CCP 02-22-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

To Summarize: The Office/Industrial concept (#1) performed very well against the economic and fiscal criteria. However, the market analysis indicated that the amount of property set aside for non-residential uses, particularly industrial and retail, was far too largc to be absorbed in any realistic time frame (if ever). Also, this concept plan would significantly overburden the regional highway network, requiting sizable investments in road construction and reconfiguration. The Town Center concept (#2) also performed well against economic and fiscal criteria, but suffered from some of the same drawbacks as concept #1: too little market, too much traffic, However, the town-center concept held great appeal for the Task Force because it addressed head-on the notion of creating a focal point for the Arden Hills community. The Open Space concept (#3) performed fairly poorly relative to economic and fIscal measures, but did well relative to land use, transportation and recreation/open space criteria. Fiscal analysis of this concept indicated that it might break even, depending on how the large amount of open space were to be owned and managed. The Residential concept (#4) generally received middling ratings on all criteria. However, it also did not score particularly poorly on any set of criteria, which made it the best candidate for further rermement. D. Feedback and Input The fIrst suggestion made by the Task Force was to preserve the residential character of CSAH 96 and enhance its role as the "front door" of Arden Hills by creating a roadway with special character -- e.g., landscaping, site entry features, no non-residcntialland uses, etc. This idea was to be incorporated into the next iteration of concept plans. At the next public meeting, POSE (Protect Open Space and the Environment) turned out its members in force, and this group dominated the meeting with applause and vocal disapproval of any concept plan showing development. It was suggested that the city prepare and evaluate a concept plan consisting entirely of open space. One criticism leveled at the Task Farcels criteria was that environmental concerns seemed to have been a minor consideration in its deliberations. Following the public meeting, Concept #5, All Open Space, was developed and presented to the Task Force (Figure 18). This plan breaks the land into large areas designated for open-space preserve, regional park, and a regional sports complex. The evaluation of this plan indicated that, like the original open-space alternative (#3), it performed well against transportation and environmental/recreational criteria, but performed very poorly against economic and fiscal criteria. (The full evaluation of Concept #5 appears in the appendix to this report.) Most of the feedback from the public, via the Vento Committee and the Arsenal Cleanup and Conversion Project (ACCP), suggested that dedicating the entire site to one use was not a good idea. The desire to see a mix of uses on TCAAP came through loud and clear at virtually every meeting and focus-group session. As a result, the planning team ultimately used #4 as the basis for preparing a composite concept plan. The new plan (ultimately designated #6a) included the town center concept, relocated from the west-central part of the site to the southeast part of the site, adjacent to the Army Reserve site. (See Section V, "Plan Rermement and Prererred Reuse Plan".) The open- space preserve was also adjusted based on a better understanding of certain natural features (e.g., turtle nesting areas) (Figure 19). Camiros, Ltd.lSEH, Inc'!LHDL, Ltd. TeMP Framework Plan Page 24 Chapter IV I J I I I I I I I .. I I I I I I J I I