pf_03192 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

REQUEST FOR COUNCIL DISUCSSION/DIRECTION DATE: 10/21/02 ITEM NO: III. B. Department Approval: DPW Agenda Section: PRESENT A TrONS Item Description: City of Roseville "Building and Lot Coverage" Interpretation. (PF3192) 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 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. 1.2 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 tenns (lot area, building area, floor area ratio) are critical to the understanding of the existence, continuance and expansion of these centers. What follows is a discussion of some ofthe issues related to these tenns 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 ofthe 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 center) shall be occupied by buildings. Section 1006.02.B. states that the floor area to lot area ratio cannot exceed .5 (50%). Both of the requirements were part of the original City Ordinances from 1959 and were more likely adopted as a method of reducing the impact of the buildings and their associated activities on existing, adjoining properties and street systems. In 1959, there were very few perfonnance standards to mitigate the size, shape, materials, location, light, noise, and traffic for retail development. Space (large lots) and distance (separation of buildings) were used as the primary substitute. 2.3 Staff has interpreted Section 1006.02.C. of the City Code as follows: Building Coverage: Not more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the shopping center master planned lot area shall be occupied by the building footprint. To staff this suggests that it includes the area within the exterior walls of all commercial buildings, not parking ramps. The "Master Planned" lot area includes the main structure, all outlots, non-buildable pond, landscaping, setback, and buffer areas; all principle commercial structures or accessory I