My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2021-2-2_PR_Comm Packet
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Parks & Recreation
>
Parks & Recreation Commission
>
Packets
>
2021
>
2021-2-2_PR_Comm Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2021 4:14:10 PM
Creation date
1/28/2021 4:13:51 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
41cost of installing the sidewalk connection in and out of the development. A map was displayed that <br />42showed the developers suggested sidewalk connections to the Commission. Staff relayed that it was <br />43their understanding that the sidewalk connections may be required as part of the public improvement <br />44contract andwould be negotiated as part of the final application for this development. Therefore, this <br />45itemshould be treated separately from Park Dedication. <br />46 <br />47Staff added that this area is located in constellation N. There are no specific plans identified in the <br />48Parks and Recreation System Master Plan for parkland in this area. <br />49 <br />50Commissioner Lenhart asked if there was a proposed location for land. <br />51 <br />52Commissioner Heikkila commented that the loss of trees will be very apparent to the public with this <br />53new development. In addition, he acknowledged that the Parks and Recreation Commission does not <br />54 have authority over tree removal or planting decisions within new developments. <br />55 <br />56 Commissioner Baggenstoss relayed that he is a part of the Rice-Larpenteur Alliance and that the trail <br />57 is very enticing. He questioned if the trail is already worked into the development. Staff noted that it <br />58 was there understanding that it will be part of the Public Improvement Agreement. In addition, staff <br />59 noted that it would be fair for the Commission to indicate that the trail connection would be a <br />60 desirable asset to the area if that is how they feel. <br />61 <br />62 Commissioner O’Brien noted that if this trail is part of the Rice-Larpenteur Alliance and City of <br />63 Roseville’s vision she would like to put support for the trail in the recommendation. She added that <br />64 if the developer ends up giving land to create the trail she would support that land offsetting the Park <br />65 Dedication monetary amount. <br />66 <br />67 Commissioner Lenhart added that she would like the trail to be publicly available to anyone. <br />68 <br />69 The Commission discussed the trail connection and how that may potentially impact their cash or <br />70 land recommendation. <br />71 <br />72 Land Developer, Roger Anderson joined the Commission to provide additional details on the <br />73 development and to answer any questions. He relayed that the connection trail was developed with a <br />74 staff member from Community Development as a way to complete a link in the City of Roseville’s <br />75 Vision Plan. Mr. Anderson noted that the trail connection will cost about $35,000 to build, will be <br />76 approximately 2/10 acre and will benefit the city more than the development. As a result of those <br />77 factors the Developer is asking for cash in lieu of land to satisfy the Park Dedication requirement. <br />78 The Commission discussed the trail layout, property use decisions and project timeline with the <br />79 developer. <br />80 <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.