CCP 01292024 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment 2 E XTRACT OF THE J ANUARY 3, 2024, P LANNING C OMMISSION D RAFT M EETING M INUTES 1 a. Troys Automotive LLC requests a Zoning Code text amendment to Table 1005-1, Table 2 of Allowed Uses, to support “motor vehicle repair, auto body shop” as a Conditional 3 Use in the Neighborhood Mixed-UseDistrict 4 Chair Pribyl opened the public hearing at approximately 6:35 p.m. and reported on the 5 purpose and process of the public hearing. She advised this item will be before the City 6 Council onJanuary 29, 2024. 7 City Planner Paschke summarized the request as detailed in the staff report dated January 3, 8 2024. 9 Member Bauer asked if Mr. Paschke could expand on why staff feels that the MU3 would 10 not be the appropriate choice in this case. 11 Mr. Paschke explained that MU3 allows for manymore uses, not that those uses could ever 12 develop or redevelop this site given the different rules and regulations, but it opens up more 13 opportunities for uses that might not be appropriate for this area or for these small 14 neighborhood nodes. Keeping this neighborhood business and going through a process that 15 allows staff and the Planning Commission to review based on a number of different factors 16 seems far better than opening it up to being a permitted use and having other uses come in. 17 Ms. Gundlach indicated this particular site is surrounded by low density residential property 18 and the MU1 Zoning is really set aside for properties that are in closer proximity to some of 19 that more low-density residential property. 20 Member McGehee asked if staff has any more site plan information for how it would be laid 21 out on the site. 22 Mr. Paschke indicated he has a site plan that he had worked with initially. He explained how 23 the site plan was arranged. 24 Member McGehee asked why the applicant has had to come forward to the Planning 25 Commission to change the building. 26 Mr. Paschke indicated the building is not permitted and the building cannot be expanded 27 under the standards for non-conforming use, thus the reason for the proposed text 28 amendment. 29 Member McGehee did not think the applicant was going to expand the business massively. 30 Mr. Paschke agreed and noted if this is approved the applicant will need to get a conditional 31 use and then he believed there is at least one variance that will be required because of where 32 the existing building lies and tying into that. There are still some more steps to this. 33 Member Aspness indicated she was thinking about unintended consequences, if the City 34 added car repair to MU1, where else could the City see that become a potential issue for 35 Roseville. She wondered if there are other places where this could occur and did staff look 36 into this. Qbhf!32!pg!367