pf_03552 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Sent: To: Subject: To whom it may concern, I live directly north of the proposed Twin Lakes area and have been the discussions over what to do with the area since started. Since I am a resident that WILL have to live with the consequences of the development, I feel that I should in from a residents standpoint. I was directly involved with the Centre Point as my f was one of the families displaced the of Roseville when the land was condemned for the project. I saw firsthand the unprofessional manner in how the city and developer operated and how the interests of the land owners were not considered important. The manner in which the homeowners were treated was shoddy and not respectful of the fact that were the legal owners of the land in question. Several who did not agree with the looked at as troublemakers standing in the way of progress. In how that development was handled, I did not have great expectations the treatment of residents would be better for the Twin Lakes plan. feelings did not change upon my attending a meeting in late 2001 where four ideas for the area were presented and it once again appeared that the and chosen developer were trying to push a that no one except the developer (who would make money on the plan) and a couple of the council members (who didn't live in the area) wanted. I was thankful when the ect was set aside. When the Twin Lakes development came up again this year I was more ful because this time a panel made up of a variety of people (including residents) was put together to look at the area and the potential development from a variety of directions. Unfortunately, it appears that once again the interests of the residents are being sat aside in favor of a developer. neighbor volunteered to be on the panel and through her I have kept in touch with some of the information that has been presented: what the areas of concerns are, the makeup of the proposed development and how it would impact the residents living nearby. She put in a lot of time to try and understand the above issues and like me is troubled by the ease in which the developer and some of the city personnel involved dismiss the traffic congestion already present in the area and how this development will add to the congestion. In addtion, neither of the two plans real pin down what the vast areas marked "residential" mean. What the residential is going to be is crucial to the existing residents and should be pinned down better before any plan is given the go ahead. To leave open the possibility that the residential could become apartments (with all the problems they can bring to an area - traffic being the least issue) would negatively impact what is a nice area. . Another troubling aspect is that back in 2001 at the first meeting on this development I sat there and listened to the city personnel assure the attendees that a "big boxn was not in the plans and would not be considered for the area. Now, big surprise both plans for the area include a "big boxn. Back in 2001 the traffic increase was estimated to be an additional 5000-6000 cars per day and this was without a Costco. At the time, the city personnel stated the increase would be insignificant. Only those- basically the council, planning commission, attorneys, real estate agents and developers who do not live in the area could term the increases as insignificant. Currently at rush hour 35W and Highway 36 are so congested that drivers use nearby residential streets to bypass freeway congestion. Traffic on Cleveland Ave. routinely backs up south from County Rd D and Fairview Ave. can be stop and go approaching Lydia and County Road D (emissions issue). Adding another major development and a new road between Fairview and Cleveland Ave. is NOT going to 1