2012-02-01_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, February 1, 2012 Page 10 opining that they had many internal controls to monitor shoppers. However, Ms. Friberg 457 noted the number of police reports at Rosedale Mall that she observed in the media, 458 recognizing the size of that center and the number of stores; as well as youth in the area 459 and bus stops. Ms. Friberg opined that one of the problems with a Wal-Mart store would 460 be people coming from outside Roseville beyond two (2) miles, since Rosedale had 461 people coming from Wisconsin, and even bypassing Maplewood Mall for Rosedale as a 462 more preferred shopping destination. Ms. Friberg opined that there would be the need for 463 increased police based on shoplifting, car vandalism, and other issues; and questioned 464 the negative impacts to the senior residence in that area; and if they would be safe 465 walking to Wal-Mart from their residence, given that potential negative impact. 466 Mr. Paschke advised that there was currently no sidewalk or trail on the east side that 467 would facilitate pedestrians from the senior residence to the proposed Wal-Mart location. 468 Ms. Friberg referenced other communities, such as St. Louis Park and Excelsior 469 th Boulevard improvements and Edina at 50 and France; and questioned what we wanted 470 Roseville to look like; or whether we preferred that it end up like the Richfield, Golden 471 Valley, Brooklyn Center or Robbinsdale. 472 Chair Boerigter asked that Ms. Friberg refocus her comments on the issue before the 473 Commission; and suggested that the public refrain from possible misperceptions that 474 people coming to Wal-Mart were going to be of the criminal element and elevate crime 475 levels in Roseville. Chair Boerigter noted that there was a Target store not too far from 476 this area that didn’t support that perception. 477 Ms. Friberg defended her position by noting that more youth would be coming into that 478 area and when that happened, there were more crimes. Ms. Friberg opined that Target 479 handled their store security quite well; however, she did have a concern with a Wal-Mart 480 located in Roseville, given the types of problems their stores frequently had, and 481 questioned if that was what type of community we wanted. 482 Member Wozniak questioned if it was reasonable for staff to address potential costs the 483 City may incur for emergency services with such a development. 484 Mr. Paschke advised that he was unable to foresee the future to make a determination or 485 estimate a potential cost for additional police, fire and/or rescue needs as the City 486 developed. However, Mr. Paschke opined that this proposed business was no different 487 than any other business coming into Roseville that the City’s Codes would encompass for 488 regulation and enforcement, whether parks, residential homes or complexes, or 489 commercial/industrial businesses. 490 At the request of Member Wozniak as to how the City would recover those costs, Mr. 491 Paschke responded that the City’s main mechanism to support those services was 492 through property taxes. 493 Member Gisselquist referenced Section 5.2 of the staff report, noting that part of the 494 review process involved the Roseville Development Review Committee (DRC) composed 495 of staff from various City Departments, and their representatives participating in reviews 496 of such land use proposals, at which time the public safety issues most certainly would 497 have been considered and discussed prior to staff’s recommendation. 498 Mr. Paschke advised that the focus of those meetings, specific to this proposal, would 499 have been the land divisions, and not necessarily the proposed use itself. However, Mr. 500 Paschke noted that had been anticipated that a large retail use could come in, and staff 501 had been prepared for that possibility and related comments coming forward. Mr. 502 Paschke referenced that the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area, through the AUAR and all 503 Zoning, Comprehensive, Master and Regulating Plans had contemplated retail in this 504 area, and noted that this use was consistent with those plans and potential uses; 505 evidenced by the relevance of the proposed use and its fit with the City’s Zoning 506 Ordinance. 507