CC_Minutes_2012_0716 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 16,2012 Page 31 As a general question, Member Willmus asked at what point in this process, the Twin Lakes Business Master Plan was officially adopted back into the current Comprehensive Plan as a controlling document. Mr. Grefenberg Mr. Grefenberg recalled those 2008 discussions about Target, and the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee's recommendations that Target and Har Mar Mall both be designated "Community Business." In arguing that point, Mr. Grefenberg opined that it was his under- standing that Target would be grandfathered in, but any future expansion would be precluded. Mr. Grefenberg opined that he was not arguing that Target was a community business, but that future development would be prohibited. In the grand compromise, Mr. Grefenberg opined that it had been determined to leave the definition as is and accept it. However, Mr. Grefen- berg recalled Member Willmus asking him to stop pushing Target and as part of the compro- mise, any future development for big box retail on the Target site would be prohibited. Mr. Grefenberg stated that he was left with the impression that from now on the Target site and Rosedale were set aside for future big box, not prohibiting all big box, but separating those us- es within the Comprehensive Plan designation. Mr. Grefenberg opined that he had a different recollection that his argument was for limiting future big box expansion on the Target site. As far as a response about the Twin Lakes Business Master Plan adoption as a controlling doc- ument to the Comprehensive Plan, Mr. Grefenberg could provide no response. Member Willmus asked for staffs response to that question during their upcoming comments. Mayor Roe asked that City Manager Malinen pass down the additional bench handout from Mr. Grefenberg; and advised that whether or not it was included as part of the record would be determined by the Board later in this meeting. Public Comments Vivian Ramalingam,2182 Acorn Road Ms. Ramalingam shared several anecdotal comments regarding the proposed Wal-Mart use and apparent discrepancies between the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code; questioning per- spectives on size, what is or is not suitable for the site, and how to best resolve those discrep- ancies. Mary Alexander, 19 Mid Oaks Road Ms. Alexander questioned what was in this proposal for Roseville; whether there was a finan- cial or employment benefit; and how it would create advantages for the community's current, yet dwindling, family-owned independent businesses. Ms. Alexander expressed his endless frustration in the current traffic situation in traveling north on I-35W and her concerns with the impacts of this development on an already over-taxed system.