CCP 02-22-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Extent to which sites within the land use areas of the plan lie within 1/4 mile ofa collectorroadway. All Plans: The four scenarios were all developed with imposition of a trail network in mind. Although no network is actually shown, all areas of the site can be connected using off-street trails that rely on the open-space framework, retention areas, the Rice Creek corridor and easements to link different uses. Also, as described under Criterion TCI above, very few developable portions of the site are located more than 1/4 mile from a collector roadway, making circulating transit a real possibility. OfficelIndustrial: This plan shows several potential transit hubs or transfer points: the retail area at I-35W and County H, preferably close to the intersection of the more westerly on-site collector street; at the intersection of County H extended and the more easterly collector; in the heart of the office/industrial area; at the interpretive center; and in the governmental area just off the Hamline connection. The only location in which a circulator would have to retrace its path would be within the single-family residential area in the center of the site. Overall rating: Good Town Center: This plan contains a natural hub or transfer point, the town center. This center would also promote higher intensities of use more readily reached on foot and served by transit. The Hamline-at-CSAH-96 site would be a good transfer point as well. The roadway network lends itself to efficient circulation with little or no doubling back. Overall rating: Excellent Open Space: Unlike the other plans, which might contain enough households to justifY a local circulator, this plan lends itself more to simply brioging regional transit to the site to serve on-site employees. Two transfer points are readily apparent: At I-35W and County H, and at Hamline and CSAH 96. For the remainder of the site, trails would provide the priocipal alternate mode of travel. Overall rating: Pair Residential: This plan contains several likely transit hub/transfer points: I-35W at County H, the three intersections ofpriocipal on-site collectors in the west-central part of the site, and Snelling at CSAH 96. However, the lower density of this plan vis-a-vis the OfficelIndustrial plan would make transit more difficult to provide efficiently and pedestrian movement less likely. Overall rating: Pair TC3 Does the plan permit practical reuse of existing infrastructure systems? Indicators ... Extent to which the plan can accommodate reuse of major utility components, such as the water reservoir or electrical substation. . Extent to which the plan will reuse existing roadbeds. . Extent to which the plan can reuse existing underground utility systems (water, sewer, gas, electricity, etc.). All Plans: In all cases, major utility components may have salvage orreuse value. These components include the water reservoir, electrical substation and major sewer distributors (particularly the Moundsview distributor, which was recently oversized to handle outflow from TCAAP). In a few instances, existing on-site roadbeds may be used for portions of new roadways -- for example, the southerly portions of Snelling and Hamline, the County H entrance, and what is now called Moundsview Road, which runs straight south from County I next to the MnDOT site. Other roadways, particularly the remainder ofHamline, may remain as trails or be removed completely to accommodate redevelopment. As for underground utilities, it is doubtful that much can be reused. Not ouly are most of the water and sewer pipes more than 50 years old, which gives them dubious reuse value, but the chance that a new development configuration will fit the old utility configuration is remote at best. Overall rating, all plans: Poor TC4 Do the transportation and utility systems respect and enhance natural features? Camiros. Ltd./SEH. Inc./LHDL, Ltd. TeMP Framework Plan Page 16 Chapter IV I J I I I I I I I .. I I I I I I J I I