2015-11-04_PC_Agenda_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

SPECIAL Planning CommissionMeeting City Council Chambers, 2660 Civic Center Drive Draft Minutes–Wednesday, September 17, 2015 1.Call to Order 1 Chair Michael Boguszewski called to order a specialmeeting of the Planning Commission 2 meeting at approximately6:30p.m.for the purpose of considering amendments to the 2030 3 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code pertaining to various properties within the Twin Lakes 4 Redevelopment Area.Chair Boguszewski reviewed the role and purpose of the Planning 5 Commission. 6 2.Roll Call 7 At the request of Chair Boguszewski,City Planner Thomas Paschke called the Roll. 8 Members Present: Chair Michael Boguszewski;Vice Chair Shannon Cunningham; and 9 Members Robert Murphy;James Bull; and Chuck Gitzen 10 Members Excused: MembersDavid Stellmachand James Daire 11 Staff Present: Community Development Director Paul Bilotta,City Planner Thomas 12 Paschke, with Senior Planner Bryan Lloyd arriving at about6:40p.m. 13 Others Present: Councilmember Bob Willmus in the audience 14 3.Commission Business 15 PROJECTFILE 0026:Continuation of the request by City of Roseville for approval of 16 amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code pertaining to various 17 properties within the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area 18 Chair Boguszewski opened the discussionfor Project File 0026at 6:34 p.m. continuing this 19 discussion from the September 2, 2015 regular Planning Commission meetingat which time it 20 was tabled. 21 Community Development Director Paul Bilottabriefly reintroducedthis item; noting that the Chair 22 closed the Public Hearing at the September 2, 2015 meeting, at which public comment was 23 heard. 24 While recognizing that the public hearing had been closed, Chair Boguszewski noted that 25 additional public comment would be considered tonight depending on the time available. 26 Mr. Bilotta provided a brief background, and clarified some misconceptions previously voiced by 27 residential neighbors of this Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area, specific to protect petitions they 28 had submitted.Mr. Bilotta advised that each of the petitionshad been received, and considered in 29 the past by the City Council, and had not been “lost in the shuffle,” as had been alluded to with 30 past public testimony.Mr. Bilotta advised that they had been incorporated into the review 31 throughout the process by thePlanning Commission and City Council on various occasions 32 during this most-studied area of Roseville.Mr. Bilotta noted the significant and ongoing public 33 input received over the last 25-30 years from the public, property owners, the business 34 community, and design teams before and after new zoning designations had come into play and 35 as revised several times based on a considerable amount of that public input.Mr. Bilotta noted 36 that tweaking is common in such a comprehensive redevelopment area, reiterating that as the 37 protect petitions were submitted, they had been part of the City Council’s review and numerous 38 public informational open houses during thereview of the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area. 39 Specific to one protest petition, Mr. Bilotta noted that theresidential neighborhood had asked that 40 north of Terrace Drive be rezoned from High Density Residential-1 (HDR-1) to a Medium Density 41 Residential (MDR) concept.Mr. Bilotta advised that the City Council and staff recognized and 42 interpreted the neighborhood concerns that they were not comfortable with HDR in their back 43 yards.However, Mr. Bilotta noted that the neighborhood was not supportive of all the uses 44 proposed in a Community Mixed Uses (CMU) zoning designation either; but appeared to 45 understand that it would be a long time before MDR became feasible in today’s marketplace.As 46 one approach, Mr. Bilotta noted that the residents appeared to be used to current commercial 47