My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_1025_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_1025_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/9/2014 4:22:20 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:45:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
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.
/
268
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
and quantity of j obs; lower value of building finish; and larger parking lots. However, staff � <br />made these conclusions based upon a plan that included a 5-7 story hospital and medical office <br />buildings. Staff believes that many of the concerns mentioned in the 2001 master plan can be <br />mitigated with this current development proposal based upon the far south location of the large <br />store in the context to the rest of the development. In addition, the proposal has included <br />discussions of good wages and benefits, "office" type hours, better materials and building <br />finishes and landscaping within the parking fields as well as auxiliary buildings along the <br />edges. Big box type development has improved over the last several years in trying to address <br />negative development perceptions. Staff is confident that this development (and the master <br />Development Team) will demand a high standard and that a big box will fit within the new <br />mixed use neighborhood. <br />7. 7 Staff recommended that the retail area should remain located in the southwest area of the <br />development for the following reasons. This area provides ease of access from 35 W and <br />County Road C, is very visible from 35W which is very important to these markets, is a transit <br />friendly location to attract workers needed for these industries, and is t�� farthest location away <br />from residential while still close to regional roadways. <br />7.8 Staff outlined conditions which may delay the implementation of a development plan for Twin <br />Lakes within the 2001 master plan. They included national and local market conditions for <br />office uses and competition with other regional business parks offering similar amenities. The <br />location of a hospital use within Twin Lakes is not a current reality; the basis for the 2001 plan <br />no longer exists. In addition, the market for large multi story office development has <br />diminished and is not likely to recover for the next 5 years or more, based upon conversations <br />with experts in the field. In summary, because of these market conditions, staff believes that the <br />implementation of the 2001 Master Site Plan is unrealistic. The current proposal provides <br />significantly more housing than was included in the plan but also significantly less office. That <br />is what the market will endure at this time. <br />8.0 M��KET VALUE IMPACTS <br />8.1 It is estimated from the Rottlund Phase 1 proposal that the project would create an estimated <br />$200 to $220 million in new market value once fully constructed, generating approximately <br />$4 to $7 million in new annual propertytaxes. The current market value of the property is $28 <br />million, generating $430,000 in annual property taxes. A portion of those new taxes are <br />proposed to be used to construct public infrastructure (roads, pathways, additional ponding) as <br />well as contamination clean-up, building removal, and other eligible expenses as part of a Twin <br />Lakes Tax Increment Agreement which must be agreed to by the City Council. The estimated <br />breakdown of the new market value is as follows: <br />Land Uses Existin Market Value Pro osed Market Value <br />Office $20 million <br />Commercial $32 mi.l.lion <br />Housin $160 million <br />Industrial $28 million $0 <br />� <br />� <br />PF3595 - RCA Concept Plan and PrelimPlat Approval - 102504 Page 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.