pf_03552 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: August 20043:51 PM Mbakeman@parkbooks.com; doherty@usfamily.net Ipse0001 @tc,umn.edu; Jmulder@mncounties.org; tpust@jessonpustlaw.com; mtraynor@ucare.org; city, council@ci.roseville,mn.us Twin lakes development 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 they started. Since I am a resident that WILL have to live with the consequences of the , I feel that I should in from a residents standpoint. When the Twin Lakes development was reborn this year, I remained optimistic that a resident friendly plan would be developed because 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 of the proposed development and how it would impact the residents living nearby. She in a lot of time to try and understand the above issues and like me is troubled by the ease in which the and some of the city personnel involved dismiss the traffic congestion already in the area and how this development will add to the congestion In addtion, neither of the plans pin down what the vast areas marked "residential" mean. What the residential is 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 possibil 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 boxu was not in the plans and would not be considered for the area. Now, big surprise both plans for the area include a "big boxu. Back in 2001 the traffic increase was estimated to be an additional 5000 cars per day without a Costco. At the time, the city personnel stated the increase would be insignificant. Now the estimated increase is 10,000 cars per day with the "big box" in the plans. Is this stil insignificant to city officials? Only those-- basically the council, planning cowmission, 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 0 and Fairview Ave. can be stop and go approaching Lydia and County Road 0 (emissions issue). Adding a new parkway between Fairview and Cleveland Ave. is NOT going to suddenly entice drivers to get on 35W at the Cleveland Ave. If anything, there will be even more drivers using the residential roads to travel further north thus bypassing 35W for as long as possible. Go out and look at 35W during rush hour to understand how backed up it is. How will adding a parkway and redesigning the entry to a clogged freeway affect the congestion on the freeway? In addition, the developer is asking for an estimated $47 million dollars in "help" from the taxpayers in Roseville. How can the city officials in good conscience even consider this? If the development makes sense then the developer should be bearing the majority of the cost of the development NOT THE TAXPAYERS. From figures I recent saw in the Roseville paper it 1