Laserfiche WebLink
City of Roseville - Planning Commission Minutes for June 7, 2006http://www.ci.roseville.mn.us/council/planning/minutes/2006/pm0607.htm <br />b.Planning File 3730: Request by ACR Homes for an AMENDED & ESTABLISHED PLANNED UNIT <br />DEVELOPMENT for 2435-2459 Rice Street. The owner/applicant seeks the allowance of an adult daycare as <br />a permitted tenant, while the Community Development Department seeks to establish a PUD Agreement <br />with specific terms and conditions. <br />Chair Traynor opened the Public Hearing. <br />City Planner Paschke reviewed the request of ACR Homes for an amendment to their existing Planned Unit <br />Development to allow the inclusion of an adult day care in their retail strip center at 2435-2459 Rice Street. Mr. <br />Paschke advised that in conjunction with their request, the Community Development Department, as a <br />eement with specific terms and <br />conditions, most notably those regulating permitted use. <br />Mr. Paschke advised that, in the historical research on the property to determine zoning and use approvals as part <br />City Council approved a Special Use Permit <br />for a Planned Unit Development for the Shelard Group on the subject property, subject to eleven (11) conditions. <br />Further research concluded that the subject property had an underlying zoning designation of B-2 (Retail Business <br />Land Use Plan. <br />Mr. Paschke further advised that, in consultation with the City Attorney to determine the best course of action to <br />ses within the existing strip mall, the <br />proposal would require an amendment to the PUD and establishment of a PUD Agreement identifying specific terms <br />and conditions in the context of reasonable or compatible permitted uses and prohibited uses (i.e., auto-related <br />uses) and site or neighborhood impacts. <br />Staff recommended approval of a Planned Unit Development that establishes specific uses. <br />Mr. Paschke submitted a letter from Michael Zimmerman of ACR Homes requesting allowance of an auto-related <br />use on the site; and requested Commission review and discussion. <br />Chair Traynor read the letter, attached hereto and made a part thereof, dated June 7, 2006 and addressed to Mr. <br />Paschke from F. Michael Zimmerman from Alta Vistas Inc. of which ACR is a subsidiary, requesting additional use <br />under the PUD application for a used vehicle dealership category; a modification to allow the applicant to obtain a <br />less obtrusive dealership through the state of Minnesota for display of up to five (5) used cars on the site, rather <br />than the traditional Minnesota vehicle dealership license now required by the State and held by the applicant. The <br />ve as a custom purchaser of cars for select <br />clientele. <br />Substantial discussion as to the timing and process of the request was held among Commissioners and staff <br />addressing the confusion as to the request itself; lack of an agreement from previous PUD approved in 1987; actual <br />permitted uses and current preferences; impacts to the neighborhood; compatible and permitted uses; state <br />requirements for auto dealers related to City Code and Zoning regulations; regulations of a PUD, with underlying <br />B-2 zoning; concerns of the Commissioners related to used car sales. <br />Commissioner Boerigter opined that granting this request would not turn the site into a used car lot, and that there <br />would be minimal impact to the health, safety or welfare of residents by allowing this use, provided conditions were <br />crafted stipulating the maximum number of cars to allow the applicant to get the appropriate State license; and <br />application of stringent conditions within the PUD Agreement. <br />Commissioner Roe discussed with staff the original intent of the 1987 PUD for use of the site; and lack of a PUD <br />Agreement to define uses. <br />Commissioners expressed disappointment with the applicant submitting an additional use request on the day of the <br />noticed public meeting, without the Commission having the benefit of staff review and comment prior to any action <br />on their part. <br />t, noting that he would not normally <br />analyze each proposed permitted use; and had advised the applicant to seek the additional request as provided to <br />allow the Commission to consider practical application of permitted uses with future scenarios. <br />ssuance of used vehicle sales and <br />municipal regulation of zoning ordinances. <br />Commissioner White questioned the practicalities of on and off-site facilities for rental leasing and public sale of <br />leased vehicles, and potential impacts to existing tenants. <br />3 of 82/6/2007 11.08 <br /> <br />