Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br />� <br />�, <br />John Johanson explained main street buildings will have under ground parking used by <br />offices on the second story. Mr. Johanson explained that ramps are not conducive to <br />mass merchandisers; they are too costly. <br />Member Pust asked for Phase 2 and Phase 3 clarification. What/how are the impacts <br />handled? <br />Member Bakeman explained the need for LEED. <br />� <br />1[M Chair Mulder explained the process for making and voting on the possible motions. <br />I 1 Using the PUD process has been more effective in managing the projects. Concept plans <br />I� are "concepts" not all the details. The Planning Commission does not control the finance <br />I� issues, but may be necessary for clean up of the site. The 2001 land use plans included a <br />I� hospital, which did not occur. What is the next best plan? Chairman Mulder said the <br />L S environmental issues are a concern and must be cleaned up before new development <br />��} occurs; not willing to retain truck terminals. The traffic issue is a concern metro-wide; <br />L� businesses move where there is housing density. If the city does not take the <br />E� opportunities, the existing retail could move. "Doing nothing" is moving backward. He <br />��� urged moving this proposed concept forward. <br />��� <br />� I Member Pust explained that the process has worked. Citizens have made their input. She <br />�� explained the financing is the council's decision. Member Pust congratulated the <br />=' � developers for continually working with and changing/upgrading the plan. Environment <br />?� conditions should be consistent with regulations, protecting shore and trails. Traff'ic <br />�5 should address the issues and a transportation plan is necessary as a condition. LEED <br />�� standards will urge developers to the best standards. <br />�? <br />�� <br />'7 i� <br />�t� <br />�€ <br />.3'' <br />33 <br />�� <br />3� <br />; (� <br />57 <br />38 <br />� �} <br />�� <br />�] <br />Member Bakeman congratulated all participants. More traffic studies are needed (all over <br />the city). She is concerned about the environment but flexible within a PUD. The senior <br />housing is a concern. Roseville is getting older. There is a need for a ndx of housing, <br />and concerns about the amount of senior housing (too much). She is impressed with <br />citizens and with developers and Stakeholder process. <br />Member poherty explained how well the process has warked. The current site is <br />deplorable. The city needs to take action. Costs of clean up will not decline. There is no <br />plan that will satisfy everyone. The market influences the development. The off'ice <br />market is weak and may not rebound in the next 2 to 5 years. Large retailers may be <br />engines for other development. He is disappointed that housing does not involve children. <br />Could this be a childless community? He supports a more diverse population. Traff'ic will <br />be bad everywhere regardless. <br />�� Member Boerigter explained he could echo many previous comments. Balance all the <br />��3 needs, the project should move forward, it is not perfect. The land needs to be <br />�4 redeveloped. It cannot be developed piecemeal. This will be a benefit for the city. <br />�� Senior housing is dictated by the market as is retail and housing density. <br />�� <br />Page 10 of 12 <br />� <br />� <br />� <br />