pm_061101 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes – Wednesday, November 01, 2006 Page 11 Commission was being asked to review and base their consideration on whether or not to support the concepts proposed to work toward a final and detailed project, meeting all code requirements, and as negotiated through staff and the Commission. Preliminary Plat Mr. Paschke reviewed Sections 6.5 - 6.7 of the staff report, detailing the review process; and proposed use mix. Rezoning Mr. Paschke reviewed proposed rezoning within the redevelopment area, as detailed in Section 6.8 – 6.11 of the staff report. General Concept Proposal Mr. Paschke reviewed the General Concept as submitted; detailing each specific concept, as outlined in Section 6.12 – 6.15 of the staff report. Mr. Paschke reviewed the various components (i.e., professional office, residential housing, and service mix – restaurant) of the Concept Plan., detailed in Section 6.16 – 6.26 of the staff report. Public Infrastructure Mr. Paschke revised Sections 6.27 – 6.30 of the staff report related to public infrastructure; noting that staff supported the concepts being advocated, but had not provided final approval, pending further refinement, Rice Creek Watershed District and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) review and approval, ongoing negotiations with the City Engineer and Public Works departments; and continued detailing of the concept plan. Mr. Paschke further reviewed park land dedication; staging of the proposed development; other amenities, including trail and sidewalk systems; project impacts to traffic, wetland ponding and shoreland protection requirements, parking, utilities, mechanical equipment, and environmental issues; and design standards and guidelines, incorporating recommendations of the Twin Lakes Stakeholder Panel. Staff concluded their presentation by stating that the Development Review Committee (DRC) and Community Development Department had concluded that the GENERAL CONCEPT phase of the Twin Lakes West development meets the requirements for consideration by the Roseville Planning Commission for their consideration of an advisory recommendation to the Roseville City Council. Staff further and specifically concluded that the request for RIGHT- OF-WAY and EASEMENT VACATION, PRELIMMINARY PLAT, REZONING, and GENERAL CONCEPT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT do not conflict with the Roseville Comprehensive Plan (and the property designation of BP, Business Park) or the 2001 Twin Lakes Business Park Master Plan. Further, staff concluded that, in a great number of ways, the proposal fulfills the goals, policies and strategies set forth in the 2001 Twin Lakes Business Park Master Plan; and based on the information provided in Sections 4 – 8 of the Staff Report, the DRC and Community Development Staff recommend approval of the requests, as noted in the report, by Rottlund Company for Twin Lakes West. Discussion included why the Twin Lakes Parkway was not connecting Fairview and Cleveland Avenues; with staff advising that the AUAR Update would dictate whether a connection was necessary, which would be reflected in the final development plan following completion of traffic studies as part of the AUAR update in process. Further discussion included input from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) regarding the proposed housing mix and how it related to Roseville’s Housing Plan; intent of developer to use “green friendly” development principles and LED certification process hallmarks; lack of retail proposed in this plan; relocation of the proposed Twin Lakes Parkway and further distance from Langton Lake, as well as housing, rather than retail, located close