Laserfiche WebLink
<br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br />42 <br />43 <br />44 <br />45 <br />46 <br />47 <br />48 <br />49 <br />50 <br />51 <br /> <br />b. Plannine File 3232: A request by the City of Roseville to amend the <br />Comprehensive Land Use Plan designation of the Twin Lakes Redevelopment <br />Area from its current designation of Business (B) and Industrial (I) to Business <br />Park (BP), a new land use designation. The Twin Lakes Redevelopment Area is <br />generally located east of Cleveland Avenue, west of Lincoln Drive, south of <br />County Road C2 and Brenner A venue, and north of County Road C. A map of <br />the specific parcels can be obtained from the Roseville Community Development <br />Department. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing opened the hearing and requested Cathy Bennett to explain the Twin <br />Lakes proposed amendment to the Master Plan as provided in staff reports dated <br />December 13, 2000. She reviewed goals and objectives and planning principles. Ms. <br />Bennett explained the history, the planning process, and presented the staff <br />recommendation. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked if fiscal disparities were figured into the financial feasibility. <br /> <br />Member Mulder encouraged flexibility. This is a vision. There is no specific proposal <br />"in the wings". Parking is important. How does the City get higher density/ramped <br />parking? There will be new drainage and parking designs needed. Cars can be screened <br />making a more open, inviting site. <br /> <br />Member Olson noted in Option 3 proposed housing along the north side. There may be <br />less of a mixing of uses. She noted that the CIP puts funding into Twin Lakes Parkway - <br />explain. <br /> <br />Member Cunningham asked if there was a demand for a hospital. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing asked how the pieces would fit together. Could the Commission identify <br />items that should be located there? Chair Klausing asked for detail about what the area <br />might develop into. <br /> <br />Member Rhody noted that this is a vision of a block of land uses which the City will <br />invite proposals for new land uses over the next 20 years. <br /> <br />Comments: <br /> <br />Steve Miller, Dominium Truck Tenninal/Freight, 2750 Cleveland Avenue, noting staff <br />recommendation 3.5, asked what "intrusion" meant. What creates more of an intrusion, <br />trucking or the other uses proposed by the staff? Low building quality does exist because <br />the trucking industry will not reinvest without clear-cut assurances from the City. <br />Trucking has economic hardships; diesel fuel is expensive; drivers are at $58.00/hour; but <br />the relocation costs much more. It adds cost and congestion to freeways. <br /> <br />Chair Klausing asked what options would occur for the land in the future. Mr. Miller <br />recommended tabling the issue until property owners meet to resolve issues. Truck <br />traffic is minimal. Can trucking remain and be compatible? <br /> <br />Sean Regan said he liked the City's effort to plan for the future. The scenario 4 Fruehoff <br />and Masa buildings (both of which Mr. Regan owns) are candidates for redevelopment. <br />Traffic issues will be addressed in the AUAR. The staff recommendation scenario of <br />