Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />S <br />9 <br />�o <br />Special City Cauztcii Meeting <br />Mnnday, August D6, 2007 <br />Page 14 <br />a. Urdinance — C�nsfder Ad�pt��g an 4rdinance Rezon�ng 2754 <br />�nei�ing Avenue Frontage Road far TOLD Devei�pment <br />City Planner Thomas Paschke xevie�ved the xequest o£ T�LD Deve�- <br />opment in cooperation with FGM Roseville LLC (prop�rty own�r) to <br />�ezone (from B-1-B, Limi�ed Retai� Dis�'ic� to BT2, Retail Business <br />District) to a11ow redevelopmeni of the f�rmer Catt�e Company parop- <br />erty �nto a specialty grocery stor�. 1VIr. Paschk� noted tha� the current <br />proposal called for �razing the existing structuare and const�ucting a <br />new 14,Q04 square foot stz-�cture. <br />11 Mr. Pasehl�e advis�d that sta£� �recomm�nded APPR4VAL o� the re- <br />� 2 ques�, based on �he comments and findings of Sec�ion 5 0� the proj ect <br />13 repo�t daied Au�ust 6, 2007. <br />�.4 <br />15 Couneilmember �hXan questioned staf�'s ratianale far rezoning this <br />16 specif c properiy when adjoining prope�ties on the south and east re- <br />� 7 mained with a zoning classifzcation of B- �-B; and why rezaning was <br />�S now recommended as appropriate when previous legislative judgznent <br />19 indieated tha� a gxacexy store was nat an appropriate use. Council- <br />2� member Ihlan questioned why sta£� didn't encouz�ag� ihe applicant to <br />21 utz�zze ihe vacant "Rainbow" site, rather than requesting rezoning of <br />22 the fo�ner "Catt�e Company" r�staurant site for r��a�l uses not cu�- <br />�3 rently permitted. <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />Mr. Paschke hzghlighted sta££'s comments zn Sect�on S o� the staf� re- <br />por� and current zoning City policy. Mr. Paschke again re�'erenced the <br />staff repo�rt rega�ding potential City Council direction �or t�x� <br />amendments providing more uses in specific zoning districts; and <br />s�aff s resea.�ch o� and �nabxli�y to determzne why all uses were not in- <br />clucled in text £o� ex�sting zoning; sim��ar tn that scenario out�ined in <br />Sectian 5.2 of the siaff r�port. Mr. Paschke advised that sta�'�' was xe- <br />active �o applications as �hey were received; and while the referenced <br />Rainbow si�e may be an option, staff was of �he opinion �ha� rezoning <br />this site would be appropriate £or ihe p�oposed garoce�-y stoz-e use. <br />Councilmember Ihlan questioned whether a i�a�'f c s�udy had been <br />completecl to d�termin� th� amount a� �ra�f�c �hat wou�d be gene�ated <br />hy a�pecialty groce�y store, and impacis to the neighborhood. <br />