My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2012_0716
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
201x
>
2012
>
CC_Minutes_2012_0716
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/17/2012 12:59:07 PM
Creation date
8/17/2012 12:58:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
7/16/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular City Council Meeting AND <br /> Board of Adjustments and Appeals <br /> Monday,July 16,2012 <br /> Page 32 <br /> In response to Member Willmus' questions of the appellants, Ms. Alexander advised that she <br /> had not been a part of that planning process, but as a resident in close proximity to Har Mar <br /> Mall, she and her neighbors had been avid followers of those discussions; and agreed whole- <br /> heartedly with Mr. Grefenberg's response about that discussion. Ms. Alexander opined that it <br /> was definitely an attempt to ensure that Har Mar Mall could never become a big box retail site, <br /> and that Target could never get any bigger; and was not focused on whether or not they should <br /> be designated Community Business,but trying to prevent regional businesses from coming in. <br /> Addressing Wal-Mart's claim that this proposed store would only serve a two (2) mile radius, <br /> Ms. Alexander questioned if they had looked at map and the actual circumference of the site to <br /> see what other uses were in that area. Ms. Alexander opined that the store would not draw <br /> from the used car dealers or fuel tank farm, or from the major freeway intersection. Ms. Alex- <br /> ander opined that it those properties were removed from that radii, there weren't many residen- <br /> tial properties from which to draw their customers, negating any practical assertion that a two <br /> (2) mile radius of this store could support it. <br /> Ms.Alexander opined that the Comprehensive Plan process was intended to guarantee that this <br /> area of Roseville would be a nice, well-developed area, and be an asset to the community. By <br /> bending the rules or setting a precedent, Ms. Alexander opined that it only opened the entire <br /> area to the next developer and provided for no assurances that another undesirable use or a <br /> patchwork of such development would locate there. Ms. Alexander opined that the people in- <br /> volved in planning this area were thoughtful, and it was a lengthy process; and further opined <br /> that she found it really frustrating that it now appears that things are being twisted for the bene- <br /> fit of a large scale business that was not within her understanding of the intent for this area. <br /> While having heard that Wal-Mart was being asked to make the "best Wal-Mart ever,"Ms. Al- <br /> exander questioned what advantage that would be for family-run stores; and suggested that <br /> those efforts and energies would be better applied and directed at those operations, rather than <br /> in support of a national or international corporation seeking handouts from the City. Reiterat- <br /> ing her original question, Ms. Alexander questioned what was in it for Roseville. <br /> Mark Rancone, Vice President and Representative of Roseville Properties, 2575 Fairview <br /> Avenue N, Suite 250, Roseville, MN (Land Owner) <br /> Mr. Rancone read from extensive written comments regarding their involvement in this lengthy <br /> development process in Twin Lakes; providing his findings. <br /> Mr. Rancone advised that he was a twenty-two (22) year employee of Roseville Properties, a <br /> forty (40) year corporate citizen and partner in Roseville. Mr. Rancone noted the ownership of <br /> other commercial and office buildings and properties within the community as well. Mr. Ran- <br /> cone proceeded to address both appellants' findings, in an attempt to clarify or correct certain <br /> misconceptions, and address some inaccuracies, and allegations. Mr. Rancone noted that, at <br /> one time, there had been a comprehensive development plan for that area, specifically to ad- <br /> dress uncontrolled runoff into Langton Lake and mitigate contaminated soils in the area. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.