CC_Minutes_2012_0716 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 16, 2012 Page 26 Ms. Schaffer admitted that there appeared to be some ambiguity; however, she opined that when studies were done on the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area, they never included such an intense use as proposed by a Wal-Mart development. As an example, Ms. Schaffer opined that there was no analysis of this type of traffic-generating use, even though she recognized that this may be an area of dispute. From her perspective, Ms. Schaffer opined that this gateway site, clearly visible from area freeways, was intended to have improved traffic connections to accommodate a regional draw. By definition, and as part of its history, Ms. Schaffer defended Target as having been conceived in Roseville, alleging that Wal-Mart's strategy was to com- pete with Target and in order to do so, needed to draw from beyond Roseville. In conclusion, Ms. Schaffer expressed appreciation to Member Willmus for his thought- provoking questions. Solidarity of West Area Roseville Neighbors (SWARN) (Attachment B) Gary Grefenberg, as a member of the SWARN Strategies Committee, representing more than seventy (70) families living west of Snelling Avenue in Roseville, as present to speak, in addi- tion to Mark Bradley, Megan Dushin, and David Nelson. Gary Grefenberg, 91 Mid Oaks Lane (SWARN Member) In introductory comments, Mr. Grefenberg expressed his appreciation of Community Devel- opment Director Patrick Trudgeon and his tutoring of SWARN representatives in how to file an appeal and his proactive role in keeping them informed of the process. Mr. Grefenberg also expressed his appreciation to Mayor Roe for his advice and counseling. Mr. Grefenberg stated that, if he was any part or shared any responsibility in leaving the impression at the recent Planning Commission that staff was at fault in providing information or not working with SWARN,he apologized. Mr. Grefenberg recognized Mr. Trudgeon's volunteering information without being asked, and was not being an obstructionist in any way. Mr. Grefenberg stated that the entire process since February 1, 2012 created come confusion, and that any fault lay at the feet of the final decision-makers, the City Council. Mr. Grefenberg again apologized to Mr. Trudgeon, agreeing to disagree with some of the findings detailed in his response and de- terminations of June 21, 2012. Mr. Grefenberg referenced SWARN's written findings and analysis (Attachment B) submitted in the hopes that the Board will review and find as a candid articulation of their concerns. Mr. Grefenberg noted that, it was not a coincidence that both he and Ms. Schaffer had served on the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee; as well as he and other members of SWARN having been active in the previous asphalt plant use consideration. Mr. Grefenberg noted that the experience with the asphalt plant had prompted the group's concerns and at- tempts to make sure past mistakes were avoided. Mr. Grefenberg asked that, in a community as diverse as Roseville, they were seeking some justification for the Findings of Fact previous- ly presented in the Staff Report dated February 1, 2012; and now only started to come forward throughout this long process in Mr. Trudgeon's response dated June 21, 2012, and Staff's Re- port of July 16, 2012.