Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment B <br />  <br />Paschke advised that most of the uses would be small in scale, within the 3,500 to 4,000 <br />square foot limitation; and would not ac commodate uses for major production and/or <br />processing. <br />Public Comments <br />Mark Rancone, Roseville Properties <br />As a representative of several multi-tenant and single-tenant buildings in Roseville within <br />Regional Business District zoning designations , Mr. Rancone spoke in support of staff’s <br />recommendation for text amendments as outlin ed; and expressed appreciation for staff <br />being pro-active in understanding the realities of leasing to tenants under current limited <br />uses. <br /> <br />As an example, Mr. Rancone noted the CPI Ca rd Group, formerly UV Color, a tenant of <br />Roseville Properties using that entire bu ilding that had been modestly upgraded several <br />years ago. Other examples included two other Roseville Properties buildings located at <br />1975 and 1995 County Road B-2 across from the U.S. Post Office (e.g. <br />Schneidermann’s) that had been constructed in the mid-1970’s, and formerly <br />office/warehouse uses. Mr. Rancone not ed that the use had now been converted by <br />Roseville Properties to retail fo rmats, with HOM Furniture built on the rear of that property <br />and having frontage road and freeway access and /or visibility versus their properties <br />running east/west to the freeway and hav ing limited exposure t hat provided limited <br />opportunities for those parcels. <br /> <br />Mr. Rancone advised that the objective of t heir firm was that the buildings be allowed <br />uses for their highest and best uses. Mr. Ra ncone advised th at Roseville Pr operties was <br />considering upgrading their two (2) buildings, including rain gardens and parking lot <br />improvements for better storm water control, as well as façade rehabilitation to entice <br />future tenants, some of whom requested t he ability to have light manufacturing uses. <br />Before committing to making significant investments on those upgrades for those <br />buildings, Mr. Rancone asked that the Planning Commission support staff’s <br />recommendations and approve the requests. <br /> <br />Mr. Rancone advised that the buildings themse lves had structural obsolescence that <br />would prevent any use for heavy semi traffic; but this action would allow for more <br />flexibility in City Code for practical applicati on and uses over the next twenty (20) years. <br />Mr. Rancone opined that they are not currently good sites for high retail uses in their <br />present locations/conditions. <br /> <br />Vice Chair Gisselquist closed the Public Hear ing for File 0017 at approximately 7:00 p.m.; <br />with no one appearing for or against. <br /> <br />MOTION <br />Member Gisselquist moved, seconded by Member Strohmeier to recommend to the <br />City Council APPROVAL of the text amendment adding Limited <br />Production/Processing into the Permitted Uses Table 1005.01 and specifically for <br />the Regional Business District, as detailed in the staff report dated October 3, <br />2012. <br /> <br />Ayes: 6 <br />Nays: 0 <br />Motion carried. <br /> <br />Staff advised that anticipated City Council ac tion is anticipated for October 22, 2012.