My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004-10-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Roseville
>
Commissions, Watershed District and HRA
>
Public Works Environment and Transportation Commission
>
Agendas and Packets
>
200x
>
2004
>
2004-10-26_PWETC_AgendaPacket
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2010 3:50:53 PM
Creation date
6/20/2005 10:50:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission/Committee
Commission/Authority Name
Public Works Commission
Commission/Committee - Document Type
Agenda/Packet
Commission/Committee - Meeting Date
10/26/2004
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.
/
36
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 />Member Wilke asked if the 135 Conidor Commission was still in <br />operation. Duane said it was <br /> <br />Member Wilke mentioned that a bus conidor is proposed to be built <br />between Minneapolis and Apple Valley. <br /> <br />5. Twin Lakes Concept Plan <br /> <br />Michael Noonan with Rottlund Homes began the presentation with a <br />background on the project. Rottlund Homes was selected as the master <br />developer for this project last fall. A development team was formed for <br />each aspect of the project, and they worked with stakeholders to form a <br />plan for the development. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring asked if a bank was included in the development. <br />Mr. Noonan said it was just a logical conclusion that a bank would be in <br />the area. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring stated that he's been following the plans for this <br />development for years and is wondering when it's actually going to take <br />off. Mr. Noonan said that was a fair question and that the prospect for <br />Twin Lakes coming forward is much better today than it has been <br />previously; and that we have a development team that has the financial <br />resources and are prepared to make the necessary commitments to lannch <br />the project. Fifty of the 80 acres of the development are under contract or <br />ownership. <br /> <br />Member Wilke said that there's been some talk about why the City didn't <br />go out and get competitive bids from developers. Dennis Welsch said that <br />the reason is the City has no control over any of the property. <br /> <br />Joe Samuel with RLK Associates explained the plan drawings. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring said that they're looking at $100 million, which is <br />just for development, it doesn't include any structures. Mr. Noonan said <br />the $100 million is to get the land to a point where structures can be built. <br /> <br />Member Willenbring asked if the 32' roadway would deter people from <br />coming in off of the area in the middle ofthe site and would it have four <br />lanes of traffic. Mr. Samuel said that intersections would be defined for <br />pedestrian crossing, possibly with concrete baning or brick pavers to <br />distinguish crosswalks. <br /> <br />Member Wilke asked about putting in a traffic circle. He thinks it works <br />well in other areas and would work well here. Mr. Noonan said he didn't <br />have a definitive answer for that at this time, but they would need to look <br />at it for this area. He is aware of other areas where they work quite well. <br /> <br />Page 2 of5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.