2017_0117_REDA Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roseville REDA Workshop Tuesday,January 17, 2017 Page 3 ■ Peer communities to Roseville considered to be the Cities of Richfield and/or St. Lou- is Park ■ Affordable home prices lower in Roseville due to smaller housing types ■ Future transportation (e.g. driverless cars) and transit option impacts to development of the community ■ What defines an ".urban city" and a "suburb" since the initial concept after the post- World War II war building boom period and current reality and previous develop- ments based on vehicular access versus today's walkability preferences and conven- ience to amenities ■ Roseville's status of becoming less a suburb every day as a trend with most inner-ring suburbs. Further discussion and dialogue included: ■ How Roseville fits into the metropolitan marketplace, with recent industrial construc- tion considered good, creating a good tax base and more jobs, some recent ho- tel/motel construction;but not a lot of office use constructed of late. ■ While there has been a huge increase in multi-family units in the metropolitan area over the last few years, why none in Roseville? ■ Consideration of the demographics of where employees are coming from and what's attracting them, and how to address competition from other communities that will continue to increase going forward. ■ Consideration of multi-family housing closer to Rosedale Center (not allowed for with current zoning designation). ■ The need for flexibility on the part of the City of Roseville for redevelopment and in- fill development (e.g. outlots or parking lots at malls); and willingness to partner with developers —not with a master plan but with a vision for the future of the community that will attract developers to the community. ■ Challenges—and opportunities—of major highways with access to Roseville and how to redevelop as a walkable versus vehicular community. ■ More efficient use of office space by many companies versus new construction or re- development; and comparably efficiencies in land use to provide amenities for em- ployees in today's market and for residential uses as well. ■ Mixed use not successful without each component able to succeed on its own. ■ Financial investments in larger density projects to make them work based on potential rents; creating the need for flexibility by the city in zoning and partnering with devel- opers including investing financially. ■ How Roseville sells itself in the future based on community needs and the develop- ment marketplace and project viability. ■ How to address those Roseville residents ready to move from their current single- family home to a single-level townhome, but not into a senior apartment complex at this stage of their lives. ■ How limited land availability in Roseville informs future development and redevel- opment by removing barriers, including financial and/or site assembly investments; tax increment financing and creative ideas to send a message to developers that it wants to partner to make a project happen. ■ Changing the community's mentality that by partnering with a developer it achieves a