CC_Minutes_2012_0723 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 23,2012 Page 42 the prosecution process, and was confident that good cases were provided in the past and would continue to be provided for the Department by Wal-Mart. Mr. Ramsey noted that, while he was fully aware of the high standards of the Roseville Police Department in prosecuting offenses, Wal-Mart also had high standards. Mr. Ramsey reviewed the various areas in which Wal-Mart ad- dressed those standards, whether through on-site personnel, a salaried manager responsible for the safety and security of the store at all times, and evolving CCTV technology and equipment. Mr. Ramsey noted that this is also addressed through basic facility design, lighting, signage, surveillance camera quality and placement. Mr. Ramsey expressed his expressed his continued interest in working with Chief Mathwig in developing the Security Plan, anticipating that City expecta- tions will be met or exceeded. Public Comment Vivian Ramalingam,2182 Acorn Road Ms. Ramalingam noted that her biggest concern had already voted on, but it bore repeating, opining that there was a discrepancy between the Comprehen- sive Plan and the Zoning Code. Ms. Ramalingam expressed further concern, as noted by Councilmember Pust, that when the applicant objects to a condition, it was removed. Ms. Ramalingam expressed her personal concern with the haste for these deliberations, especially as she reviewed the comments made by fel- low citizens at previous meetings. Ms. Ramalingam opined that no other Rose- ville business contemplated a police interference rate to the same degree as Wal-Mart, whether or not Wal-Mart paid for that service. Ms. Ramalingam ex- pressed further concern with the additional traffic and impediments for vehicu- lar and pedestrian traffic. Peter Strohmeier,2735 Rice Street,Apt. #206 Mr. Strohmeier clarified that he was speaking as a private citizen, and not in his capacity as a Roseville Planning Commissioner; and duly noted that he was one of two Commissioners opposing the most recent finding that Wal-Mart was a permitted use. Mr. Strohmeier asked that the City oppose the Final Plat based on the following: 1) Wal-Mart is a free-standing store, and should be designated as a Re- gional Business, consistent with that of Target, a comparable and competing business. 2) There is an obvious conflict between the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code, citing the December 9, 2011 City Attorney Letter and case law supporting that position (e.g. 2006 Mendota Heights land use case); and a presentation made by the Attorney firm of Fredrikson & Byron on land use.