Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Roseville Planning Commission <br />September 24, 2002 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. The depressed and competitive real estate market that we find ourselves in, <br /> <br />. The likelihood that these buildings will not remain competitive in a regulatory <br />environment in which special municipal approvals are required for new tenancies <br />or expansion of existing tenancies, and <br /> <br />. The reality that industrial tenants will not renew their leases or locate in these <br />buildings without the reasonable expectation that they will be able to expand and <br />modify their uses to meet market demands. <br /> <br />According to the Owners' analysis, a low percentage of existing uses in these buildings would be <br />permitted in the new B-6 district. Over the 20-year course of redevelopment in Twin Lakes, as <br />outlined in the Master Plan, if these properties are re-zoned B-6 the Owners expect to experience <br />increased vacancies, drops in rent roll, drops in value (and property tax capacity), and property <br />deterioration due to unavailability of funds for building maintenance. The resulting blight would <br />have an adverse impact on the value and tax base not only of these properties but also of other <br />properties in the area. <br /> <br />Alternatives to address the Owners' concerns discussed with Dennis Welsch, Thomas Paschke <br />and City Attorney Joel Jamnik include (1) deferring the rezoning of improved properties until <br />market forces dictate or make feasible redevelopment of these properties as permitted uses under <br />the B-6 zoning text, and (2) rezoning all properties now and modifying the language of the B-6 <br />text to allow leasing and releasing of existing properties for their current intended uses in this <br />very competitive commercial real estate market until market forces dictate redevelopment. <br /> <br />While the Owners definitely prefer option (1), deferring the rezoning, they have been working <br />with City planning staff to develop "nonconforming use" language for the B-6 zoning provisions <br />that would allow them to keep their properties leased and occupied, to avoid significant <br />reductions in asset value over the 20-year course of redevelopment outlined in the Master Plan. <br /> <br />Attached is a document showing the revisions to the B-6 zoning provisions that are proposed by <br />5t. Paul Properties and Northco. The proposed changes accomplish the following: <br /> <br />1. Permitted uses contemplated by the comprehensive plan and the recitals to <br />Ordinance No. 1258, but previously omitted from the list of permitted uses in the <br />B-6 zoning provisions, have been added to the list of permitted uses. <br /> <br />2. A definition of the term "ancillary" as used in the list of permitted uses has <br />been added. The need for a definition of this term was pointed out by City <br />planning staff. <br /> <br />3. The nonconforming use provisions of the B-6 zoning provisions have been <br />modified to allow continuance, extension, expansion or intensification of uses that <br />