Laserfiche WebLink
<br />,ianuary 28, 200£1 <br />Mr. Thomas Paschke <br />City }'lamter <br />City of Roseville <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, Minnesota X5113 <br />RE< Redevelopment of Firestone Building SitelComments to Request for City Council Action <br />Dear Mr. paschke: <br />We are in receipt of your revised Request for City Council Action regarding the proposal by <br />Fumnes Realty 5etvices, Ll.,C and Gateway Washington, Ina ("Gateway') for redevelopment of <br />the cturent Firestone I3ui'lding site within I-Tar Mar Mall. You indicated in your recent email to <br />the undersigned that the changes in this documeit from the previous draft wore set forth in <br />Section 6.11(x). As currently drafted, 6.11(a) is not acceptable to Gateway, the owner of blar <br />Mar Mall. As we made clear at the last City Council meeting, Gateway caunat approve or accept <br />any language or agreement which grants to the City the tmilateral rights to close or alter any <br />ingress or egress point from the Mall, including the westerly driveway on County Road 13. <br />Gateway does agree, however, that, if safety issues rotating to vehicles coming to or leaving Her <br />Mar arise in tlae future, to discuss with the City in good faith alternatives for resolving those <br />safety carcerns. With that in mhtd, Gateway eoutd accept the following re-draft of the second <br />sentence of SecKion 611(x), and we hereby submit such language to you for your consideration: <br />"While not requiring closm•o of this ingress/egress xs a part of the approval of the <br />PUD Amendment, the parties acknowledge that the City does not waive, and <br />hereby retains, any right which it may have tutder applicable la4v Ca require <br />closure of the ingress and/or egress fi-om such westerly driveway in the tiihtre <br />should the City determine, in its reasonable discretion, that Craftic safety <br />considerations warrant it," <br />R.; ~ ~ Anna <br />,. V /_VVV <br />