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 34 <br /> Then, Mr. Rancone advised that another delay for all Twin Lakes land owners was put in place <br /> in 2007 through updating the AUAR, with land owners awaiting the next level of zoning ordi- <br /> nances mandating uses. Mr. Rancone noted that the update provided a very comprehensive <br /> analysis of environmental and traffic issues, and provided three (3) different development sce- <br /> narios, one of which called for substantially more retail for that area as a possibility. <br /> Another delay in 2009, with a mandated update to the Comprehensive Plan, another exhaustive <br /> process, allowing citizens to weigh in for various types of business uses, but Mr. Rancone not- <br /> ed essentially creating yet another delay in marketing the land until that was resolved. Mr. <br /> Rancone noted that this was then followed by a mandated update to the City's Zoning Code, <br /> another delay in marketing the property. <br /> Mr. Rancone noted that Roseville Properties, unlike some of the land owners disputing the <br /> proposed allocation formulas and suing the City, had chosen to take the high road and wait the <br /> process out yet again. Mr. Rancone reiterated that the process allowed an opportunity for resi- <br /> dents, some in tonight's audience as well, to weigh in on that zoning. Meanwhile, Mr. Ran- <br /> cone noted that once again, marketing the property was delayed for that process, while another <br /> layer of regulations was added. Then, Mr. Rancone noted, the Regulating Plan defining design <br /> standards for Twin Lakes, created yet another delay and another hurdle to development of the <br /> land. Basically, Mr. Rancone noted that, from 2006 — 2011, land owners had been stymied <br /> from doing anything. Upon yet another potential delay with the allocation formula and subse- <br /> quent court case, Mr. Rancone noted this proved problematic and was eventually overturned in <br /> the courts. <br /> Mr. Rancone opined that it was disingenuous for speakers to imply that they had not had an <br /> opportunity to weigh in during the legal process. With the ruling from the Court of Appeals, <br /> Mr. Rancone noted that this provided an opportunity to tighten the rules for the size of build- <br /> ings and uses, with the Planning Commission and City Council determining to not make it so <br /> restrictive in order to address the realities of the marketplace. Mr. Rancone opined that in an <br /> ideal world, it would be wonderful to have smaller, community businesses; however, as a prac- <br /> tical matter, those smaller businesses could not afford to open as the first person on the block <br /> and proved to be unrealistic in today's world and market. <br /> Mr. Rancone asked that citizens look at the mixed use concept for the entire Twin Lakes Rede- <br /> velopment Area, not just the Wal-Mart proposal, which simply served as the first piece of the <br /> puzzle, along with the Park and Ride facility. Mr. Rancone opined that this would determine <br /> the next pieces of the puzzle. Mr. Rancone assured citizens that people would utilize Wal- <br /> Mart,particularly the senior population on a tighter budget. <br /> Contrary to Ms. Schaffer's allegations that retail properties pay less in taxes, Mr. Rancone clar- <br /> ified that this is certainly not the case from their perspective, with their property taxes higher <br /> than some other commercial properties in Roseville, opining that someone needed to vet that <br /> out. Mr. Rancone noted that retailers pay higher taxes per square foot than commercial busi- <br /> nesses, at least from their perspective dictated by the marketplace. Mr. Rancone noted that de- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.