pm_040804 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

He explained the preliminary plat. It could change from two lots to three lots. The rezoning from "S-C" and "B-1" was described by Thomas Paschke. The "S-C" definition is not appropriate for the proposed Target site. Thomas Paschke explained public and private easements on the site. He noted that the easements are not needed and should be vacated. Because this is a rezoning, there is no site plan review as in a Planned Unit Development. Thomas Paschke indicated that based on the information in Section 4 and the findings in Section 5 of the project report dated August 4,2004, the Community Development Staff recommended approval of the Comprehensive Land Use Map Amendment, Preliminary Plat, Rezoning and Vacation of certain Public to allow the redevelopment of the "T1" Target store at 1515 County Road B, subject to the following conditions: A. The dedication of right-of-way 50 feet wide over the western access into and through the Target site to Commerce Street. Said right-of-way will be required to be wider at County Road B to accommodate the ingress/egress design. B. The provision of a relocated water main easement per the Public Works Department and based on the final site utility plan approved by the Public Works Director. c. The provision of utility and drainage easements around the periphery of each lot as required by the Public Works Director. These easements are typically 5 feet in width, but can be wider depending on location. D. The provision of a sidewalk easement for the sidewalk proposed to be replaced adjacent County Road B. Member Traynor asked what the standard of review is for the Comprehensive Plan changes. Thomas Paschke explained the uniqueness of this case (Target is not a Shopping Center). Chair Mulder asked if the preliminary plat will include two or three lots within the plat. (up to 3) Member Pust asked why there should be more than two lots in the Target project. Thomas Paschke explained his reasoning for expanding to three lots, adding 7,500 square feet of additional complementary building space. No questions were asked by the Planning Commission on the Rezoning. Member Doherty asked for details on the easements to the Perkins' site. Thomas Paschke explained the State and County frontage road plans and construction in 2007. Target will do some of this County Road B work as part of their own redevelopment and may need to dedicate a public road through the western portion of the site. Chair Mulder asked if traffic flow would be improved. Thomas Paschke explained improvements including medians, turning lanes, right only turns and stop lights. Member Traynor asked why design elements are not part of the approval process. Thomas Paschke explained that a rezoning cannot be conditioned. Member Traynor asked if there are city design standards. (Yes, but they are not written specifically for a "Big Box".) The Target project will have to meet "B-3" requirements as well as design standard requirements (Chapter 1010) in the Code. Member Pust asked if the easement, when vacated, returns value to the City. (No) Member Pust asked if other cities get paid for vacations. She asked where traffic currently using State Farm Road will be dispersed throughout the site, such as Pascal. Where will pedestrian traffic from Commerce Street cross the Target site? (Thomas Paschke suggested the City will require a pedestrian easement for a sidewalk). Will there be fencing to preclude pedestrian access (no). Forrest Russell, Target Corporation Development Manager, explained the redevelopment of "T-1". The design will have an entry from County Road B; it works for everyone. The building design (exterior) is not complete at this time, but it will be more than a large concrete box. Target will work on landscaping, trails, parking, new roads and vacation of old easements. A third lot on the site is possible, but has not been committed to, with the parking needs being re-examined. Target is working on the public access easements. Chair Mulder asked that the Target image be distinctive as it is located in downtown Roseville. The building has four frontages - this is challenging. Member Bakeman asked that some historical symbol of "T-1" be placed on the site. John Shaw, Perkins Architect, asked if the staff's DRC (Development Review Committee) was open to public