Res_11666 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Roseville, County of Ramsey, Minnesota, was held on the 6th day of January 2020 at 6:00 p.m. The following members were present: Etten, Willmus, Laliberte, Groff, and Roe. The following were absent: None. Member Etten introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 11666 RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR LIMITED WAREHOUSING AND DISTRIBUTION AT 2830 FAIRVIEW AVENUE (PF19-025) WHEREAS, A2 Art Storage and Services has submitted a valid application for approval of a proposed limited warehousing and distribution conditional use at 2830 Fairview avenue; and WHEREAS, the property is assigned Ramsey County PIN 04-29-23-42-0048, and is legally described as: See Exhibit "A" WHEREAS, the proposed use conforms to the definition of an"limited warehousing and distribution"in City Code §1001.10; and WHEREAS, the Roseville Planning Commission held the duly noticed public hearing for the request on December 4, 2019, and having closed said public hearing, voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed conditional use based on the public record and the Planning Commission's deliberation; and WHEREAS, the Roseville City Council has made the following findings regarding the general standards and criteria established in §1009.02.C: 1. The proposed use is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan does not speak directly to the proposed use or the subject property, but Planning Division staff believes the proposal is generally consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan to allow a diverse range of land uses in the Community Mixed-Use district. 2. The proposed use is not in conflict with any Regulating Maps or other adopted plans. The site does lie within the Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area, which is controlled by a Regulating Map and Plan. The reuse of the building and the contemplated interior improvements is not in conflict with this plan area's requirements, but will require the Planning staff to work with the applicant on any proposed improvements to determine the extent of potential compliance with the requirements of§1005.02 and §1005.07. 3. The proposed use is not in conflict with any City Code requirements. Based on the current plan to only improve and upgrade the interior of the building, staff would conclude this to not be in conflict with the City Code and specifically the Zoning Code. The applicant's narrative(Attachment C) Page 1 of 2