pf_03192 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSIONIDIRECTION DATE: 11/06/02 ITEM NO: 6d Department Approval: DPW Item Description: Manager Approved: Agenda Section: HEARINGS City ofRoseville "Building and Lot Coverage" Interpretation. (PF3l92) 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On October 21, 2002, the City Council directed this issue back to the Planning Commission and requested that the Commission begin a series of well publicized meetings with the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce, the affected businesses, and the properties owners within 350 feet surrounding the "SC" Shopping Center Districts. The Council asked for performance standards which are linked to the adjacent neighborhoods and have measurable impacts on the residential areas. The Council also asked for a better discussion of intensity of use including the relationships among store size, lot coverage, and traffic (the example was a 24-hour grocery store versus a furniture store). The Mayor suggested that lot coverage regulations may be obsolete, particularly with the stringent parking requirements the City has adopted. The Council sent the recommendations (5.1 through 5.6) back to the Planning Commission, removing the numbers or percentages (premature and too restrictive) within the staff and Planning Commission recommendation. See Section 7 and 8 of this report. 1.2 In 1994, when the Commission and Council adopted the City's Comprehensive Plan, a key element of the land use policy was to eliminate retail and business encroachment into residential areas; growth for these business sectors would have to occur by intensification on existing sites, by redevelopment, and by conversions of brown field industrial areas. 1.3 In 2000, the City Council reviewed shopping center building expansions. A major issue was lot coverage at the Roseville and Har-Mar Shopping Centers and other "SC" districts. The Council provided clarification and direction for interpretation of the Code on January 24, 2000, suggesting that the broader issue oflot coverage in shopping center districts should be discussed at a future date. Three terms (lot area, building area, and floor area ratio) are critical to the understanding of the existence, continuance and expansion of these centers. What follows is a discussion of some of the issues related to these terms and suggested remedies. 2.0 REVIEW of REQUEST 2.1 Shopping center zoning and other retail business in Roseville cover only 5.5% of the land area or about 490 acres of the 8,861 total acres within the city. Yet, the shopping center and other retail business (not office) provide 28% of the tax base in the community. Approximately 31 % or 12,250 ofthe city's jobs are related to retail sales. It is an important physical and fiscal feature in the City of Roseville. 2.2 Section 1006 pertains only to shopping centers and shopping center districts. Section 1006.02.C. states: Not more than twenty-five percent (25%) ofthe lot area (of the shopping 1