those neighbors; and opined that Roseville was not 409 the first community faced with such an issue, but suggested that Roseville could use the 410 experience and rationale of those other communities in limiting the number of pawn 411 shops and prior court opinions. Ms. Park referenced the Cities of Bloomington and St. 412 Louis Park, MN as further examples. Ms. Park suggested, for future note, that the City 413 take such safeguards into consideration for application and to limit the number of pawn 414 shops allowed in Roseville; and for tonight’s immediate action, deny this specific 415 application. 416 Rick Poeschl, 1602 N Ridgewood Lane 417 Mr. Poeschl spoke in opposition to this proposal, as he had with the 2008 proposal, 418 noting that he had attended both meetings; and the majority of those attending spoke 419 against a pawn shop use; as well as three of the five City Councilmembers voting against 420 the 2008 application. Mr. Poeschl urged the Commission to deny this proposal. 421 Francy Reitz, 2009 Aldine 422 Ms. Reitz spoke in opposition to a pawn shop; and even if legally allowed, she opined 423 that it was not an appropriate use within two (2) blocks of a residential area. Ms. Reitz 424 opined that pawn shops were associated with areas of criminal activity, whether accurate 425 or not; and opined that such a use would most assuredly negatively impact residential 426 property values and the neighborhood’s feeling of safety. Ms. Reitz referenced the goals 427 listed in the Imagine Roseville 2025 community visioning report; and opined that a pawn 428 shop certainly did not fit with that vision. Ms. Reitz further referenced purpose statements 429 from the recently-adopted City Zoning Code. Ms. Reitz noted that there were several 430 vacant sites in Roseville that did not adjoin residential neighborhoods, and if a pawn shop 431 was allowed, one of those sites may be more appropriate. Ms. Reitz asked that the 432 Commission deny this request; and give future consideration to evaluating whether pawn 433 shops in Roseville should be limited in number based on population; and that their 434 potential locations be given serious thought. 435 Donna Como, 1620 W Highway 36 436 Ms. Como advised that she had not been included in the mailing, as she was not in the 437 immediate proximity and was actually in attendance to speak to another matter. However, 438 she felt compelled to speak, since she had been included in the 2008 public notice 439 mailing; and wanted to offer her support for the neighbors adjacent to this proposed pawn 440 shop, sharing their concern for declining property values and safety, including potential 441 traffic congestion at that intersection with the proposed use. Ms. Como opined that 442 Roseville had a wonderful reputation in the metropolitan area, but as a first-ring suburb, it 443 needed to continually work hard to maintain its integrity and what made it so special. Ms. 444 Como concurred with previous speakers and spoke in opposition to granting this request. 445 Kevin Bell, 1721 Shryer Avenue W 446 Mr. Bell, as the father of small children in this neighborhood, opined that he was not 447 comfortable with a pawn shop going into the neighborhood, whether it proved to increase 448 the crime rate or not. Mr. Bell opined that this type of establishment, most with bars on 449 the windows, prevented his comfort in walking with his children to the McDonald’s 450 Restaurant adjacent to the subject property, and already in a not so pedestrian-friendly 451 area. Mr. Bell expressed his love for the neighborhood and his neighbors, and while 452