Laserfiche WebLink
REDA Meeting <br /> Minutes—Tuesday,October 17,2017 <br /> Page 4 <br /> Member McGehee asked how much of this chapter or specific requirements <br /> were from the Metropolitan Council. <br /> Mr. Gromberg advised that this chapter was one of the recommended sections <br /> by the Metropolitan Council to forecast how redevelopment may occur, the <br /> city's tools to attract new businesses and their interaction with existing <br /> businesses. However, Mr. Gromberg advised that there were no real <br /> requirements as with other land use sections of the comprehensive plan, with <br /> this chapter being one of the newer chapters recently added. <br /> Member McGehee stated that she found it disconcerting that the various <br /> assertions and mathematical work (e.g. median priced homes in Roseville <br /> wrong) were not in keeping with what the EDA has discussed for its goals over <br /> the years, or that of the City Council either. <br /> While it may be fine to have plan goals as identified, Member McGehee <br /> questioned what was written under several redevelopment sites (e.g. Sites 3 <br /> and 4) questioning where that description came from, as she didn't feel <br /> comfortable with it from a council member or resident perspective. Member <br /> McGehee opined that there was a heavy emphasis in the chapter on lower wage <br /> jobs; workforce housing, etc. with computations based on the wrong median <br /> priced home value which she found misrepresentative. In general, she found <br /> the draft overall to not be forward-thinking as laid out or based on community <br /> surveys completed over the years with residents stating that they wished to <br /> maintain all current amenities. <br /> Member McGehee stated that she had a hard time with this chapter since the <br /> Council had asked for an update process. There was unanimity that overall the <br /> city was well-satisfied with the existing comprehensive plan and only updates <br /> were needed, not a new plan as presented in this chapter. Member McGehee <br /> further stated that she was happy with the format of the existing document, <br /> providing visions and facts; while this new version recreates that format with <br /> objectives and tasks. <br /> Member Laliberte stated that she was not delving into the writing and structure <br /> at this stage; but had instead focused on the identified sites. With Site 1, <br /> Member Laliberte noted that Twin Lakes had been identified for a long time; <br /> as well as Site 2 with the considerable attention being expended for the <br /> Southeast Roseville Redevelopment Area. <br /> Regarding Site 3, Member Laliberte noted the considerable dispute about the <br /> Har Mar Mall site; previously identified by the Housing & Redevelopment <br /> Authority (HRA) as a site to pay attention to, even though people in that area <br /> were reluctant to change, and certainly not any intensified density as proposed <br /> here and in past conversations in that area. Having participated in walkabouts <br /> in that area and in talking to those residents, Member Laliberte opined that <br />