2009_0126_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Boss expressed concern if HarMar were to expand further, noting the current stacking of vehicles on Snelling in that area, even with recent street improvements; and issues with the configuration of that intersection and traffic flow into and from the fast food establishments. Mr. Boss opined that the more you develop, the more residents get pushed out. Tam McGehee, 77 Mid Oaks Lane Ms. McGehee concurred with the comments and position addressed by Ms. Schaffer; opining that a 100,000 square foot footprint limit did not preclude building up; further opining that smaller businesses (i.e., Byerly's, the new Rainbow, and Barns & Noble) served the community, as well as the region; noting that the new owners at HarMar had forced out many smaller businesses in the community, and further opined that people liked the smaller formats. Ms. McGehee opined that when she attended the first Open House, she was impressed with the definition for "Community Business;" however, advised that she could not support the current language; and questioned the process and this changed outcome. Ms. McGehee noted her involvement in the Friends of Twin Lakes lawsuit; clarifying that it had been based on the AUAR, not the Comprehensive Plan, nor the Twin Lakes Master Plan. Ms. McGehee suggested another compromise in defining the dollar figure for staff and consultant time in creating a Master Plan at $50,000 of public monies. Ms. McGehee questioned the integrity of a simple majority vote for Master Plans. Linda Pribyl, 1637 Ridgewood Ms. Pribyl expressed concern, in considering "Regional Business" designations that they be attractive and more upscale. Ms. Pribyl opined that homeowners pay taxes; as well as commercial properties, and opined that the current commercial opportunities were sufficient; however if further businesses were considered, or if HarMar were to be razed, that the City consider a model similar to the City of Edina. Ms. Pribyl opined that the "white wall" put up by MnDOT was offensive, in addition to the new roadway being extremely rough. Ann Berry, 1059 Woodhill Drive Ms. Berry, as a 46 year resident in her home, reviewed the enormous changes in Roseville during that time, and invoked the name of former City Planner Howard Dahlgren and his years of devotion to the City and the common good through his good design and respect for all people in the planning process. Ms. Berry noted that she had served with Mr. Dahlgren when she was on the Planning Commission and when Twin Lakes Parkway was first proposed, opining that it was an appropriate beginning for development in that area. Ms. Berry reiterated that part of Mr. Dahlgren's value to the City was his respect for all people in the process; and Ms. Berry encouraged everyone to keep his model in mind. Ms. Berry urged the Steering Committee, the Planning Commission and City Council to view the Comprehensive Plan as a guide to future development in the City; and to guard against including numerous specificities (i.e., Master Plans) to allow details to change as land develops. Ms. Berry opined that the Comprehensive Plan was a guide and should be viewed that way, without specifically defining types or sizes for retail or the amount or type of housing, to allow the City as much flexibility as possible in future planning and projects. Ms. Berry further opined that retailers paid a substantial amount of the City's tax base, and that they didn't only serve the community, but the region with their retail facilities. Dan Regan, County Road C Properties, (representing family businesses and commercial partnerships along County Road C(for over three decades) Mr. Regan encouraged the Commission and City Council to take land use designation, specifically along County Road C, on a case by case basis, specifically regarding the 100,000 square foot restriction. Mr. Regan opined that he had no desire for "big box retail" in Roseville, and further opined that the Twin Lakes residential neighborhoods had voiced that same opinion for years. Mr. Regan cautioned that, by using the 100,000 square foot language, the City would be limiting itself to corporate campuses or similar opportunities, and that it would stall development and create a timeline far into the future, based on simple demand and absorption. �