My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2004_1206_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2004
>
2004_1206_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2014 4:35:22 PM
Creation date
12/14/2009 1:46:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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
City Council Regular Meeting —11/22/04 <br />DRAFT Minutes - Page 33 <br />studied; comparison commonalities; and modeling <br />projections. <br />Mr. Welsch reviewed the staff reports and SRF traffic <br />generation models for both the first phase of the project <br />(80 acres) and the entire parcel (170 acres). <br />Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification regarding the <br />"worst case scenario" projects, showing hospital and <br />retail alternatives; and whether the major retail <br />component had received similar traffic study projections <br />under a "worst case scenario." <br />Mr. Welsch noted that staff would provide any scenarios <br />requested, as directed by the City Council, and that those <br />projections should be part of the PUD process, at which <br />time additional information would be presented. <br />10) Public facilities changes, utility service <br />and capacity area available, storm ponds: Staff <br />noted the lack of clarity in the petitioner's concerns <br />regarding the public facilities in question; assuming <br />the petitioner's reference to an alum treatment <br />plant. Mr. Welsch reiterated his comments that the <br />reverse appears to be occurring in the water quality <br />at Langton Lake; and staff's commitment to protect <br />the lake. <br />11) Surface water management: Staff noted <br />that the redevelopment proposal meets the <br />Pollution Control Agency (PCA), City of <br />Roseville, and Rice Creek Watershed District <br />requirements. Mr. Welsch opined that it was <br />staff's perception that the project actually adds <br />quality to the redevelopment area, and supported <br />the validity of the calculations provided. Mr. <br />Welsch noted that staff was currently using the <br />Rice Creek Watershed Plan; and that the project <br />wouldn't get through the PUD process without <br />consistently meeting those requirements. <br />12) Comprehensive Plan has no zoning: Staff <br />noted that the comprehensive plan does not initiate <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.