pm_100709 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, October 07, 2009 Page 4 based on the comments and findings of Sections 4 and 5 and the conditions of Section 6 of the staff report dated October 07, 2009. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Motion carried. Chair Doherty noted that the case was scheduled to be heard by the City Council at their October 19 or 26, 2009 meeting. b. Planning File 09-026 Request by Semper Development, Ltd. (with property owner James Schwalbach) to REZONE the property at 2587 Rice Street, to be consistent with the Roseville Comprehensive Land Use Plan Chair Doherty opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 09-026 at 7:49 p.m. Economic Development Associate Jamie Radel provided staff’s analysis of the request by Semper Development Ltd. To REONE the property at 2587 Rice Street from R-1 (Single Family) to B-3 (General Business District) to make the zoning designation for this parcel consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation for this parcel and consistent with other zoning designations for the adjoining parcel owned by Semper Development to facilitate marketing efforts. Ms. Radel noted that the future land sue in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, awaiting final adoption, guides the parcel as Community Business. Staff recommended APPROVAL of the request ofSemper Development, Ltd. (with property owner James Schwalbach) to REZONE the property at 2587 Rice Street, to be consistent with the Roseville Comprehensive Land Use Plan; based on the comments of Sections 4-6 and the conditions of Section 7 of the project report dated October 19, 2009. City Planner Thomas Paschke reviewed zoning considerations by the Planning Commission, with no stipulations for terms and conditions attached: either approval or denial of the rezoning request. Mr. Paschke, in reviewing the written comments received, noted that the issues brought forward were more related to future site redevelopment and/or use, rather than actual rezoning. Mr. Paschke advised that, once staff had a redevelopment proposal before them, those specific impacts could be determined and addressed, whether through an administrative approval process if all codes and standards were met, or before the Planning Commission for any revisions. Chair Doherty spoke in opposition to allowing access onto Wewers and asked that his opposition be made a part of the record. Mr. Paschke duly noted Chair Doherty’s comments, and advised that the record could show this preference, it could not be considered as a condition for rezoning approval. Mr. Paschke advised that designating this parcel as B-3 was consistent with other properties to the north, and was not to be unique and consistent with the pending 2030 Comprehensive Plan designation and guidance, and applicable uses as permitted. Discussion included the process for future development and notice to the neighbors related to any redevelopment in the area in order to express their views related to access onto Wewers Road, recognizing that this is a major safety concern for the neighborhood; with staff addressing potential processes, depending on the type of redevelopment and permitted uses; and mitigations applied to future development to address various issues. At the request of Commissioner Gisselquist, Mr. Paschke reviewed the background of this parcel, as well as those adjoining parcels; noting that the property directly north had been guided business since pre-1998 (parcel #2587), and was shown on the “inconsistency” map but never zoned accordingly. Mr. Paschke noted that state law changed in the late 1990’s related to Comprehensive Plans and zoning consistencies, and may have been part of the reason that this area had not been addressed, similar to other areas throughout the City also needing to be addressed once the 2030 Comprehensive Plan was adopted.