Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br /> Monday,July 9, 2018 <br /> Page 17 <br /> City Planner Paschke briefly reviewed this request, recommending approval as <br /> detailed in the RCA dated July 9, 2018. <br /> Councilmember Etten asked about the green space in this PUD and whether it will <br /> be preserved. <br /> City Planner Paschke responded this has been discussed generally. The PUD is <br /> predicated upon incorporating the green space within those ponds. Overall, every <br /> site has to average about 25% green space. <br /> Councilmember Etten stated he wants to ensure the applicant understands this is <br /> not a normal space as far as putting asphalt over the whole thing. <br /> Councilmember McGehee asked about the tax impact as well as the difference in <br /> types of job between the hotel and the previously proposed storage facility. <br /> City Planner Paschke responded he is not sure about the tax impact. <br /> Councilmember McGehee stated she is not clear on the quality and quantity of <br /> jobs in a hotel. She was not impressed with their sketch to fill in a pond and not <br /> to do underground parking. <br /> Mayor Roe asked if the Council has any question for the applicants. <br /> Tom Noble, Chief Manager of Roseville Centre Lodging, 1660 Highway 100 S, <br /> St. Louis Park, introduced the landowner Rick Kuela. <br /> Councilmember Etten asked whether Mr. Noble is aware of the requirements for <br /> green space. <br /> Mr. Noble responded affirmatively. Since this project began a year ago, every- <br /> thing that has been discussed tonight has been a consideration. The PUD requires <br /> a minimum of 25%of green space. Currently the applicant is at 23.5% of green <br /> space, and the intent is to make a fully compliant application. <br /> Councilmember Etten asked about an above-ground pond. <br /> Mr. Noble recalled the numerous meetings that have been held with the Rice <br /> Creek Watershed District in order to understand the history of the area as well as <br /> meeting the needs of the District. Years ago, there was a design that envisioned <br /> some stormwater retention being built into this area. Based on actual need at the <br /> time of construction, that pond never was built as a stormwater retention pond. <br /> That is his understanding based upon meetings with the Rice Creek Watershed <br /> District. It was intended in concept to be a pond that holds water 100% of the <br /> time. In fact, it was not built to that specification. It is not a functioning pond <br />