2010-03-03_PC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, March 03, 2010 Page 6 253 Commissioner Boerigter concurred with Chair Doherty’s comment, but advised not being 254 afraid to allow churches in B-3 Districts, given the information provided to-date; and 255 questioned how the impact of a church use could be any different that a permitted use for 256 a hospital, mortuary or theater. Commissioner Doherty questioned the aesthetics of the 257 church wishing to be next to other businesses; however, noted that this was their 258 decision to make. 259 Chair Doherty expressed concern that there may be unintended consequences that were 260 unknown at this time. 261 Commissioner Boerigter noted that, once the zoning code was rewritten, and unless 262 there was a run of church use applications between now and that rewrite, the B-3 District 263 would no longer exist so the problem would not exist. 264 Commissioner Gisselquist concurred with Commissioner Boerigter; observing that the 265 Comprehensive Plan provided no guidance for church uses; and reiterating that if you 266 were “grandfathered in” you were fine, but if not, there were limited options available. 267 Commissioner Gisselquist opined that he was not supportive of spot zoning, and he 268 personally didn’t like to contribute to something that could be perceived as such; however 269 he noted that the Commission was attempting to make do with the zoning currently in 270 place. Commissioner Gisselquist noted that his initial reaction when reviewing the 271 proposal had been that this seemed to be an overly broad solution to a unique situation; 272 however, when listening to the rationale of Commissioner Boerigter, he concurred with 273 his comments. Commissioner Gisselquist noted that newer churches were beyond the 274 smaller neighborhood, traditional churches, with a multitude of different service options; 275 and opined that this may be an appropriate location for a church of this size. 276 Commissioner Wozniak noted that when he first saw the proposal, his reaction had been 277 negative, given the location next to a car dealership that appeared inappropriate; 278 however, he noted the parallels between a regional business and regional church use 279 such as this; and opined that he was persuaded by the arguments of the City’s Imagine 280 Roseville 2025 community vision. Commissioner Wozniak opined that this is not the right 281 site for a church due to its isolation; and concurred with staff that a site in the Twin Lakes 282 Redevelopment Area may be more appropriate. 283 Commissioner Boerigter recognized staff’s recommendation, noting that he seldom 284 criticized their rationale; however, he questioned whether the bottom line was that this 285 site was seen as more valuable for a tax revenue-generating use than the church use. 286 Commissioner Wozniak opined that he would prefer to remove the tax issue from 287 consideration, and focus on land use only; further opining that he was persuaded by the 288 arguments that tax revenues were equitable on one side of I-35W or the other; but 289 continued to oppose the proposed location due to its isolation and inappropriateness with 290 adjacent business uses. 291 MOTION 292 Member Boerigter moved, seconded by Member Gisselquist to RECOMMEND TO 293 THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of the proposed ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT for 294 Twin City Chinese Christian Church to allow churches as a permitted use in the 295 General Business District. 296 Commissioner Wozniak sought clarification from staff on the ramifications of the 297 proposed action. 298 City Planner Thomas Paschke advised that staff would take action for approval into 299 consideration as it proceeded with the zoning code rewrite and whether this as a 300 permitted use under the B-3 Zoning District, if ultimately approved by the City Council 301 and whether additional parameters should be created to allow churches in the future in 302 regional business districts or whether to rezone this site as a different zoning distinction 303 through clarifying textual information under that land use designation.