pf_03251 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

r\E~T & FI.AN!Ar:AN .J ~ .. _. 1 \,L .~ (FRI) 9. 22' 00 16:50/ST.16:42/NO, 4863201417 P 3 Mayor and City Council Members City of Roseville September 22,2000 Page 2 nonconforming uses, applicable in this circumstance. Section 10] 1.02 stipulates that a non-conforming use can be continued, "but may not be extended, expanded. intensified . or changed unless to a conforming use." Additionally, Section 1011.05 stipulates that while the structures containing a non-conforming Use may be maintained and may undergo "incidental" alterations, no alterations which would "extend, expand or intensify the non-confonning use" are permitted. Clearly, the intrusion of a 300 seat gambling facility into the Hamline Center will grossly intensify the existing non-conforming use. Just for example, the 11,650 square feet to be leased for the gambling operation, ifused for retail sales, would require approximately 58 parking spaces. According to the Staff Report, the City Code requires a minimum of ]00 spaces (one space per each 3 seats) for the gambling operation, while the actual parking need is estimated by the Staff to be between 120 and J 50 parking spaces. This increases the current parking deficit by 62 to 92 spaces. Moreover, the alterations proposed to accommodate the gambling operation, which we have understood to cost in excess of $400,000, clearly go beyond the "incidental" aJterations permitted by Section 1011.05. The mere fact that this use requires a conditional use permit is, by itself, evidence that the existing non-conforming use is being changed or expanded illegally. ll. Location Restrictions Imposed by Chapter 303. Section 303,04 of City Ordinances (copy #2 encJosed) provides that any new "amusement devices, areas or game room business or enterprises" with a capacity for more than 8 customers at one time shall be setback a minimum distance of 1500 feet from any residentially zoned area, school or church. In the Staff Report, the staff recommended that the proposed gambling operation be considered a "amusement establishment". We believe that an "amusement establishment", which is a permitted conditional use in a B-2 District, should be considered the same as a "amusement device, area and/or game room" regulated by Chapter 303. Therefore, the setback required by Section 303.04 would prohibit this use at this location, since there are residential areas, a music school and two churches within 1500 feet of the Hamline Center. This setback restriction for a facility that operates video or other table games or arcades for a mere 8 CU3"tomers is indicative of the City's determination that this and similar uses (such as the proposed gambling operation) should be prohibited from immediate proximity to residences, churches and schools. Since the gambling operation proposed for Hamline Center would be adjacent to aU three of these types of uses, and should be considered an inappropriate conditional use for this reason. This should be true even if the specific prohibition of Section 303.04 is found by the City Attorney not to be applicable to this gambling operation. The adverse impact on adjoining residences, schools and churches of this 300 seat gambling facility wiJI obviously be much more substantial than would a video arcade seIVing 8 potential customers.