My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_0112_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_0112_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 1:06:31 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:39:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
Meeting Date
1/12/2004
Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
210
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
Memo <br />To: Neal Beets Date: 12/12/03 <br />Re: Recommendations Regarding the Selection of Stakeholder Panel Members, <br />Process Design <br />I am very pleased that the city council has requested my services in facilitating a <br />stakeholders' process related to the next phase of development in Twin Lakes. The <br />continued redevelopment of this area and the reinvestment that it will represent is vitally <br />important to Roseville's future. From my experience with many, many similar processes I <br />know that a great deal of good can come from this effort. I also know that there are <br />several key aspects of the process that have to be right, or the potential benefits will be <br />lost. <br />I regret that a prior commitment keeps me from attending the city council meeting this <br />evening. The design of this process, the selection of the participants, the roles and <br />responsibilitiesof the participants, the council's expectations, desired outcomes, and the <br />relationship between this process and the regular planning and development review and <br />approval process are all critically important pieces. Dennis Welsch, Michael Naonan and <br />I have met and discussed this at one meeting and have offered some recommendations for <br />the council's consideration. I would welcome the opportunity to provide a more detailed <br />recommendation for the council's review and approval. <br />The following are a series of recommendations that I would offer to guide the refinement <br />of this process: <br />C. The Twin Lakes Advisory Panel process does not replace or supersede the <br />normal, established planning and development review and approval process. It is <br />intended to augment it and assistthe developmentteam in the preparation of a <br />better and more informed master plan. <br />�. This process does not replace the role of the Planning Commission, Parks <br />Commission, or any other established board or commission. <br />�, The city council is not delegating its decision-making responsibilities,or authority <br />to the Panel. <br />�. It is not presumed that the Advisory Panel will reach consensus on all issues. <br />Rather, every opinion will be provided to the development team and recorded for <br />From the Desk of.... <br />John W. Shardlow • President • 300 1" Ave. N. • Suite 210 • Minneapolis.,NIN 55401 <br />612-339-3300 • fax -612-337-5601 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.