My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pm_041201
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
200x
>
2004
>
pm_041201
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 3:36:17 PM
Creation date
1/6/2005 3:26:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Planning Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Minutes
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
12/1/2004
Commission/Committee - Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
<br />f. The Public Works Department must complete the review and approve of the grading, drainage, sidewalk and <br />trail, and utility plans proposed with the General Concept and Final Plan submittal. All plans, including the location <br />of fire hydrants (per Fire Marshal) and utility services connections, require the approval of the Public Works <br />Department. In addition, the applicant is required to receive the approval of the storm water management plan by <br />the Rice Creek Watershed, prior to the Final Planned Unit Development Plan approval by the City Council. <br /> <br />g. The provision of a lighting plan for the all revised parking lots and the building, which plan must meet the <br />requirements of Section 1010.12. <br /> <br />h. The provision of a revised landscape plan that incorporates additional plantings in all newly created curb islands <br />and within the area surrounding the storm management pond. <br /> <br />i. The provision of a snow removal plan that eliminates any of the parking areas adjacent to the addition, <br />specifically the theater, from temporary or permanent snow storage <br /> <br />j. The provision of a signage plan for both building façade signage and any proposed monument/pylon signs. Staff <br />suggests that the sign plan accounts for all signage existing and proposed at Rosedale Center. <br /> <br />k. The provision of a life-safety and security plan for the renovation and addition, to be completed in coordination <br />with the City's Police and Fire Departments prior to final approvals of the PUD. <br /> <br />Chair Mulder asked who was the controlling entity on the Transit Hub. Deb Bloom explained the three party <br />Agreement (Mall, City, and Transit Hub). Aaron Isaacs, Metro Transit explained the agreement which covers the <br />transit area, the bus parking and park and ride area, and the Shelter on the lot. The Metropolitan Council paid for <br />the improvements. There are eight years reaming on the Transit Agreement. Mr. Isaacs explained the changes in <br />the Transit Hub. Over several meetings, the Transit Hub plans have been refined, with bus layover area adjacent to <br />the southeast wall of the Theater and the Transit pick-up hub near the entry to the mall. There are 400 park and <br />riders. Member Doherty asked if there is enough room for buses (ten at a time) on this area. (Yes with a loss of 45 <br />parking spaces). This is one of two suburban Ramsey County Transit hubs. <br /> <br />Chair Mulder asked what will happen in 5-10 years regarding tenant use (remains nearly the same). <br /> <br />The park and ride may need expansion with a need for up to 500 spaces. The Rice at Hwy 36 park and ride will <br />assist the supply. <br /> <br />Aaron Isaacs asked for permanence - an assurance that the Hub will be there in more than eight years. Could the <br />City assist in creating permanence of location through the PUD? <br /> <br />Member Doherty asked for details of the bus parking area. <br /> <br />Debra Bloom asked for details of the Hub Improvement buy-out costs of $130,000; and, is the length of the <br />Agreement eight or thirteen years. <br /> <br />Member Bakeman asked for clarification regarding pedestrian access from the lower level to the theater. Where is <br />the pathway along B-2? Deb Bloom explained the details of the pathway plan. Member Bakeman asked what <br />pedestrian access is available through the parking lot. Thomas Paschke explained the access from the north to the <br />lower level and the details of the plaza access to the Mall. <br /> <br />Member Traynor asked for details of the traffic study. The city review by SEH noted issues that needed to be <br />resolved. Deb Bloom explained a revised study, dated December 1, 2004. Some issues are resolved but there are <br />stacking issues and stress issues on the County Road B-2 transportation system. Member Traynor asked for the <br />identified issues/problems and possible solutions. How can this be reviewed? <br /> <br />Thomas Paschke suggested staff work with the Rosedale Consultants on the traffic and parking details. Member <br />Traynor suggested that a condition regarding traffic mitigation be included in the PUD concept. He also asked for <br />details on interior traffic improvements through the site. <br /> <br />Member Mulder asked if the B-2 traffic will have a cost to the city? Deb Bloom noted that B-2 already has <br />problems. The County must be involved because the mitigation measures involved city, county, state and <br />Rosedale. The city and county have no money budgeted for B-2 improvements. The intersections will need to be <br />improved and there will be a cost. Chair Mulder asked if a TIF district exists here (no, disbanded by City Council). <br /> <br />Member Bakeman asked for details of storm water. These issues must be worked out by the Mall property owners. <br /> <br />Chair Mulder asked Thomas Paschke how many parking spaces are required for the entire Mall. (No detail <br />currently available). What is the industry's standard (4.5 vs. City Code of 5.0) of spaces per 1,000 square feet of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.