CC_Minutes_2013_0325 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday,March 25,2013 Page 10 Councilmember Willmus requested that information be provided in Work Session format. Public Comment Mark Rancone,Roseville Properties Representative Mr. Rancone reviewed some of their existing properties and their current non- conforming uses, limiting their ability to retrofit the buildings for tenants looking to lease space for limited production/processing. Mr. Rancone provided photos to highlight some of those examples; this developer's willingness to make signifi- cant improvements to their properties if able to lease them, and financing issues from lending institutions in attempting to fund those renovations for non- conforming uses. Mr. Rancone noted their desire for some flexibility in keeping the buildings occupied and providing jobs in Roseville, without seeking any fi- nancial assistance from the City to do so. Mr. Rancone noted that this type of use actually had less impact than retail, since it was typically Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; but made the highest and best use of those buildings. Councilmember McGehee expressed her concern that a future property owner may not have the same sense of responsibility of Mr. Rancone, and could create issues. Councilmember Etten, in referencing RBD adjacent to single-family and multi- family residential, suggested leaving things as they are currently, but use the RBD-2 only for those areas (e.g. Fairview Avenue west of Cleveland Avenue) to allow flexibility for businesses but exempt areas near residential properties. Councilmember Willmus concurred, noting that adding the second zoning desig- nation would serve to protect some of those residential areas adjacent to RBD, while still accommodating business interests as expressed by Mr. Rancone and his goals that would be accomplished with that zoning designation. Councilmember Willmus commended Mr. Rancone for his firm's proactive redevelopment and improvement on their properties. Regarding limited production use adjacent to residential areas, Mayor Roe opined that, due to their nature and hours of operation and lower traffic, a converse ar- gument could be made that limited production had less of an impact than retail, since that continued to be a major concern heard from residents in those areas (e.g. truck deliveries, snow removal,hours of operation). Mr. Paschke referenced the complementary ordinance amendment proposed, and immediately following this item, that clarifies the type and number of trucks al- lowed with this limited production and processing use. Mr. Paschke noted that the current code language did not have such a clarification; and agreed that exist- ing retail areas have significantly more vehicles and trucks than was found now with existing limited production uses. If that was the Council's overall concern, Mr. Paschke assured them that how those limits were defined would get to the