Laserfiche WebLink
AttachmentH <br />Approve Preliminary / Final Plat and Development Agreement – Roseville Properties (Wal-Mart) <br />1 <br />Mayor Roe reviewed the process once again for presentation, public comment and discussion of this <br />2 <br />item prior to potential City Council action. <br />3 <br />Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon and City Planner Thomas Paschke summarized the <br />4 <br />requested action as detailed in the RCA dated May 21, 2012 for consideration of the Preliminary and <br />5 <br />Final Plat for Wal-Mart and Roseville Properties. The Planning Commission recommended approval of <br />6 <br />the Preliminary Plat on a 5/1 vote. Planning Division and Public Works Department staff, and the City <br />7 <br />Attorney recommend approval of the Final Plat and associated Development Agreement. Details of <br />8 <br />those recommended approvals were detailed in Section 8 of the staff report. <br />9 <br />Mr. Paschke noted the existing parcel would be combined into two (2) lots along Cleveland Avenue as <br />10 <br />the property frontage. Mr. Paschke reviewed the Preliminary Plat, in accordance with City Code, <br />11 <br />Chapter 11, based on analysis of the development meeting those code requirements related to <br />12 <br />appropriate infrastructure, any easements and rights-of-way issues related to the project, and <br />13 <br />improvements negotiated between the developer and staff on behalf of the City. Mr. Paschke advised <br />14 <br />that the Final Plat, as previously indicated by Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd, incorporated those <br />15 <br />detailed elements of the Preliminary Plat, but not to the level of detail while yet including all land to be <br />16 <br />dedicated to the City, and easements and boundaries related to the specific project. . <br />17 <br />Community Development Director Patrick Trudgeon reviewed the draft Development Agreement <br />18 <br />(Attachment J) also known as a public improvement contract outlining the obligations of the City and <br />19 <br />the applicant. Mr. Trudgeon provided an overview of those business points. While the draft <br />20 <br />Development Agreement included in the meeting packet was substantially complete, Mr. Trudgeon <br />21 <br />referenced additional exhibits and attachments, along with a cover memorandum from Mr. Trudgeon <br />22 <br />dated earlier today, providing additional details, was included as a bench handout tonight, and attached <br />23 <br />hereto and made a part hereof. Mr. Trudgeon noted that there were copies available for the public as <br />24 <br />well. Mr. Trudgeon briefly reviewed the revisions, whether typographical, grammatical, or more <br />25 <br />substantial that were recommended via that bench handout. Therefore, Mr. Trudgeon asked that the City <br />26 <br />Council motion include verbiage that Development Agreement was amended. <br />27 <br />Councilmember Pust questioned the exhibits and differences in the Final Plats, with Mr. Trudgeon <br />28 <br />noting that the Preliminary Plat was marked “Preliminary subject to revision” which was routine as the <br />29 <br />document was forwarded to Ramsey County for their review by the County Surveyor as part of the <br />30 <br />recording process. <br />31 <br />Councilmember McGehee, via a bench handout attached hereto and made a part hereof, had a list of <br />32 <br />fourteen (14) questions related to the draft Development Agreement to which staff responded. <br />33 <br />Hours of Operation: Twenty-four (24) hours per day <br />34 <br />It was noted by Mayor Roe that Cub Foods at Har Mar Mall is another retail operation in Roseville with <br />35 <br />a 24-hour operation. <br />36 <br />Mr. Paschke advised that there was no restriction in City Code as to hours of operation; with Mr. <br />37 <br />Trudgeon and Mayor Roe concurring, noting the restrictions for extended hours were specific to <br />38 <br />commercial operations adjacent to residential areas. <br />39 <br />Councilmember McGehee noted that there was a potential for future residential development adjacent to <br />40 <br />the proposed Wal-Mart as part of CMU zoning, and noted that the Development Agreement stipulated <br />41 <br />that no further restrictions could be imposed by the City for at least two (2) years. Councilmember <br />42 <br />McGehee questioned whether this precluded any adjacent properties being developed as residential. <br />43 <br />Page1of14 <br /> <br />