My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02881
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2800
>
pf_02881
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:19:45 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 1:24:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2881
Planning Files - Type
Planned Unit Development
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
CENTRE POINTE
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
209
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />w <br /> <br />BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. <br /> <br />TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS <br />7301 OHMS LANE, SUITE 500/ EDINA, MN 55439/ (612) 832-9858/ FAX (612) 832-9564 <br /> <br />February 24, 1997 <br /> <br />REFER TO FILE: <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Hunter <br />Orr-Schelen-Mayeron & Associates, Inc. <br />300 Park Place East <br />5775 Wayzata Boulevard <br />Minneapolis, MN 55416-1228 <br /> <br />RE: Traffic Study Report for Centre Pointe Business Park <br /> <br />Dear Jack: <br /> <br />As a follow-up to our discussions on Friday and today, this is to provide some follow-up <br />suggestions in terms of resolving the issues regarding the traffic study report prepared by <br />your firm in January 1997 for the Centre Pointe Business Park. I concur with the <br />comment you expressed that the report does not meet anyone's standards. David Pieper <br />told me that he completed the report consistent with the directions he was given to make <br />maximum use possible of the 1985 report prepared by our firm, making only minimal <br />necessary changes to that report. <br /> <br />I heard you express interest to promptly resolve the problems associated with the traffic <br />study report prepared by your firm, My further comments in 'this letter are offered in the <br />spirit of supporting such prompt resolution. In my judgment, the primary step that needs <br />to be accomplished to rectify this problem is for the traffic study and report to be redone <br />in an objective manner that is consistent with pertinent standards. Key points that I <br />believe must be included in a traffic study for the Centre Pointe Business Park are: <br /> <br />a) Complete the traffic forecasts and analyses for the year 2001, which is the year <br />after the three year build out period presented on page 4 of the Centre Pointe <br />EAW. <br /> <br />b) Account for all other new development and traffic growth expected in the area <br />between 1997 and 2001. This needs to include all new development expected to <br />occur in the Twin Lakes Business Park, Gateway Business Park, and Tower Place <br />Business Park. <br /> <br />c) Address potential traffic impacts at all locations that may be significantly affected. <br />The current study report just addresses intersections along Cleveland Avenue rrom <br />County Road C to County Road D. At a minimum, detailed consideration also <br />needs to be given to the complete interchanges ofI-35 W with County Road C and <br />County Road D because much of the Centre Pointe traffic will use these <br />interchanges. County staff also have expressed interest to understand impacts that <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.