Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Meeting <br />Minutes – Wednesday, August 04, 2010 <br />Page 12 <br />THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL of a CONCURRENT AMENDMENT TO THE <br />548 <br />COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – LAND USE MAP and OFFICIAL ROSEVILLE <br />549 <br />ZONING MAP (REZONING) for the subject properties, as <br />seventy-two (72)? <br />550 <br />detailed in the staff report dated August 4, 2010 (Project File 0004 and <br />551 <br />Project File 0017); <br />as reviewed and discussed. <br />552 <br />Ayes: 5 <br />553 <br />Nays: 0 <br />554 <br />Motion carried. <br />555 <br />Mr. Paschke noted that these parcels were scheduled to be heard by the City <br />556 <br />Council at their August 23, 2010 meeting <br />557 <br />Recess <br />558 <br />Chair Doherty briefly recessed the meeting at approximately 7:23 p.m. and reconvened at <br />559 <br />approximately 7:30 p.m. <br />560 <br />c. PROJECT FILE 0017 <br />561 <br />Request by the Roseville Planning Division Adopting new regulations for <br />562 <br />Title 10, Zoning Regulations, pertaining to the Employment Districts: the <br />563 <br />Office/Business Park District and the Industrial District. <br />564 <br />Mr. Paschke briefly reviewed the proposed new Employment District standards in <br />565 <br />the text portion of Title 10, Zoning Regulations of City Code, including <br />566 <br />Office/Business Park and Industrial Zoning Districts, as detailed in the Request <br />567 <br />for Planning Commission Action dated August 4, 2010. Mr. Paschke noted the <br />568 <br />consolidation of previous districts for more clarification from previous overlaps in <br />569 <br />industrial districts; creating of design standards to limit impacts; and parking lot <br />570 <br />standards; as well as simplifying the Table of Uses throughout the Code in all <br />571 <br />Districts, addressing height standards and modifications as addressed in Section <br />572 <br />4.2 of the staff report. <br />573 <br />Chair Doherty opened the Public Hearing for public comment at approximately <br />574 <br />7:35 p.m. <br />575 <br />Public Comment <br />576 <br />Gary Grefenberg, 77 Mid Oaks Lane <br />577 <br />Mr. Grefenberg opined that there had been no Open House on this specific <br />578 <br />issue, and given the few audience members at tonight’s Public Hearing, <br />579 <br />expressed concern that more of an effort had not been made to alert more <br />580 <br />people to this issue, specifically the proposed zoning for Industrial Districts, due <br />581 <br />to recent concerns with the proposed asphalt plant as an example of an Industrial <br />582 <br />use and the importance of related issues. <br />583 <br />Mr. Grefenberg asked that an Open House be held specific to this issue in a less <br />584 <br />formal atmosphere to address multiple unanswered questions and clear up a lot <br />585 <br />of ignorance on the part of residents that was fostering fear and concern. Mr. <br />586 <br />Grefenberg noted that the proposed asphalt plant had garnered this fear; as well <br />587 <br />as making sure that there was sufficient public notification in the future to avoid <br />588 <br />similar situations. <br />589 <br />Mr. Grefenberg noted his service with the Imagine Roseville 2025 community <br />590 <br />visioning process, as well as on the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee. <br />591 <br />Mr. Grefenberg noted his repeated conversations with Mr. Paschke over the last <br />592 <br />week regarding current guidelines for public notice; and the concerns of many <br />593 <br />residents on what the proposed zoning may allow in certain areas. Mr. <br />594 <br />Grefenberg displayed the current zoning map and areas of concern to him, <br />595 <br />specifically along the west side of Roseville along I-35 with a single category of <br />596 <br />Industrial, and discontinuing the three current Industrial Districts into only one <br />597 <br />District. Mr. Grefenberg opined that this recommendation has not been <br />598 <br />thoroughly discussed enough by the Steering Committee to support such a <br />599 <br /> <br />