2015-08-05_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular Planning CommissionMeeting Minutes –Wednesday, July 1, 2015 Page 5 conditional use for a drive-through at this time was to allow them a larger pool of tenant 201 options moving forward.As noted in staff’s findings in the report, Mr. Jensen opined that 202 it seemed an appropriate space for which to seek such a potential use.Mr. Jensen 203 further stated that, at the discretion of the Commission and/or staff, he had no problem 204 bringing a future tenant forwardfor approval as a potential occupantof the building and 205 user of the drive-through. 206 Member Boguszewski asked if it was the intent of the applicant to build the drive-through 207 now or merely obtain approval for a future tenant and construct it at that time or post- 208 approval. 209 Mr. Jensen noted a future tenant may not need that option, but his hope was to see such 210 a use and related drive-through as a tenant, since there weren’t many such small 211 business options along Rice Street at this time.In essence, Mr. Jensen advised that he 212 was seeking approval before a tenant became known to allow for such an option, without 213 the unknown if such a use may or may not be approved at the time such a tenant was 214 available. 215 Mr. Rustad noted that construction would start immediately, according to plan, for Sun 216 Control’s occupancy of the largest portion of the building, and after or during that same 217 time, three additional spaces may be leased by other, and unknown tenants.Other than 218 for the actual drive-through itself, Mr. Rustad advised that all other construction as 219 indicated in the plan would be completed during the initial phase of construction, 220 including landscaping and curb cuts with Mr. Jensen and his partner seeking tenants 221 parallel to that construction.Having owned the building since 2003, Mr. Rustad advised 222 that he was well-aware of the demographics of the area and traffic flow; and opined that 223 the proposed plan was usable and would complement that neighborhood without any 224 negative impacts. 225 In his review of the site plan, Member Daire opined that the space to the north of the 226 building suggested a better location for a drive-through rather than the south side; and 227 asked if the applicant had considered that option and if so, why they had chosen the 228 south side instead. 229 Mr. Rustad responded that, since this site shared ingress/egress with the property 230 immediately to the north, and pick-up from the drive-through from the driver side of a 231 vehicle, the concern was that staging of vehicles may back up into that adjacent property 232 or even into Rice Street if located on the north side, creating more problems than as 233 proposed on the south side. 234 Member Daire sought further clarification regarding the grading of the site and potential 235 conflict with existing doors and the drive-through. 236 Mr. Rustad clarified that the SE corner was at higher grade at the SE corner but not 237 significant; and the doors in question were considered service doors, with one required 238 as an additional exist for one unit, but not used for daily entry as required by code. 239 Member Bull thanked the applicants for their participation in the Roseville business 240 community; and asked if they understood that a potential use may not meet expectations 241 and may not be approved. 242 Mr. Jensen responded that he understood concerns as raised by the Commission; and 243 expressed his confidence that a potential tenant could be found, similar to the previous 244 area coffee shop (J. Arthur). 245 Mr. Rustad concurred, opining that the smaller spaces of approximately 1,000 square 246 feet, were more attractive to a smaller use; with only the end cap available and subject to 247 limited smaller operations. 248 Mr. Jensen noted their commercial business involved window tinting for residential, 249 commercial and vehicle applications; and at night their work vans would be stored in the 250 garage, with approximately 60%of their residential and commercial business off-site, with 251